Should the triple lock be scrapped in the 6 March Budget?

nigelbb

The first change should be to put politicians on the same mixture of state and defined contribution pension as the real world, instead of their legally guaranteed, risk free public, solid gold sector pension, which apparently accretes benefits at five times the rate of private sector ones, achieving in ten years what takes forty-nine elsewhere. Only then will they understand what it's like to have people debating whether you deserve to get back a pension you've contributed to for forty+ years.

No. The fault is the diminution of private sector pensions by ruthless employers declaring DB pensions unaffordable. The reduction in trades union power & supine attitude of employees with regard to pensions plus lax labour laws have all contributed to the death of private sector DB pensions which used to be at the same level as public sector pensions.

BlackKnightMonty

Yes it should be scrapped

nigelbb said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

nigelbb said:

ewaste said:

nigelbb said:

No, but then nobody is legally earning just £200/week. State pension is half what somebody earns on National Minimum Wage.

NMW at 35hrs a week is around £318.01, 40hrs a week would be £352.40. That's after deductions and the 5% of Qualifying Earnings being paid under AE into a pension. That's if you're lucky enough to have a secure job and 35-40hrs of paid work per week. You'd naturally have various work related expenses e.g. travel costs for getting to and from work.

So a guaranteed £200 a week increasing annually by the triple lock is rather generous. Especially when you've had a lifetime to do what many pensioners preach e.g. work hard, better yourself and save. That's before we get into any of the additional little things like bus passes etc. 

NMW is £11.44/hour from 1st Aptil 2024 which gives a take home pay of £379.33 after deductions including pension contributions. The new state pension is £221.20 from 1st Aptil 2024.or 58% of NMW so just a little more than half.

Under 18 it’s £6.40 an hour.

18-20 it’s £8.60 an hour.

The theory is that you should be paid less because there is some on-the-job training. But it sounds exploitative to me.

as EWaste incates, to earn that wage you undertake all the trappings of work; commuting costs, maybe working shifts, work clothes.

There’s just no way a SP should be at the same level as a working wage!

I didn't say that state pension should be at the same level as NMW. I said it's not much more than half NMW. It's a lot less than median earnings.

My apologies.

Hoenir

No it should be kept

BlackKnightMonty said:

Hoenir said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Same discussion will pop up over and over prior to every budget. 

With stagnating wages the position gets more and more egregious.

To progress people need to develop skills. 

Hoenir

No it should be kept

Exodi said:

GibbsRule_No3. said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Surely we knew the rise for 2024-2025 would be Triple Lock it is what happens 2025-2026 and beyond, under a possible Labour Government.

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Given her book was an exercise in cut and paste. Her reluctance may well be as a result of a lack of real creative thought.  In reality the economic middle ground is very limited. Post war economic theory seems to be running out of road. 

MACKEM99

No it should be kept

What about linking it to the number of years you have actually worked and paid income tax etc?

BlackKnightMonty

Yes it should be scrapped

Hoenir said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Hoenir said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Same discussion will pop up over and over prior to every budget. 

With stagnating wages the position gets more and more egregious.

To progress people need to develop skills. 

Absolutely. Skills, especially STEM skills is what the UK is crying out for.

All of this costs money; and there is very little investment in education.

BlackKnightMonty

Yes it should be scrapped

Hoenir said:

Exodi said:

GibbsRule_No3. said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Surely we knew the rise for 2024-2025 would be Triple Lock it is what happens 2025-2026 and beyond, under a possible Labour Government.

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Given her book was an exercise in cut and paste. Her reluctance may well be as a result of a lack of real creative thought.  In reality the economic middle ground is very limited. Post war economic theory seems to be running out of road. 

The trouble with socialism is you eventually run out of other people’s money.

9.3m of working age on benefits.

12.7m on state pension.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/dwp-benefits-statistics-february-2024/dwp-benefits-statistics-february-2024

Welfare bill set to rise from £295.8 for FY2324 to £360.1 for FY2829 thats a 22% rise over the next 5 years. 

https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/E03057758_OBR_EFO-March-2024_Web-AccessibleFinal.pdf

And wages are stagnant, so this comes from fiscal squeezing the productive half of society. (Actually it’s less than half).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/previousReleases?page=1

And finally…

Those who are now at retirement age will have benefited most of all. On average someone born in 1956 will pay about £940,000 in tax throughout their life. But they are forecast to receive state benefits amounting to about £1.2m, or £291,000 net. Someone born in 1996 will enjoy less than half of that figure: a fresh-faced 27-year-old today will receive barely more than someone born in 1931, about a decade before the term “welfare state” was first popularised.

https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/05/britons-in-their-thirties-are-stuck-in-a-dark-age

daveyjp

Just heard on radio that since 2019 changes in taxation policy mean pensioner households (66+) are now £770 a year worse off.

westv

No it should be kept

BlackKnightMonty said:

Hoenir said:

Exodi said:

GibbsRule_No3. said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Surely we knew the rise for 2024-2025 would be Triple Lock it is what happens 2025-2026 and beyond, under a possible Labour Government.

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Given her book was an exercise in cut and paste. Her reluctance may well be as a result of a lack of real creative thought.  In reality the economic middle ground is very limited. Post war economic theory seems to be running out of road. 

The trouble with socialism is you eventually run out of other people’s money.

9.3m of working age on benefits.

12.7m on state pension.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/dwp-benefits-statistics-february-2024/dwp-benefits-statistics-february-2024

Welfare bill set to rise from £295.8 for FY2324 to £360.1 for FY2829 thats a 22% rise over the next 5 years. 

https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/E03057758_OBR_EFO-March-2024_Web-AccessibleFinal.pdf

And wages are stagnant, so this comes from fiscal squeezing the productive half of society. (Actually it’s less than half).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/previousReleases?page=1

Maybe I am reading it wrong but you seem to make the error that people can't be claiming benefits and be productive.

BlackKnightMonty

Yes it should be scrapped

daveyjp said:

Just heard on radio that since 2019 changes in taxation policy mean pensioner households (66+) are now £770 a year worse off.

If Pensioners paid NI then they would get the ‘benefit’ of the cut.