You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Two related articles from today's Grauniad...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/05/its-national-sickie-day-ill-health-uk-econony-ons
TLDR: Too few working people paying tax, too many sick people not paying tax, ergo retirement age must rise (but not in an election year).
TLDR: Too few working people paying tax, too many sick people not paying tax,
And too many perfectly healthy wealthy individuals who neither work, nor pay tax.
It's either this or a wealth/property tax I think (which is one of the theoretical problems with the UK economy - too much money tied up in property and thus not economically active).
Don't think property taxes or raising the pension age will be electorally popular, and the other issue is the amount of free childcare provided by retired grandparents due to lack of adequate provision.
Not enough immigrants. Need more to support the tax base. Up yours Farage.
To be honest I read that this morning and it pretty much echoed my thoughts in that retirement is going to be a thing of past for a hell of a lot of people, if you're struggling to eat/pay rent or bills/save for a deposit you're unlikely to be tucking away money for your retirement.
Younger people, their research has found, do not have the financial assets that their parents and grandparents did. In 2010, those under 40 held £7.53 of every £100 of wealth. By 2020, that had fallen to £3.98. One-third of the UK’s 14 million Gen-Xers are at high risk of retiring on insufficient income.
Can't imagine why the above might happened :rollseyes:
I must admit, after it went up to 67 I started feeling like retirement might always be just out of reach for me.
Not enough immigrants. Need more to support the tax base. Up yours Farage.
The Tories keep harking on about growing the economy whilst refusing to fund the NHS to bring down waiting times and get more people back to work and also refusing to allow immigration...
Very joined up policy making....
I don't see a problem with it being 71. There's no good reason why old people who are well can't work, the whole concept of a healthy retirement at your leisure is recent - the idea of state pension was to compensate people too old to work (a bit like sick pay) and it wasn't intended to pay out to most people, only those who happened to get old - it simply didn't keep up with how long people were living.
There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work, the whole concept of a healthy retirement at your leisure is recent
Maybe so, but it's quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it's 71 / 75 / 84 etc
Maybe so, but it’s quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it’s 71 / 75 / 84 etc
for that reason, it simply won't happen like that. Regardless of what some "researchers" think, the only way (politically) to do this is punt the number up for those not yet in work or only just started work
I don’t see a problem with it being 71. There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work
When people (me) have been paying a not insubstantial amount of NI, which is supposed, in part, to be for the state pension, it's a bit of a bitter pill for the goalposts to keep moving until they're beyond reach.
5lab
Full MemberI don’t see a problem with it being 71. There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work
I have quite a good reason, I don't want to. If you want to carry on, by all means!
Why is this country so uniquely shit amongst similar nations in Europe, that we have both one of the lowest state pensions and highest pension ages?
for that reason, it simply won’t happen like that. Regardless of what some “researchers” think, the only way (politically) to do this is punt the number up for those not yet in work or only just started work
But it's been done before - 65 to 67 which happened well into my working life. Why won't it happen like that again? Maybe not straight to 71 but I can absolutely see them incrementally moving the goalposts by a couple of years at a time for those in work now.
Years ago 65 as a retirement age was about 50 years after many entered the workforce, many doing manual jobs. With most not entering the workforce until 18 years old, many not until 22, and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature, is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature
But an awful lot still aren't. Do we have a two tier pension age for binmen and scaffolders versus IT consultants and call centre workers?
I love how, as a nation, we are prepared to accept not only a worse pension than most comparable nations, but also a government under which life expectancy has fallen noticeably trying to push the retirement age upwards.
Do we have a two tier pension age for binmen and scaffolders versus IT consultants and call centre workers?
Surgeons? Airline pilots? Truck drivers (given that the risk of collision goes up substantially if the driver is >70)?
There is absolutely no way I’d be able to do my job at 71.
Sure I could retrain, but what non physically demanding jobs will be left with AI allegedly taking over?
not claiming that bumping it up isn't a tough pill to swallow, but the money has to come from somewhere.
The state pension was introduced the age was 65 (for men) and life expectancy (for someone born that year) was also 65. If the numbers had been correctly managed the current state pension age would be 81.
Yet another reason for a country in misery.
But it’s been done before
Yeah. All the WASPIes might disagree.
