Triple Lock for Pensioners . . . .

[The Real Maroonblood]

1 minute ago, periodictabledancer said:

 

Half of all UK welfare spending is on pensions (despite the fact it's the lowest pension in W Europe) and there 's many billions to be saved by means testing it. 

Wait until all the auld folk are deid then do it.

[H2]

2 hours ago, highlandjambo3 said:

I’ve been getting an Army pension since I left at 40……does this mean I was a pensioner at 40 or does it only count when I hit state pension age 🤷‍♂️

I salute you. You more than paid for your pension.

[H2]

 

I guess it's what do you want, invest in a pension or material possession and holidays. It's yours to choose.

 

The current pensioners have worked out through their lives knowing they would have the state pension, plus the accumulation of whatever they invested for any other pension. If that head been means tested the investments would be quite different. Why would you invest to lose?

[davemclaren]

28 minutes ago, joondalupjambo said:

Yeah they are banding about 5k which when you think my wife missed out on circa £7k per annum for 9 years it is not a lot.

 

https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/complaints-womens-state-pension-age

 

Funnily enough this was updated yesterday with the latest decisions by the ombudsman.

Just a holding statement really. 

[cazzyy]

1 hour ago, periodictabledancer said:

 

Half of all UK welfare spending is on pensions (despite the fact it's the lowest pension in W Europe) and there 's many billions to be saved by means testing it. 

 

We were talking about doing away with housing benefit. 🤷‍♀️

Edited November 22, 2023 by cazzyy

[frankblack]

1 hour ago, periodictabledancer said:

 

Half of all UK welfare spending is on pensions (despite the fact it's the lowest pension in W Europe) and there 's many billions to be saved by means testing it. 

 

Wasn't it paid for by NI contributions?  

 

You want to tell people that they can't get what they paid for to hand out to others who perhaps didn't contribute?

[highlandjambo3]

1 hour ago, H2 said:

I salute you. You more than paid for your pension.

I didn’t contribute a single penny to my Army pension……which is £1400 ish quid a month……..I’ve been out 19 years now 😳💰💵💰💵.

 

Course the military no longer provide that nugget now.

[scott herbertson]

2 hours ago, the posh bit said:

 

That's why we need more immigration. Send they wee boats up to Granton Harbour! 

would prefer they just dealt with asylum and immigration cases promptly

[Section Q]

5 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Clever ploy to increase the pension by the triple lock amount then claw some of it back from most by not raising the tax threshold but reducing NI rates.  

Reducing NHI rates is surprising, considering the government's claim that the state pension is unaffordable in it's present format.

[Section Q]

4 hours ago, cazzyy said:

 

We were talking about doing away with housing benefit. 🤷‍♀️

The subject from OP is "the triple lock on the state pension".

[davemclaren]

6 minutes ago, Section Q said:

Reducing NHI rates is surprising, considering the government's claim that the state pension is unaffordable in it's present format.

There's no real correlation and there's no employee contributions past the state pension age. Raising income tax thresholds or reducing income tax rates would have benefited more people but, of course, be more expensive. 

[BlueRiver]

23 minutes ago, Section Q said:

Reducing NHI rates is surprising, considering the government's claim that the state pension is unaffordable in it's present format.

 

National Insurance is just another tax. 

 

Any money raised by it goes into the same pot. It isn't ring-fenced for anyone's pensions. 

[Section Q]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

There's no real correlation and there's no employee contributions past the state pension age. Raising income tax thresholds or reducing income tax rates would have benefited more people but, of course, be more expensive. 

It's almost like there's an agenda to make the state pension even less affordable by reducing the NHI contributions, which is the only source of it's funding. ...Puzzling. . .

[Greedy Jambo]

Pensioners can't work a single lock, never mind a triple one. 

[Section Q]

1 hour ago, BlueRiver said:

 

National Insurance is just another tax. 

 

Any money raised by it goes into the same pot. It isn't ring-fenced for anyone's pensions. 

