UK State Pension

flook said:
The answer, unpalatable as it is, is higher taxes. As a nation we have become adept at moaning constantly about the failings of the care system, the failings of the NHS, poor policing standards, ludicrously low state pensions etc etc, the answer to all of these is twofold, first increase taxes, because all these cost money and the government hasn't got enough, and two improve efficiencies (and thats a big heading covering a number of issues including but no doubt not limited to staffing levels, middle management positions, training, over-priced contracts). Basically stop wasting money and stop being a corrupt **** looking after your mates

Problem is whichever government brings in even part of these measures won't be in power shortly after, because the opposition will of course promise lower taxes blah blah blah, and so we go round and round in circles.

For decades the fat has been trimmed from government provided services, easy cuts which might cause a few grumbles but nothing of note, eventually there was none of this low hanging fruit (apologies for the mixed metaphors) left and cuts were made in more essential services, people started to notice, satisfaction levels went through the floor, but any mention of increased taxation is met with pitchforks and flaming torches by the masses, myself included for many years I'll admit.

Means testing of the state pension MAY happen one day, but it HAS to be decades in the future, because anyone currently working will (assuming they have a plan of any description for their retirement) have factored in the SP. People in their 20's may have time to do something about it, people in their 30's...maybe not, people over 40 pretty much no chance. Obviously a small percentage, those in very highly paid jobs, sit outside these broad statements.
Click to expand...
Higher taxes is probably the only rational answer if there is a will ( a big if) to increase state pensions to an acceptable level
 
flook said:
The answer, unpalatable as it is, is higher taxes. As a nation we have become adept at moaning constantly about the failings of the care system, the failings of the NHS, poor policing standards, ludicrously low state pensions etc etc, the answer to all of these is twofold, first increase taxes, because all these cost money and the government hasn't got enough, and two improve efficiencies (and thats a big heading covering a number of issues including but no doubt not limited to staffing levels, middle management positions, training, over-priced contracts). Basically stop wasting money and stop being a corrupt **** looking after your mates

Problem is whichever government brings in even part of these measures won't be in power shortly after, because the opposition will of course promise lower taxes blah blah blah, and so we go round and round in circles.

For decades the fat has been trimmed from government provided services, easy cuts which might cause a few grumbles but nothing of note, eventually there was none of this low hanging fruit (apologies for the mixed metaphors) left and cuts were made in more essential services, people started to notice, satisfaction levels went through the floor, but any mention of increased taxation is met with pitchforks and flaming torches by the masses, myself included for many years I'll admit.

Means testing of the state pension MAY happen one day, but it HAS to be decades in the future, because anyone currently working will (assuming they have a plan of any description for their retirement) have factored in the SP. People in their 20's may have time to do something about it, people in their 30's...maybe not, people over 40 pretty much no chance. Obviously a small percentage, those in very highly paid jobs, sit outside these broad statements.
Click to expand...
I wrote something similar on the Labour thread (probably wasn't the best place). If the answer is higher taxes, which is probably the right one, could we have a single, clear ring fenced tax to cover this and only this. Along with a separate tax for the NHS and one for social care. At least it becomes more tangible where the money goes from your pay each month.

It would also reduce the amount parties can play games with taxation. With people realising that a cut in the payment means a cut in one of these areas.
 
mosssideblue said:
For sure a different model is needed for future generations but even if a pensioner is mortgage/ rent free, cost of general living and repairs/ replacement of household items is a worry. Not to mention, a trip to the dentist could wipe out your monthly pension in one go.

Like you, I don’t know what the answer is, but something needs to change for pensioners today and for pensioners tomorrow
Click to expand...
This is the same for everyone, but the young uns have rent/mortgage to pay as well.
 
mosssideblue said:
Am I right in thinking the Government don’t invest NI contributions to potentially improve the available money, but simply pay pensions from the tax kitty?
Click to expand...
The inner workings of where the money comes from isn't transparent. The way its presented by the government however is no different in practice to a ponzi scheme.

It would make sense if it was invested but even if it is Im sure they wouldnt want it to be directed traceable back to NI contributions.
 
I get the raising the income tax higher but then you end up taxing the private pensions, therefore reducing your pension yet again! Could there be a lower tax for pensions but a higher one for people working?
 
Governments will all kick the can down the roads but will gradually tax the State Pension more & more as an easy option.