The current economics just dont work, harsh fact but its a reality. Theres an ever increasing percentage of working age economically inactive, and increasing amount of wealth tied up with fewer people and a lot of people in the middle paying for other peoples lives and combined with the ever increasing cost of living cant afford to plan their own retirement. Politicians have known this has been coming for years but like social care there are no easy answers so they've ignored it and kept the electorate generally ignorant of the realities.
Tell me - those of you saying 70/71 is reasonable: do you expect this to affect YOU or is your assumption that it will only affect younger people than you? If it will affect you - are you saying this because you expect to still work to 71 or because you believe you've made good enough plans to retire on private pensions?
With most not entering the workforce until 18 years old, many not until 22, and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature, is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
My job is entirely sedentary but so stressful/chaotic I can't imagine doing it into my 50s, let alone 70s!
This vindicates my decision to seek out an easier life now at the expense of salary, rather than wait for retirement (that, and the males on my dad's side of the family expiring at an average age of 67... 🙄).
Years ago 65 as a retirement age was about 50 years after many entered the workforce, many doing manual jobs. With most not entering the workforce until 18 years old, many not until 22, and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature, is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
Well I, like many others started work at 16.
Maybe so, but it’s quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it’s 71 / 75 / 84 etc
Dunno if it marks me out as Bougie but I'm under 40 and don't even consider the state pension in my retirement planning. If it's there when I get there it'll be bonus and probably end up needing to be spent on healthcare costs anyway.
interesting reading from those who actually make the decision here (from last year)..
my crib notes are they'll give you 10 years notice of a change (which isn't a huge amount), and they kicked the can down the road in 2023 to make it a problem for the next government, due to inflation and covid.
Tell me – those of you saying 70/71 is reasonable: do you expect this to affect YOU or is your assumption that it will only affect younger people than you? If it will affect you – are you saying this because you expect to still work to 71 or because you believe you’ve made good enough plans to retire on private pensions?
I'm 41. I expect the state pension age will rise for me, and I'm not financially planning on it being a big part of my retirement income (as in, I suspect it will be means tested). I'm planning to retire at 58, my biggest upset is if they continue to bump the age at which you can access a private pension pot in line with state (historically it's been pegged at 10 years below state pension age), I guess if that happens I might have to work an extra year.
is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
How do those 18-22 year olds get into the job marketplace if the 67-71 year olds are filling up the top end, there's a knock on effect with only so many jobs in the system.
The big problem for me is that by increasing the age, you are effectively destroying many peoples dream, they work for 50 years, they retire and enjoy life for a few years before they become infirm or die, you take that away, and mental health will suffer for many (more!). My dad ran after a bin lorry for his adult life, if he had to go further than 65 it wouldn't have been pleasant, he had illnesses towards the end, hernias, msi stuff and you'll just push more into an early grave, which will save money i guess.
The sad fact is how we've gotten to this, and at the same time as we see a generation of retirees who retired at 60, had final salary pensions and so on it's grating to have to work until 67/68, let alone being in your early 20s and knowing you're never going to retire, and have to work now with a huge tax burden that's partly paying for those who got to retire 20-30 years ago.
It’s either this or a wealth/property tax I think (which is one of the theoretical problems with the UK economy – too much money tied up in property and thus not economically active).
I think there is another way (or at least partially to plug the gap):
You stop paying NI when you reach retirement.
Older people are more likely to need care, NHS etc so actually are proportionally quite a big "burden" on the things NI was set up to cover (even if you don't include the pension). It seems to me that getting rid of the NI exemption for retirees would raises a significant amount. It would not hurt the poorest pensioners because if you only get state pension you are below the NI limit.
I’m 50. I’ve thought for a while now that I’m unlikely to be retiring at 68, because the numbers just don’t add up.
I’m sorry for anyone that this is news to, but 68 was always a political compromise.
If anything for Gen X (myself) I don’t think it’ll even be 71, because as we don’t have the political clout that the boomers do, and the generations behind us are more likely to be struggling, I think that any form of retirement if you’re still able to do productive work is likely to have to be entirely self funded.
Younger people, their research has found, do not have the financial assets that their parents and grandparents did. In 2010, those under 40 held £7.53 of every £100 of wealth. By 2020, that had fallen to £3.98. One-third of the UK’s 14 million Gen-Xers are at high risk of retiring on insufficient income.
I think we need to look deeper, the inequality runs across all ages and we need to see the spread of assets as I suspect it'll show us how they are congregating at the rich 'end'.
Politicians have known this has been coming for years but like social care there are no easy answers so they’ve ignored it
See also why local government is in a mess - many of the things we think of that they provide are 'discretionary' and social care and emergency housing, which aren't, hoover up the budget.