I'm aware of that. But this government continues to sight NHI contributions as not sufficient to fund the NHS and state pension, so it's puzzling they would reduce it.

[BlueRiver]

13 minutes ago, Section Q said:

I'm aware of that. But this government continues to sight NHI contributions as not sufficient to fund the NHS and state pension, so it's puzzling they would reduce it.

 

Do they? 

 

Admittedly I've never seen them do so and usually seen it discussed within the wider public income framework. I'll take you at your word though. Mightve passed me by. 

[davemclaren]

32 minutes ago, Section Q said:

I'm aware of that. But this government continues to sight NHI contributions as not sufficient to fund the NHS and state pension, so it's puzzling they would reduce it.

 

18 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Do they? 

 

Admittedly I've never seen them do so and usually seen it discussed within the wider public income framework. I'll take you at your word though. Mightve passed me by. 

Boris said the 2% rise on NI a couple of years ago was to find extra old age care. It's an illusion though as it all just goes on the same pot as all taxes 

[BlueRiver]

13 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

 

Boris said the 2% rise on NI a couple of years ago was to find extra old age care. It's an illusion though as it all just goes on the same pot as all taxes 

 

Ah yeah I remember that plan now. 

 

That was my overall point though initially. NI isn't used to fund anything specifically as it all gets thrown into the same place. 

 

I'd even go as far to venture that NI contributions alone won't have been enough to fund the NHS and state pensions since nigh on their inception. 

[Footballfirst]

National Insurance was introduced to generate the funds required to pay for pensions and sick pay.

 

Over the years, as other posters have noted, the funds raised are just part of the Treasury's general pot.

 

There is an argument for ending the tax (on employees) and increasing/adjusting the Income Tax rates and allowances to make up the difference.  However that would require the tax on pensioners to increase, although age related allowances could be used to alleviate the worst effects of the change.

[Section Q]

1 hour ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Do they? 

 

Admittedly I've never seen them do so and usually seen it discussed within the wider public income framework. I'll take you at your word though. Mightve passed me by. 

It's also confusing for those, (me included), who have made class 3 NHI contributions to make sure they have maximised their claim for a state pension, but then the govt. turn round and reclassify the payments as a benefit.

 

Personally, I've lived and worked around the world, and about 20 years ago I became aware that 35 years contributions to NHI were necessary to acquire a full pension. As I intended resting my old bones in the UK, I felt morally bound to make an effort and "fund" my retirement rather than receive universal credits as some choose to do. It's therefore disheartening to learn I'm on benefits now.

 

The understanding that contributing to NHI meant funding, or partly funding your state pension and health care has totally changed. I think more twists and turns are coming. And turning younger workers against retires is a classic divide and conquer tactic by the present government. Next we'll be told health care is a benefit.

[Section Q]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

 

Boris said the 2% rise on NI a couple of years ago was to find extra old age care. It's an illusion though as it all just goes on the same pot as all taxes 

This.....

Past generations were led to believe they were financing their health care and state pension by paying NHI contributions. The spin from the government appears bent on turning the workers, (tax payers), against retires.

[BlueRiver]

I don't like the term "benefits" at all really. 

 

I'd much prefer a term like social security was used. 

[SectionDJambo]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

 

Boris said the 2% rise on NI a couple of years ago was to find extra old age care. It's an illusion though as it all just goes on the same pot as all taxes 

His desire to „let the bodies pile high“ was probably more typical of his thinking. If a few hundred thousand over 65s had died as a consequence of his government’s dithering during the early stages of Covid, the Treasury could have saved billions in pension payments.

He would also have lost a few Conservative voters in the process though.

[cazzyy]

3 hours ago, Section Q said:

The subject from OP is "the triple lock on the state pension".

 

So what? The post he replied to wasn't.

Edited November 23, 2023 by cazzyy

[periodictabledancer]

3 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

National Insurance was introduced to generate the funds required to pay for pensions and sick pay.

 

Over the years, as other posters have noted, the funds raised are just part of the Treasury's general pot.

