Is the State Pension enough to live on if you are single !!

ader42

Brie said:

I know one woman who, for various reasons, has insufficient years to get any sort of SP and so when her OH dies she will have no income whatsoever.  Her only resource will be to sell the house they live in and hope to find some place to rent with the proceeds.  

She’d get Pension Cridet if nothing else, that she be enough, even if she has to downsize to a flat to reduce her household bills.

The extra she has from downsizing would surely provide an emergency or holiday fund. 

BlackKnightMonty

Linton said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Moonwolf said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think we can quite easily establish that a pensioner with a fine art collection probably has enough wealth to do without the SP. 

I didn't mention fine art or imply a big collection. I was imagining someone with four paintings they wanted to keep in the family, that between them are worth say £100,000.  The current value might not be representative of lifetimes earnings (cf Van Gogh) You are saying if they push someone over an arbitrary threshold they need to be sold to cover a state pension even if the sentimental value is greater than the cash value.  Of course they could be passed on earlier or put into a family trust, then we get into all the avoidance questions.

I would have thought is was clear anyway that this was just one example of the possible challenges to wealth calculations and using 'wealth' to means test something that is currently basically universal.

I appreciate that it might not be easy. But that’s not a reason to dismiss the idea.

There’s a good chunk of pensioners who really don’t need the SP. Better the money goes to those who actually do need it. 

I am surprised that you are in favour of subsidising the poor at the expense of the rich.  Or does that just apply to pensioners?

Your proposal would affect a small minority rather than "a good chunk".  A much cheaper way of diverting money to the less well off could be to remove the tax perks given to the wealthy.

For example how  can the £20K annual limit for ISA contributions be justified.  Someone who can afford paying that over say 30 years would put the gains from £Ms of investments completely outside the tax system for the rest of their lives.  Noone on low pay could afford it.

Another good idea in my view is to move  most of NI into income tax.  This would reduce the tax paid by the poorest and increase the load on the rich who can afford it, in particular the millionaire pensioners, 

I am fully in favour of supporting those most in need.

Thanks some good suggestions and ideas to reflect on.

Linton

Exodi said:

Another state pension thread complete with anecdotes about destitute pensioners, flawed comparisons to other countries pensions and excessive use of verbs like 'struggling' and 'surviving'.

Is the State Pension enough to live on if you are single

Yes.

It is ironic that despite this forums propensity to characterise pensioners as poor, the majority of forum members are of pension age/retired, yet about 1/8th earn the full state pension or less.

How do you know that about 1/8 of forum members have a total income from all sources of the full SP or less?  No one has asked me and I would be unlikely to volunteer the information. Given that this forum by its very nature will not be of much interest to many people with such a low total income it would seem very unlikely. 

From the statistics the average retiree has a signifiicantly higher income than SP but nothing like the millionaire level. Not poor but not able to enjoy the standard of living they had when working.

Nebulous2

BlackKnightMonty said:

Moonwolf said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think we can quite easily establish that a pensioner with a fine art collection probably has enough wealth to do without the SP. 

I didn't mention fine art or imply a big collection. I was imagining someone with four paintings they wanted to keep in the family, that between them are worth say £100,000.  The current value might not be representative of lifetimes earnings (cf Van Gogh) You are saying if they push someone over an arbitrary threshold they need to be sold to cover a state pension even if the sentimental value is greater than the cash value.  Of course they could be passed on earlier or put into a family trust, then we get into all the avoidance questions.

I would have thought is was clear anyway that this was just one example of the possible challenges to wealth calculations and using 'wealth' to means test something that is currently basically universal.

I appreciate that it might not be easy. But that’s not a reason to dismiss the idea.

There’s a good chunk of pensioners who really don’t need the SP. Better the money goes to those who actually do need it. 

I remember in sociology looking at some of the historical origins of social work. The parish officers who made decisions about who would be supported and who wouldn't - the deserving and undeserving poor. Going through people's homes looking for items of value to sell before they qualified for support. "You can't get any support until you sell that clock." Those experiences cast a long shadow down the years. 

Then we moved on to the development of the welfare state - the safety net that was there for those in need. Older people explaining to me how pleased they were at being able to see a doctor without paying guineas they didn't have.  Some support for people whose physical capabilities had diminished. One of my great-great-grandfathers drowned while working as a fisherman in his 70s. 

I never expected to see the welfare state dismantled in my lifetime.

We clearly have problems, including demographic ones, but winding the clock back 150 years isn't the answer. 

Ibrahim5

Linton said:

Exodi said:

Another state pension thread complete with anecdotes about destitute pensioners, flawed comparisons to other countries pensions and excessive use of verbs like 'struggling' and 'surviving'.

Is the State Pension enough to live on if you are single

Yes.

It is ironic that despite this forums propensity to characterise pensioners as poor, the majority of forum members are of pension age/retired, yet about 1/8th earn the full state pension or less.

 

From the statistics the average retiree has a signifiicantly higher income than SP but nothing like the millionaire level. Not poor but not able to enjoy the standard of living they had when working.

I am a millionaire on a low income. Income and assets are different.

Silvertabby

ader42 said:

Brie said:

I know one woman who, for various reasons, has insufficient years to get any sort of SP and so when her OH dies she will have no income whatsoever.  Her only resource will be to sell the house they live in and hope to find some place to rent with the proceeds.  