I must admit, after it went up to 67 I started feeling like retirement might always be just out of reach for me.
Its like Catch 22. Literally. When Yossarian gets to 24 missions, the number he has to fly gets raised from 25 to 30, when he hits 29 somehow still alive, it gets raised to 35, when he gets to 34...
On along enough timeline the chances of survival are zero. Keep raising that age until the whole concept of retirement is exclusively the reserve of the rich. You work til you drop or see your life out in abject poverty
See also why local government is in a mess – many of the things we think of that they provide are ‘discretionary’ and social care and emergency housing, which aren’t, hoover up the budget
Isn't it presently 75%+ of councils budget? Thats only going to go up.
Maybe we can start packing old people off to Rwanda too? Actually... they're probably already focus grouping that...
But it’s been done before – 65 to 67 which happened well into my working life
Indeed, I didn't check my NI for ten years, checked back in and my retirement age increased by TWO years. I've also just paid my 35 years of NI, so am done with accrual of benefits - until it increases to 40 years. Of course I enjoy what I do and probably won't ever fully retire, but then I don't have a hard manual labour job and am in full control of my mental faculties. Such people are the one who should be retiring earlier not later.
Yeah good job workplace pensions are getting better...oh wait. Prospects for younger folk are getting worse and worse in this country. Whole system is very efficiently funneling wealth to the few.
It’s also not just about the financial situation, it’s about the demographics of having enough people active in the workforce to keep things going.
As for AI replacing people, so far it’s magical thinking IMO.
I'm 31, pretty much everyone my age and 5 years up expects to get no state pension anyway. I don't even think it would be a political suicide by this point most of us have mentally checked out of expecting that.
But we don't vote anyway in substantial numbers so it's even less of a vote loser.
Maybe so, but it’s quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it’s 71 / 75 / 84 etc
It absolutely ****s those in the middle that have been prudent enough (and had enough income) to put a shed load of their pay into a pension, and have planned on retiring at a point in time, only to have it moved.
Case in point... me. I've put between 20 and 35% of my wage into a pension for 30+ years - rather than spaffed it away on booze / fags / prostitutes. On the basis of a defined retirement age. It's called PLANNING. Pity the morons running the country can't plan too. Because ever since I was born, it was predictable when I'd reach 65.
But they'd rather give it in tax breaks to the millionaire tory party donors and the corrupt rather than normal people that they have been taking the £££ off.
(Given me half my NI contributions back from the last 40 years and I'll take the pension age rise).
I’ve put between 20 and 35% of my wage into a pension for 30+ years – rather than spaffed it away on booze / fags / prostitutes
It’s never too late to start 😉
It absolutely **** those in the middle that have been prudent enough (and had enough income) to put a shed load of their pay into a pension, and have planned on retiring at a point in time, only to have it moved.
other than the 10 year rule (ie you can't access the pot more than 10 years ahead of the retirement age, which hasn't been kept up-to-date with recently) - any shifts in state pension age shouldn't impact your ability to access your private pot.
I’m struggling to do my job now and been off sick got the longest I ever have due to that. Working to 71 is an absolute no for me. <br /><br />
And too many perfectly healthy wealthy individuals who neither work, nor pay tax.
How do you not pay tax?
I don’t see a problem with it being 71. There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work
Well as taking up jobs that younger people could do, working at 71 for many in physical jobs or those that require quick decision making while under huge amounts of stress is ridiculous to think it’s ok
A few thoughts from me:
- there are so many jobs that a 70 year old would find really physically challenging. Teaching for example. Does that mean a huge increase in sickness and early retirement on grounds of ill health payments?
- will people working longer not fill the jobs many younger people need? And yet on average, an older person is wealthier and likely to have somewhere to live. Storing up more issues.
- why make people work longer when part of the issue can be solved through reduced tax avoidance, getting ill people better quicker and therefore paying tax, spending taxpayer money responsibly, reducing the wealth tied up in housing etc etc.
Of course all this takes a strong vision of a country, responsible government and much political determination.
Oh.
Wait.
Where's the hope?
– why make people work longer when part of the issue can be solved through reduced tax avoidance, getting ill people better quicker and therefore paying tax, spending taxpayer money responsibly, reducing the wealth tied up in housing etc etc.
As far as I’m aware it’s not just about the cost, it’s actually about having enough people in the workforce, which can’t be solved through increased taxation.
