"Wealthy Pensioners"

Mollie65 - a lot of sense. I have a bus pass but because of poor public transport I can't use it much whereas my London friends.....like the idea of charging like with the rail card
Nanaej -it's much more complicated than that- some if my close friends are now very well off because of inheritance and having the luck to have parents who lived in affluent areas with high house values. Then I have a friend who just squandered both high salaries and inheritances and now get every benefit going for their university children and themselves.... It's so varied but its not as simple as having savings because you were frugal

Such a difficult issue..two people same income: one more free with his/her cash and saved less vs someone who were more frugal and saved for the future..who 'deserves' benefits??

Agree entirely, mollie with your last comment. I agree with Barrow as well. And if we have no savings, the state will have to pay all the costs of our care when we get to that stage. Swings and roundabouts!

bluebell agree all benefits that are not means tested should be taxed. But how do you quantify the bus pass when Londoners are lucky enouth to have the 'freedom pass' and others scrape by with one bus a day each direction (if they are lucky)
better to charge for the bus/freedom pass and allow reduced travel costs - work the same way as the senior railcard.
would it be poreferable to add the winter fuel payment and christmas box to the state pension which is already taxed - but the WFP is per household so it gets complicated.
why is there always the overwhelming feeling that if one was designing a benefits/pension system from scratch, one would not start with the current state of affairs.

Ooohhhh Barrow that could be tricky!! Not all savings produce income - in fact as we well know there are any number of schemes that tie up capital to avoid income tax and in this type of case could then keep income artificially low. What's wrong with just taxing universal
benefits?

In my email to my MP I did stress that any means testing should be based on income and not savings. Like many people the savings I have are invested to produce an income, which combined with my state pension gives me an income of approx. £12,000 p.a.

As a married couple our retirement income is modest - my husband is entitled to full state pension, plus a couple of small company pensions, while I am not entitled to a full pension as I stayed at home when our two children were young.

Also, went back into full time education, gaining qualifications and A Levels, a time I thoroughly enjoyed.

Our son still lives at home and contributes to expenses, all in all we manage quite well.

We have a good nest egg which we use for home improvements and holidays, and certainly don't consider ourselves to be wealthy pensioners.

I think all politicians need to think how any change in policies regarding heating allowances etc, may effect how pensioners may vote. It would not be a popular measure with some.

I think £50,000 is a figure they've plucked out of the air. My state pension and occupational ditto added together is less than £20,000 because of time out child rearing before you were credited with contributions. An article in the Telegraph today says the 'average family' can just cover essentials on £25,000. If it weren't for my DH who worked from age 16 except for education, I think I'd be pushed.

Grump! My combined Pension + Pension Credit comes to under £7000 a year - I don't think I'd be considered well off....would I??? (I'd love to see some of these bloody MP's trying to live on this measly sum

That sounds pretty much what I'll have mollie. But I desperately want to have holidays when I retire. If I carry on working I'll have money for holidays but no time to have them. And, once I retire there's no going back. All a bit scary. At least my bus pass looks safe [if and when I get it!]. I was going to live for the next few months on what I may be living on if I retire, as a trial run, as it were.

crimson - if it helps my gross income before tax is around 12,500 and I manage just fine as a single pensioner. I have no rent/mortgage to pay but find my biggest expenses are the council tax (even with a 25% reduction), heating, insurance and utilities (onerous if only one person has to shoulder the cost) and saving some money to cope with unexpected house/car costs.
my family know that Christmas and birthday presents come from the frugal side but are given with lots of love and I am so grateful for what I have.

Jane! I had to re-read my post twice before I realised what I'd written - you are right, of course!

I'd like to see Nick Clegg or indeed any politician try to manage on even £50,000, let alone the figures way below that which have ben referred to here. not even

Well, I was contemplating retirement but my guaranteed retirement income is way below 13,900. Looks like I need to have a rethink .

OH & I have a joint income (2 x work pensions + state pensions) that is £50k+ before tax and we are very aware how fortunate we are to have such a comfortable income in retirement. We both worked from the age of 21, I retired at 60 and OH at 64 (he does still work p/t). I am not sure if we are wealthy.. it is all comparative! I know other people of our age who have a lot more and some a lot less so I have always though that we were somewhere in the middle! With regard to the £200 fuel payment we have used it to support our fave charity but there may be a time when we could not afford to do that..depending on how cost of living goes1

I feel there's a real distinction to be made between income and capital. Wealth, to me, equates to capital - savings, investments, property ( either a second home or a very expensive first home). And yes, when talking about income, it should be clear if that's net or gross. I guess anyone with a really large income is more likely to have wealth as well but it's complicated isn't it?

Ana I think you meant a two-person household (with a point income of £50K) didn't you?

Is the £50,000 figure before or after tax and is it for an individual or a couple?.
If my wife had lived we would have been touching 50k before tax if you take into account state and occupational pensions.
I would not regard myself as wealthy but very comfortable compared with a lot of pensioners.
My view is a basic pension, bus passes, heating allowance should be given to all pensioners as long as they have been in work for 30+ years and any other money the pensioner has should not be taken into account.
If the government suddenly says that it will take away allowances if the pension is say 50k plus a lot of pensioners will take lump sums out of their pensions on retirement and give it to their children etc to keep within the limit.

Frank

I'm sorry that my first post made it look as though I felt pensioners on £50,000 p.a. (and actually, I was thinking of a two-household income) should not be regarded as 'wealthy' - not my point at all, as obviously that would give an income of £100,000 p.a. to a couple!

However, whatever cap the government puts in place there are always going to be those who say it's too high, or too low...

if i got quarter of 50000 it would be fantastic [hmmm]

the following is very interesting about the idea of 'wealthy' baby boomers

quoting from pension questions:

'The average retirement income is £16,509, but unlike earned incomes this has been declining. In 2010 it was 7 per cent down on 2009’s £17,779 and 11.5% down on 2008’s £18,663. This worrying trend is likely to continue as occupation pension schemes close, annuity rates go lower and the squeeze continues on disposable incomes, which means that most people have less money to save for their future.

Nearly one in five people in 2010 retired on just the state pension, and 35% of women and 29% of men (32% overall) actually retired on an amount that is below the poverty line. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, a single person in Britain needs to earn at least £13,900 a year before tax in order to afford a basic, but acceptable standard of living. As retirement incomes fall and inflation remains at around 5% it is likely that many more pensioners will cross the poverty line.

(Statistics source: Prudential) '

I know these are averages/medians but it does suggest that many of us even with state pension/serps and a small personal/works pension are below the 13,900 pounds a year figure for a single pensioner. I know I am

I'd be very happy with half of that. I know I am lucky to have my own house and an occupational pension in addition to my state one, but am by no means affluent. But as you say, soop, things could be a lot worse.

Count us out! A pension of a LOT less than £50K would be a bonaza for Mr soop and me. We manage on the State Pension and what remains of a small nest egg, for which we both worked extremely hard, for a very modest income. Our last proper holiday [in 1988] was a four day honeymoon in the Cotswolds. And yet...compared with countless, truly poor people, we consider ourselves to be well-blest.

I thought I would check this thread out to see if I am on it -
Nope, clearly not a wealthy pensioner then. As if I needed reminding.
A pension of £50K would be very nice and while I admit a salary of £50K may not sound like untold riches (not that I ever achieved it) from where I am sitting now..... ah well, I can dream.

I agree it's a lot - it's much more than our household income as well - it just doesn't seem as huge an amount as he was implying.