 

There is an argument for ending the tax (on employees) and increasing/adjusting the Income Tax rates and allowances to make up the difference.  However that would require the tax on pensioners to increase, although age related allowances could be used to alleviate the worst effects of the change.

Totally agree.

We need the German approach of +50s (IIRC) paying a specific tax to fund THEIR needs. Instead,  the young are being taxed out of existence and have a NHS that is collapsing because old people are killing it (and refusing point blank to pay for it). 

[Tazio]

I’m of the age that compulsory work pension schemes only became a requirement in my mid 40’s. So on retirement I’ll have my state pension and my work pension. Based on my last pension statement my work pension scheme will pay me about £70 a month. So by the time I retire that private pension will probably be worth about treating myself to a takeaway curry and a bottle of wine a month. 
In a few years there are going to be a lot of retired people absolutely stuffed for money if they don’t own their house. 50 years of work and look forward to a retirement in poverty due to the terrible pensions offered in this country. 

[Section Q]

4 hours ago, periodictabledancer said:

Totally agree.

We need the German approach of +50s (IIRC) paying a specific tax to fund THEIR needs. Instead,  the young are being taxed out of existence and have a NHS that is collapsing because old people are killing it (and refusing point blank to pay for it). 

Oh deary me. Now old people are killing the national health.....

[Section Q]

3 hours ago, Tazio said:

I’m of the age that compulsory work pension schemes only became a requirement in my mid 40’s. So on retirement I’ll have my state pension and my work pension. Based on my last pension statement my work pension scheme will pay me about £70 a month. So by the time I retire that private pension will probably be worth about treating myself to a takeaway curry and a bottle of wine a month. 
In a few years there are going to be a lot of retired people absolutely stuffed for money if they don’t own their house. 50 years of work and look forward to a retirement in poverty due to the terrible pensions offered in this country. 

This.

 

Many people are finding it tough in old age. We definitely have gone backwards. Hard to believe people think pensioners are living the dream.  . .

[BlueRiver]

20 hours ago, H2 said:

Yep, handing out hand over fist to the next generation. But hey you believe what TikTok and your mobile phone tell you!

 

🤣🤣 aw come on now. 

 

The boomer generation approaching retirement and in retirement now are probably the most privileged age cohort to have ever walked the planet. 

 

That's not to say everyone within that generation is privileged but they've  hoarded wealth and power like dragons. 

[BlueRiver]

18 hours ago, joondalupjambo said:

My son says the same thing in relation to his Mum 🙂

 

They are sorting it but perhaps it could be said that the Pensions Department are deliberately taking years to do it.  Folk that were due their pension 9 / 10 years ago are dropping off like flies so when there is finally a settlement there will be much fewer number left to pay out to.  Latest I read somewhere was that lump sum, one off payments are being considered as the best option, no back payments at all and it would only be the recipient who was affected that got it.  If they have passed by the time of any agreement then hard lines and also no payments to any remaining family.   I think, only my view is that part of the delay could be the WASPI campaigners are fighting hard for back payments and so not just the UK Government causing the delay.

 

 

 

Why do the WASPI women deserve anything? 

 

As a teenager I was aware of increases to pension age that were going to affect women. 

 

Why do I now need to cover their greeting about it all whilst being expected to work beyond their retirement age (something that's increased since I entered the work force...) 

[davemclaren]

34 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Why do the WASPI women deserve anything? 

 

As a teenager I was aware of increases to pension age that were going to affect women. 

 

Why do I now need to cover their greeting about it all whilst being expected to work beyond their retirement age (something that's increased since I entered the work force...) 

Because the ombudsman found the government guilty of maladministration due to there being two years when comms should have been issued that weren't.  

[BlueRiver]

2 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Because the ombudsman found the government guilty of maladministration due to there being two years when comms should have been issued that weren't.  

 

Relating to the 1995 Act rises or the later ones? 

 

I might need to start prepping my claim now, DWP never wrote to me to tell me I'll be 68 when I retire. 

