More deprivations perhaps 😏

Ziplok

Not everyone who has an occupational pension has a large occupational pension, though.

I would assume the adjustment would be based on total income from all sources, and tapered.

Just as the withdrawal of WFA should have been but wasn't - ah - there is the problem, knowing the current lot, we would end up with another clumsy all or nothing cut.

^More sensible for who?
It’s how older pensioners like my Mum get about so much to browse shops and meet friends.It’s designed for just that reason, for older people to stay mobile and out of their houses.^

A nominal £10 or £20 to save such a lot in bus fares seems reasonable.

It would be yet another way to discourage people from bothering with a works pension and relying on the state one instead. If income from all sources was taken into account it would cost a fortune to administrate, and in any case the fabled millionaire pensioners probably don't use public transport much anyway.

If this thread of mine has caused upset to anyone I apologise, however if I ever mention anything which has a political leaning, I find I get snidey remarks from a ‘few’ people. I will not be starting or contributing to anything of this nature again.

Don't worry, NanKate. There are always threads about things that will never happen, or that might happen but not yet. It does no harm to debate the rights and wrongs of the principles behind them, though.

Jaxjacky

Does your friend know the lottery numbers for Saturday please?

Hahaha

NanKate

If this thread of mine has caused upset to anyone I apologise, however if I ever mention anything which has a political leaning, I find I get snidey remarks from a ‘few’ people. I will not be starting or contributing to anything of this nature again.

Please don’t stop contributing. It was a question and something someone close to you told you might happen.

We can all share things here which worry us and should be able to do so without judgement or ridicule.

Thank you Cossy and Doodledog. 👍

Don't let the snidey people get to you Kate. Your contributions as valid as anyone else's.

Thanks Kitty 👍

The thing is, pensions are already means-tested. If you’ve paid into an occupational pension which pays above £12500 or whatever, you pay 20% of it back, and if you have over £50k or so you pay back 40% of it. Because you have worked. If you don’t work you get free Pension Credit free of tax, and if you don’t work but pay the voluntary contribution but of NI (far less than the full rate) you get the full pension free of tax, too. It’s the workers who lose out every time.

The system is not set up to encourage people to work, and it has left us in a position where the balance between the economically active and inactive is such that those who do pay in could end up losing even more.

I can’t see means-testing or scrapping of the SP happening for a long time, though, or at any rate having an impact any time soon, as those already receiving pensions will have to continue on them, and anyone within ten years or so of retirement will need time to prepare. I can, however, see a future generation being told that they have to pay into a retirement plan of some kind (probably through their workplace) and the universal SP being phased out for those who don’t qualify for subsidised contributions.

The problem then will be what to do with those who have made no provision. I hate to think that any future government would allow people to starve, but how do we incentivise work if there is provision for those who refuse?

There is also the problem that any system that is designed to penalise those who don’t work shifts the balance of power between employers and workers to a dangerous place, so the emphasis has to be on encouraging fair contributions, rather than penalties for opting out. But then we’re back to where we started, with some getting a free ride and others paying for both themselves and others .

It’s not easy, is it?

They are penalising us for being old. It wouldn't be so bad if the money saved was used for the benefit of our country, but they are giving so much away to other countries. Is this what they mean when they talk about 'an equal society'?

kittylester

Don't let the snidey people get to you Kate. Your contributions as valid as anyone else's.

This.

mum2three

They are penalising us for being old. It wouldn't be so bad if the money saved was used for the benefit of our country, but they are giving so much away to other countries. Is this what they mean when they talk about 'an equal society'?

How much are we giving away to 'other' countries?

Maybe better to support people in their own countries than having them coming here?

This is a vacuous argument.

I would be happy to pay more for my bus pass, as with the railcard, if it meant housing costs go down and my son can get a place of his own.

I am not that well off but young people today don't have half the prospects we had so yes, if spending on education and housing is going up, then why not pay a little for my bus pass?

My brother is absolutely horrible about Rachel reeves but he lives in rural Dorset and gets his thinking from the Express and the local pub. I wish he would either get a proper newspaper or stop buying one altogether.

keepingquiet

mum2three

They are penalising us for being old. It wouldn't be so bad if the money saved was used for the benefit of our country, but they are giving so much away to other countries. Is this what they mean when they talk about 'an equal society'?

How much are we giving away to 'other' countries?

Maybe better to support people in their own countries than having them coming here?

This is a vacuous argument.

I would be happy to pay more for my bus pass, as with the railcard, if it meant housing costs go down and my son can get a place of his own.

I am not that well off but young people today don't have half the prospects we had so yes, if spending on education and housing is going up, then why not pay a little for my bus pass?