Well as taking up jobs that younger people could do, working at 71 for many in physical jobs or those that require quick decision making while under huge amounts of stress is ridiculous to think it’s ok
unemployment is currently at an all time low, and more people in employement will drive more job creation, so I'm not sure "taking up jobs" is a big issue.
There are plenty of low-skill, low-stress, low-physical-effort jobs around that pay more than the state pension. Checkout assistant, driver, browsing singletrackworld it middle management
I'm a teacher, well a faculty head now, at 53 I'm going to bite the bullet and go at 60. No way can I see my going longer. I might be able to wangle a side enterprise but if not it'll be own brand beans and scouring the countryside for firewood. Actually if all parents have gone by then it's off to Europe to retire.
The youngsters need to start voting to stop all the chushty retired Tory voters messing everything up for the rest of us.
I'm certainly not working past 67, probably earlier TBH.
All the work-based pensions I have been diligently paying into for decades don't start paying until state retirement age. I'm going to be very upset if I've paid all that money through the years and the goalposts get moved yet again.
Where’s the hope?
It’s the hope that kills you, so probably best to do away with all that nonsense
There are plenty of low-skill, low-stress, low-physical-effort jobs around that pay more than the state pension. Checkout assistant, driver,
Well done for naming two jobs that AI will likely ruin.
Got any more utopian ideal jobs for the elderly.
Perhaps all those who've maxed out their private pension could start making payments into the state pot, maybe in exchange for a 1:1 increase in private pot.
When people (me) have been paying a not insubstantial amount of NI, which is supposed, in part, to be for the state pension, it’s a bit of a bitter pill for the goalposts to keep moving until they’re beyond reach.
Hmmm. The key thing to remember is that your NI is not for your pension.... It's for all the lucky basturds who have already retired.
Where’s the rope?
FTFY 😩
Or perhaps people who've maxed out their private pot should have state pension eligibility removed.
and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature
I don’t really see what that has to do with anything tbh.
Here's your answer...
Actuarial fairness is considered a key aspect of a just pension system
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2021.675618/full
Comes up a lot..
https://www.cnbc.com/2010/10/20/should-retirement-age-be-based-on-work-type.html
https://www.ft.com/content/9f639718-1db7-11e0-aa88-00144feab49a
Hmmm. The key thing to remember is that your NI is not for your pension…. It’s for all the lucky basturds who have already retired.
Yes. I get that. I don't think that changes the point.
Or perhaps people who’ve maxed out their private pot should have state pension eligibility removed.
makes it hard to justify paying NI all those years
It also disincentives people to save, thus putting more burden on the state. Bit like Death Duty, only the top few % pay it, but everyone worries it will affect them..
Will the demographic imbalance will be reduced somewhat as we boomers die out?
Will the demographic imbalance will be reduced somewhat as we boomers die out?
I assume that's all modelled in.
The current problem is nearly 3m people off work on NHS waiting lists, plus falling birth rates plus reducing immigration. It's almost like the Tories are trying to engineer the collapse of the state pension and tank the economy at the same time.
As far as I’m aware it’s not just about the cost, it’s actually about having enough people in the workforce, which can’t be solved through increased taxation.
If only we had an agreement where we could have recruited more people into the workforce from our close neighbours. We could call it something like 'freedom of movement' or something similar, maybe make it part of a political union to the benefit of all members?
As far as I’m aware it’s not just about the cost, it’s actually about having enough people in the workforce, which can’t be solved through increased taxation
I’ll probably pull a sickie.
Spent the day today pulling cables in and my finger/thumb joints are borked.
If there’s an NHS in 20 plus years time maybe they’ll have a cure for arthritis.
I’d like to have not been pulling cables in or possibly shifting a 300kg gas cylinder, but labour shortages.
Maybe I’ll ask the retired guy over the road if he wants a job? Although I’m not sure how well it’ll go as he usually gets me to change light bulbs, open jars etc.
Well as taking up jobs that younger people could do
I don’t think you grasp the problem the UK has at all. The Scottish government have been shouting about it for decades now… an ageing population paired with UK wide rules and costs deliberately stacked against young families and young migrants… but down here we still have our heads in the sand thinking our problem is immigrants and the ****less youth of today (when it’s neither).
it’s actually about having enough people in the workforce,
Mmmmmmm lovely tasty infinite growth.