Both myself & Mrs Moon have a small occupational pensions which take us over any 'help' benefits....that's fine between us, we've done over 60 years of full time employment, and although not rolling in it are ok financially.

Once my OAP kicks in (5 years time) I expect to be battered on tax, I'm already paying a bit on my occasional pension. Due to the stealth free pay allowance freeze we're all copping for it on the sly.

It seems that the saying life, death and taxes is still holding true.
 
Kompany Car said:
The inner workings of where the money comes from isn't transparent. The way its presented by the government however is no different in practice to a ponzi scheme.

It would make sense if it was invested but even if it is Im sure they wouldnt want it to be directed traceable back to NI contributions.
Click to expand...
I listened to podcast which said just get rid of NI and make it one big income tax then everyone pays the same, NI is supposed to be for state pension, maternity allowance and jobseekers allowance but it’s often used for other things, so just have one big tax everyone pays the same.
 
mosssideblue said:
Higher taxes is probably the only rational answer if there is a will ( a big if) to increase state pensions to an acceptable level
Click to expand...
Most people would agree but who is to pay the higher taxes is hotly disputed. Most people want improved social services but they think they should be paid for by someone other than themselves.
 
Not sure what the problem is, the government very generously removed retirement age. So we can all top up our pensions by working into our 80's.

If any government had the bollocks to implement a fair tax system the future wouldn't be so bleak, and now big business will use AI to put more people out of work.
 
With every passing year, each successive govt from about the mid 70's has kicked the future 'how to pay for' Pension issue down the road.

They've raised the pension age... slowly raising the female retirement age to become the same as Male, whilst also increasing the male retirement age. This is ok, but is offset by the increasingly aged population, ie more people living at pension age, and living longer.

With each successive year, the amount of wiggle room available to the govt for ''sorting' pensions, reduces.

The 'triple lock', while admirable, is going to have to come off, unless people accept that taxes will have to rise...
and by taxes I mean , taxes on people that can afford them. No 'rich' person is going to be "hit" by a 1% increase in a targeted tax, compared to the daily grind of the lowest earning 70% of the population, just trying to get by.
Eg £1m earnt, 1% tax is just £10k... which is just under a 1/3 of the median gross wage of a person in the UK. ie 50% of people earn less than that, from £0 - £34k.

What that tax is on/come from... is open for discussion.

But it needs to do something about the increasing disparity between the richest 10% and the bottom 70-80% of the population. In over 50 years, the disparity has widened considerably.
 
flook said:
The answer, unpalatable as it is, is higher taxes. As a nation we have become adept at moaning constantly about the failings of the care system, the failings of the NHS, poor policing standards, ludicrously low state pensions etc etc, the answer to all of these is twofold, first increase taxes, because all these cost money and the government hasn't got enough, and two improve efficiencies (and thats a big heading covering a number of issues including but no doubt not limited to staffing levels, middle management positions, training, over-priced contracts). Basically stop wasting money and stop being a corrupt **** looking after your mates

Problem is whichever government brings in even part of these measures won't be in power shortly after, because the opposition will of course promise lower taxes blah blah blah, and so we go round and round in circles.

For decades the fat has been trimmed from government provided services, easy cuts which might cause a few grumbles but nothing of note, eventually there was none of this low hanging fruit (apologies for the mixed metaphors) left and cuts were made in more essential services, people started to notice, satisfaction levels went through the floor, but any mention of increased taxation is met with pitchforks and flaming torches by the masses, myself included for many years I'll admit.

Means testing of the state pension MAY happen one day, but it HAS to be decades in the future, because anyone currently working will (assuming they have a plan of any description for their retirement) have factored in the SP. People in their 20's may have time to do something about it, people in their 30's...maybe not, people over 40 pretty much no chance. Obviously a small percentage, those in very highly paid jobs, sit outside these broad statements.
Click to expand...
Increasing the retirement age has to be part of the equation too. Unfortunatey people want neither - to pay more tax or work longer. There needs to be a re-alignment of peoples expectations. Peoples viewpoint is very often achored to when they started work and paying in, but that is irrelvant really. People need to think about what it will be like when they start to take out.
 
stonerblue said:
So it should be. The state pension bill is massive and i'm gonna guess at least half of them don't need it.
Click to expand...
That will just lead to people not saving for a private pension, why the hell would you knowingly be giving NI contributions for 50 years and get fuck all back from it. I’d be squirreling money away somewhere to counter attack the means test.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top