Agreed, but then I have access to a car. I don't drive myself, but Mr D does, and that's very different from having to go everywhere by bus. I may feel differently if circumstances were different.

I'd be interested to know how much senior bus passes cost the country. As the buses are travelling anyway, often with few younger passengers outside of commuting times, letting the empty seats go to older people probably doesn't cost a fortune, and the subsidies to the bus companies may well keep less popular routes open for everyone.

I didn’t mean to be snidey NanKate but prefer sourced information, apologies if I was seen as such.

Like others I think this was a Tory/ Badenoch thing.
She has been all over the news recently after her interview on LBC which sounded like she was looking at means testing pensions.

kittylester

^More sensible for who?
It’s how older pensioners like my Mum get about so much to browse shops and meet friends.It’s designed for just that reason, for older people to stay mobile and out of their houses.^

A nominal £10 or £20 to save such a lot in bus fares seems reasonable.

The cost of administering a £10 annual cost would probably be more than the fee would generate in income.

I'm not sure what Rachel Reeves has said but this is from the Guardian.

Kemi Badenoch has been urged by a former Conservative pensions minister to clarify “what on earth she means” by suggesting the pensions triple lock could be means-tested, amid alarm within the party that she will lose support among older people.

I do think RR will have to look at phasing out the triple lock. I would suggest she marks it for what would cause her to withdraw the inflation and 2.5% prongs and use only average earning.

My choice would be when Pension Credit reaches a Minimum Income Standard. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation suggests it is about £5.5 thousand short of their figure (Sept 2024) which usually comes in quite close to the government's own figure. Pension Credit comes with extra befits in kind so an average value would bring down the £5.5 thousand.

While triple lock existed all stare pension would rise with it and more people on Basic Pension (and some on the New SP) would tip into Pension Credit.

The next generation of tax payers always pays for the older generations pension. It's a Pay-As-You-Go scheme. It seems wrong that when we paid (from our taxes) more of us were paying for fewer pensioners. Now fewer taxpayers are paying for more pensions and at a rate that can be above their own earnings increase.

Doodledog

It would be yet another way to discourage people from bothering with a works pension and relying on the state one instead. If income from all sources was taken into account it would cost a fortune to administrate, and in any case the fabled millionaire pensioners probably don't use public transport much anyway.

You and your employer must pay a percentage of your earnings into your workplace pension scheme. We could (if we chose) have a means tested pension. They would need to ramp up the Workplace Pension but it works elsewhere so no reason why it couldn't be done.

I was always in favour of universal benefits but I'm beginning to wonder if a) they do what the set out to do and b) we can afford them. A bit like my feeling on unions and nationalisation. They seem anachronistic and we may have to use more 21st century methods.

Why would Reeves need to look at phasing out the triple lock?

There is a wealth of funds in the National Insurance Fund (net of the NHS allocation) which stood at 86 billion at 31 March 2024. That is 65 billion in excess funds over and above the contingency required to meet extraordinary events

The excess is projected to reduce to 75 billion by 31 March 2025 (Hunt’s 10 billion pre-election NIC cut) but thereafter GAD say that contribution income is estimated to exceed benefit expenditure in every subsequent year of the projection period, resulting in an increasing fund balance.

See my post on page one which links to the relevant government publications.

It’s the job of government to manage the economy to keep inflation at a reasonable level. If it does so then pension rises will remain at reasonable levels. If it doesn’t then people on fixed incomes will need help to keep up with rising costs. Else we just go down the residual welfare route which is costly to administer and divisive.

A bit like my feeling on unions and nationalisation. They seem anachronistic and we may have to use more 21st century methods.

Running an economy on the principle that all money put into it by the state is sucked upwards into the hands of the wealthy seems incredibly anachronistic to me, seeing as that has been happening for hundreds of years.

Perhaps some 21st century methods might be beneficial in that regard, too. Or even the 20th century method devised by Lord Keynes which brought the UK closer to a more equable distribution of resources than had ever been the case before, or since...

It’s the job of government to manage the economy to keep inflation at a reasonable level.

Well, actually it isn't. That is the job of the nominally independent Bank of England.

If it really were understood by the government to be the job of the government our Chancellor would be telling the BoE to lower the interest rates which have contributed seriously to inflation in the UK and kept it high for much longer than it should have been.

mum2three

They are penalising us for being old. It wouldn't be so bad if the money saved was used for the benefit of our country, but they are giving so much away to other countries. Is this what they mean when they talk about 'an equal society'?

It’s a fraction in % terms that we give in Foreign Aid, just like many other countries do.

EVERYONE deserves a decent chance and opportunities not just those with white faces!