She’d get Pension Cridet if nothing else, that she be enough, even if she has to downsize to a flat to reduce her household bills.

The extra she has from downsizing would surely provide an emergency or holiday fund. 

Pension credit is means tested.

BlackKnightMonty

Nebulous2 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Moonwolf said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think we can quite easily establish that a pensioner with a fine art collection probably has enough wealth to do without the SP. 

I didn't mention fine art or imply a big collection. I was imagining someone with four paintings they wanted to keep in the family, that between them are worth say £100,000.  The current value might not be representative of lifetimes earnings (cf Van Gogh) You are saying if they push someone over an arbitrary threshold they need to be sold to cover a state pension even if the sentimental value is greater than the cash value.  Of course they could be passed on earlier or put into a family trust, then we get into all the avoidance questions.

I would have thought is was clear anyway that this was just one example of the possible challenges to wealth calculations and using 'wealth' to means test something that is currently basically universal.

I appreciate that it might not be easy. But that’s not a reason to dismiss the idea.

There’s a good chunk of pensioners who really don’t need the SP. Better the money goes to those who actually do need it. 

I remember in sociology looking at some of the historical origins of social work. The parish officers who made decisions about who would be supported and who wouldn't - the deserving and undeserving poor. Going through people's homes looking for items of value to sell before they qualified for support. "You can't get any support until you sell that clock." Those experiences cast a long shadow down the years. 

Then we moved on to the development of the welfare state - the safety net that was there for those in need. Older people explaining to me how pleased they were at being able to see a doctor without paying guineas they didn't have.  Some support for people whose physical capabilities had diminished. One of my great-great-grandfathers drowned while working as a fisherman in his 70s. 

I never expected to see the welfare state dismantled in my lifetime.

We clearly have problems, including demographic ones, but winding the clock back 150 years isn't the answer. 

Yeah nice idea; but the welfare state is fundamentally flawed.

Maybe if the boomer generation had set up a sovereign wealth fund it could absorb the economic and demographic shocks we have experienced. But expecting a smaller working population to cover the cost of everything - with an economic tsunami - just isn’t sustainable.

BlackKnightMonty

Silvertabby said:

ader42 said:

Brie said:

I know one woman who, for various reasons, has insufficient years to get any sort of SP and so when her OH dies she will have no income whatsoever.  Her only resource will be to sell the house they live in and hope to find some place to rent with the proceeds.  

She’d get Pension Cridet if nothing else, that she be enough, even if she has to downsize to a flat to reduce her household bills.

The extra she has from downsizing would surely provide an emergency or holiday fund. 

Pension credit is means tested.

Perhaps that’s the answer.

Make SP something you must claim; and only those showing hardship and poverty would get it.

That sounds fair.

Exodi

Linton said:

Exodi said:

Another state pension thread complete with anecdotes about destitute pensioners, flawed comparisons to other countries pensions and excessive use of verbs like 'struggling' and 'surviving'.

Is the State Pension enough to live on if you are single

Yes.

It is ironic that despite this forums propensity to characterise pensioners as poor, the majority of forum members are of pension age/retired, yet about 1/8th earn the full state pension or less.

How do you know that about 1/8 of forum members have a total income from all sources of the full SP or less?  No one has asked me and I would be unlikely to volunteer the information. Given that this forum by its very nature will not be of much interest to many people with such a low total income it would seem very unlikely. 

From the statistics the average retiree has a signifiicantly higher income than SP but nothing like the millionaire level. Not poor but not able to enjoy the standard of living they had when working.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/poll/2023/mse-annual-census-2023/

If you total 'Less than £6,396' and '£6,396 to £12,570' and divide it by the totals (excluding 'Prefer not to say'), You get 13.97%, but as the full state pension is around £11.5k instead of £12.5k, reducing this to 12.5% (about 1/8th) seemed a reasonable assumption. Of course depending on what side of the fence you sit, you would argue that the 'Prefer not to say' are either people on the breadline too embarrassed to state their income, or millionaires who are uncomfortable disclosing their vast wealth. Pick your bias.

You actually raise the exact point I was trying to make: "Given that this forum by its very nature will not be of much interest to many people with such a low total income it would seem very unlikely. ". I would agree with this and the census shows that somewhat - after all, this is a money saving site, it is unsurprising the average forum member may be financially better off than the average Joe. Yet despite this, there is an irony that in every thread about the state pension, the thread inevitably delves into tales of woe about destitute pensioners, despite the forum demographic - the infamous 'I know someone who...'.

Simultaneously any notion of means-testing the state pension is swiftly shut down. We're stuck in this mine-cart knowing the track can't go on forever, but unwilling to change course, slow down or press the brakes.

Silvertabby

BlackKnightMonty said:

Silvertabby said:

ader42 said:

Brie said:

I know one woman who, for various reasons, has insufficient years to get any sort of SP and so when her OH dies she will have no income whatsoever.  Her only resource will be to sell the house they live in and hope to find some place to rent with the proceeds.  

She’d get Pension Cridet if nothing else, that she be enough, even if she has to downsize to a flat to reduce her household bills.

The extra she has from downsizing would surely provide an emergency or holiday fund. 

Pension credit is means tested.

Perhaps that’s the answer.

Make SP something you must claim; and only those showing hardship and poverty would get it.

That sounds fair.

The Australian State pension has been means tested from day 1.  An Oz friend tells me that some people 'live well' during their working lives in order to leave themselves under the means test in retirement.