[BlueRiver]

For clarity I have sympathy for the claims regarding the 2011 acceleration but as far as I'm concerned if this relates to the 1995 changes I hope Parliament tell them to ram it. 

[davemclaren]

22 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Relating to the 1995 Act rises or the later ones? 

 

I might need to start prepping my claim now, DWP never wrote to me to tell me I'll be 68 when I retire. 

See the 'Findings' section in this. 
 

https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/complaints-womens-state-pension-age

[Malinga the Swinga]

6 hours ago, Section Q said:

Oh deary me. Now old people are killing the national health.....

Aye, worked most of their lives, paid taxes as required and whatever else was asked of them and now being accused of killing health service as they have cheek to be alive. 

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

10 hours ago, periodictabledancer said:

Totally agree.

We need the German approach of +50s (IIRC) paying a specific tax to fund THEIR needs. Instead,  the young are being taxed out of existence and have a NHS that is collapsing because old people are killing it (and refusing point blank to pay for it). 

What's your views on spending millions on operations and medicines for the young who suffer from incurable conditions? I mean, if you have certain conditions and you get treatment that could prolong life by 4 or 5 years, is that worth it to you? Do you consider that a waste of resource or is it a simple case of you get treatment up to 49 years, 364 days but as soon as you are 50, you can **** off and die as 50 is your arbitrary cut off.

 

[BlueRiver]

30 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

See the 'Findings' section in this. 
 

https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/complaints-womens-state-pension-age

 

Thank you. 

[BlueRiver]

11 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Aye, worked most of their lives, paid taxes as required and whatever else was asked of them and now being accused of killing health service as they have cheek to be alive. 

 

 

I wouldn't be so crass as to put it like that but the top heavy demographics in the UK does put the NHS and its current funding model under a lot of stress. 

 

There's going to be less and less of us in work paying for more and more elderly requiring healthcare. 

[davemclaren]

2 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

I wouldn't be so crass as to put it like that but the top heavy demographics in the UK does put the NHS and its current funding model under a lot of stress. 

 

There's going to be less and less of us in work paying for more and more elderly requiring healthcare. 

Luckily robotics and AI mean that there will be plenty of wealth and no need to work. 😄

[Fxxx the SPFL]

10 hours ago, periodictabledancer said:

Totally agree.

We need the German approach of +50s (IIRC) paying a specific tax to fund THEIR needs. Instead,  the young are being taxed out of existence and have a NHS that is collapsing because old people are killing it (and refusing point blank to pay for it). 

i'm 66 and still working and paying Tax retiring next March. I paid National Insurance from when i left school 1973 until May of this year. I have done my bit as far as tax/NI is concerned and i believe that i have paid for any NHS treatment i may require hopefully not in the future ten times over.

[Malinga the Swinga]

1 hour ago, **** the SPFL said:

i'm 66 and still working and paying Tax retiring next March. I paid National Insurance from when i left school 1973 until May of this year. I have done my bit as far as tax/NI is concerned and i believe that i have paid for any NHS treatment i may require hopefully not in the future ten times over.

C'mon now, you are killing the NHS!! Just because you've contributed and paid taxes doesn't mean a shit in ptd's brave new world.

[Fxxx the SPFL]

1 hour ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

C'mon now, you are killing the NHS!! Just because you've contributed and paid taxes doesn't mean a shit in ptd's brave new world.

[jambos are go!]

23 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Clever ploy to increase the pension by the triple lock amount then claw some of it back from most by not raising the tax threshold but reducing NI rates.  

Sneaky and possibly dishonest if you ask me!

[joondalupjambo]

5 hours ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Why do the WASPI women deserve anything? 

 

As a teenager I was aware of increases to pension age that were going to affect women. 

 

Why do I now need to cover their greeting about it all whilst being expected to work beyond their retirement age (something that's increased since I entered the work force...) 

To clarify I am only talking about 2011.  

 

[BlueRiver]

15 minutes ago, joondalupjambo said:

To clarify I am only talking about 2011.  