There’s the dichotomy… we need more young people to balance out the older people… but the older people don’t want us to have more young people (be it more fresh faced immigrants or a tax and benefit system or the housing provision that supports larger family units) and they have all the political power because of their numbers and where they can afford to live MP constituency wise.
Hmmm. The key thing to remember is that your NI is not for your pension…. It’s for all the lucky basturds who have already retired.
Yes. I get that. I don’t think that changes the point.
Agreed. I was trying to support your arguement.
Got to keep paying for them gimmigrants arriving daily.
Anyway you can retire any age you wish if you have been financially astute. 52 for me.
and they have all the political power because of their numbers and where they can afford to live MP constituency wise.
They also tend to vote, which the young generally don't.....
And then complain that politicians aren't looking out for them (the young that is).
5labFull Member
I don’t see a problem with it being 71.
ime, when people make statement like this what they really mean is.
5labFull Member
I don’t see a problem with it being 71 for other people.
which the young generally don’t…..
Often because their accommodation is temporary. So much easier for the home owner of Tumbridge Wells to have a consistent constituency to vote in.
Got to keep paying for them gimmigrants arriving daily.
That’s exactly the upside down attitude that’s the problem.
One-third of the UK’s 14 million Gen-Xers are at high risk of retiring on insufficient income.
This one is at risk of dying before he retires. Spent most of my working life since 16 doing physically demanding jobs. Now office based, stressful, suffering from a sedentary lifestyle plus issues from the physical work.
Sounds bad but I have no sympathy for those complaining they’re badly done to because they’ve put loads in to private pensions. Do you have any concept of how ****ing lucky you are to be able to do that in the first place? I spent years deciding between buying electric tokens for a meter or eating. Lucky enough to be able to put a bit away nowadays. A hell of a lot of people aren’t so fortunate.
Retirees will soon exceed workers in the UK. Successive post-WW2 governments failing to take action addressing the baby boom - retirees NI contributions were spend decades ago on their parent’s pensions. Selling-off public assets, natural resources and utilities means there’s been no sovereign investment returns to help plug gaps. We have a huge and increasing wealth disparity, with rich pensioners sitting on property portfolios whilst denying young people the opportunity to affordably rent or buy a home.
The UK has also one of the poorest productivity (GDP per capita) of the G7 as well as one of the lowest investment rates - things aren’t going to get better anytime soon. Throw in a dearth of workers in things like healthcare and construction, the sick won’t be getting better by themselves and the desperate shortage of affordable housing isn’t going to build itself. Chuck in the politicisation of immigration to suit the frothing gammons by both main parties, I can’t see the current predicament getting better for at least another decade.
Having just turned 59, I work part-time and have other income to keep me going until my private pensions start paying - fortunately my state pension is only a relatively small part of that income.
What I do know is that if I did have children, I’d be telling them to go abroad as their earning potential and career options are going to be better elsewhere - I thought the 80’s were pretty shit, but this decades going to take some beating.
The UK need to work out how to fix the ageing population issue internally where possible and through immigration were needed. Immigration is a huge problem for both sides, we cherry pick the best, then you are just moving the problems to another country, where you've stolen their brightest and best.
There is a real need for something though, even raising pension age to 71, i doubt you'll see a huge increase in numbers working that additional 4 years, we live longer, not healthier, i've just had a new hip, god knows what else will be wrong in 25 years when i'm 71 😂
"If only we had an agreement where we could have recruited more people into the workforce from our close neighbours. We could call it something like ‘freedom of movement’ or something similar, maybe make it part of a political union to the benefit of all members?"
Net immigration was 672k in the year to June 2023. How many more do you want and where will we get the houses for them?
https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2024/02/01/reducing-net-migration-factsheet-december-2023/
I think the whole world needs a rethink of how it operates. Constant growth, productivity, making mountains of shite we don’t really need, performing jobs that have no real meaning or need to them. All whilst we rape the planet of resources and a select few hoard all the wealth.
New houses near me advertised as ‘Great starter homes’ and ‘ideal for first time buyers and young families’ starting at £280k! It’s not realistic for the vast majority of young people.
Sorry, pissed off and in a ranting mood at the moment!
How many more do you want and where will we get the houses for them?
Ignoring the immigration issue… if we have more retired people we need more working people… they need homes wherever they or their parents were born.
How many empty bedrooms are there in the UK? Who has them? How many young families are constrained by their housing situation?
The problem isn’t population growth in the UK, it’s a lack of distribution and a system stacked against young people by previous generations.