 

 

Fair I'm on board with that. 

[joondalupjambo]

3 hours ago, **** the SPFL said:

i'm 66 and still working and paying Tax retiring next March. I paid National Insurance from when i left school 1973 until May of this year. I have done my bit as far as tax/NI is concerned and i believe that i have paid for any NHS treatment i may require hopefully not in the future ten times over.

Same age as you and apart from a few bob income now paying tax mostly on pension income.  No issue with that them's the current rules and I am lucky.  I left school at 16 and started work on the Monday after finishing on the Friday.  Never been out of work and have paid tax and NIC's ever since.

 

However I have never thought for one minute what I have paid in was for me. My understanding was that any tax and/NIC's that I paid was put into a pool.  A pool to be used for all.

 

The fact that the country has fecked it up over several generations and governments, and that any pool of cash today cannot stretch enough to cover everything people need from the State is totally out with my control. I can do diddly squat about it.  I can vote, and do but that seems to be of little value these days because whoever I vote for is not fixing anything, not making things better or giving us hope for the future.  

 

Is it right?  Is it fair? Is it bollocky.

 

 

[Lone Striker]

1 hour ago, jambos are go! said:

Sneaky and possibly dishonest if you ask me!

Not really.  If your only source of income is the state pension, you'll be  paying zero tax on the new increased full amount (£11,510 approx). The personal allowance (zero rate) in £ 12,570.     If you have additional sources of regular income (e.g. occupational  pension,  savings/investment  interest, rental income etc), that takes you above the £12,750 and so gets taxed.

 

Under current arrangements, the 12570 threshold is frozen till 2028, so if the state pension continues to go up via the triple lock figures for the next 4 years it may end up above that threshold. 

 

If Labour get in, they may unfreeze the lowest tax band threshold. 

 

 

 

 

[WorldChampions1902]

40 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Under current arrangements, the 12570 threshold is frozen till 2028, so if the state pension continues to go up via the triple lock figures for the next 4 years it may end up above that threshold. 

 

If Labour get in, they may unfreeze the lowest tax band threshold. 

There is no “may” about it IMHO. The New State Pension will be above the tax threshold in that timescale and we will have the perverse situation whereby it will be subject to tax.

 

Labour will inherit a financial poisoned chalice so may not be in a position to reinstate the indexation of tax allowances for all at that point. In which case, they should at least do so for pensioners to ensure their state pension continues to be free of tax.

[Fxxx the SPFL]

22 hours ago, joondalupjambo said:

Same age as you and apart from a few bob income now paying tax mostly on pension income.  No issue with that them's the current rules and I am lucky.  I left school at 16 and started work on the Monday after finishing on the Friday.  Never been out of work and have paid tax and NIC's ever since.

 

However I have never thought for one minute what I have paid in was for me. My understanding was that any tax and/NIC's that I paid was put into a pool.  A pool to be used for all.

 

The fact that the country has fecked it up over several generations and governments, and that any pool of cash today cannot stretch enough to cover everything people need from the State is totally out with my control. I can do diddly squat about it.  I can vote, and do but that seems to be of little value these days because whoever I vote for is not fixing anything, not making things better or giving us hope for the future.  

 

Is it right?  Is it fair? Is it bollocky.

 

 

👍

[H2]

On 23/11/2023 at 10:34, BlueRiver said:

 

🤣🤣 aw come on now. 

 

The boomer generation approaching retirement and in retirement now are probably the most privileged age cohort to have ever walked the planet. 

 

That's not to say everyone within that generation is privileged but they've  hoarded wealth and power like dragons. 

That maybe the case, every generation in history benefits from improved living standards. That has not changed. The current youngers generations are even better off, with better housing and higher living standards, more holidays abroad than any other generation, better cars, and add in the other luxuries like mobile phones. Better education opportunities, Better working conditions, better health and safety, But all we hear is "your ruined my childhood" you "destroyed the planet". etc etc etc.