Gransnet forums

News & politics

Loss of State Pension Altogether

(8 Posts)
Seeker Fri 12-Jul-13 23:16:37

The state pension being lost to women at 60 and men at 65 is well known and is moral theft by government and the entire political class, as the state pension is deferred wages from our youth and not some generous gift from government to be withdrawn at whim.

My epetition on 38 Degrees is to get the state pension now before it is lost to everyone after 2016.
you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/state-pension-at-60-now

Petition asks:

- Revoke in 2014 Budget the Loss of Higher Age Related Tax Allowance at 65.

Finance boffins say that to prevent fuel poverty / funds for food / energy bills a pensioner needs around £10,500, with London pensioner needing £12,500. So we have those higher costs.

- Revoke in 2014 Budget the Loss after 2016 of married women being able to claim a state pension from husband's contributions

- Revoke in 2014 Budget the Loss of state pension altogether to the many made redundant by Austerity Job Cuts, who will not have the rise from 30 to 35 years of contribution to get a full state pension.

This u-turn can happen. Labour wanted to bring in the 10p in the pound tax band back. So the Tories raised the basic tax allowance and took such people out of tax altogether, with the tax code rising to £10,000 in April 2014. Labour have said they will just follow Tory polices if elected in 2015 into government, so no help there from politics to the over 50s.

The loss of state pension assumes women are in secure work that will last till retirement age, married with a middle class income husband and above, have up to £250,000 of savings for the bills, and will not fall ill or disabled by sickness or accident.

Reality of Austerity - No Benefit, No Job, No Income, No State Pension
- most of the Austerity Job Cuts in public sector will happen to women as majority of employees,
- there is ageism in job recruitment for over 50s,
- most unemployed women over 50s are because of chronic sickness / disability and
- those benefits will be gone by 2014 for hundreds of thousands,
- for men and women there is a 75% unemployment for over 60s, and
- Benefits such as winter fuel allowance, free prescriptions, and many others are threatened by Austerity / Welfare Reform.

Yet the truth of Welfare Reform and Austerity is that it has cost hundreds of millions more in admin and costs to sub-contracted private firms that has helped the economy not one bit, and has wasted funding that could have properly been spent by government on Fiscal Stimulus in a recession.

All the government has done is imprisoned a debtor who could not pay a debt in a debtor's prison for all the good they have done to UK's recession hit economy. You do not pay off a debt by spending less, but by earning more.

And anyway, it would have been cheaper to just pay the benefit and state pensions and focus on Fiscal Stimulus for growth and jobs.

The entire political class has failed in its obsession on Austerity and Welfare Reform in the midst of a recession. Yet we have no European debt nor are in the failed system of Euro money.

gracesmum Sat 13-Jul-13 16:45:52

I think you have to be realistic. When the State Pension was introduced, life expectancy was much less. We are living longer - Hurray! - so the money has to go further - Boo! Starting it later seems a better alternative than limiting the number of years one can collect it. The irony of working longer is of course the rampant age discrimination many of us have experienced. So it seems personal provision for one's old age should be undertaken as early as possible - but what young person beieves they are ever going to grow old?

I don't understand the rest of your post, but am not disputing anything.

Ariadne Sat 13-Jul-13 17:16:00

I didn't understand most of it either - somewhat convoluted? Looked at the petition but I agree with gracesmum in that we should, albeit unwillingly, be realistic.

Ana Sat 13-Jul-13 17:40:54

I agree - and no government is going to backtrack on this issue now.

HUNTERF Sat 13-Jul-13 17:55:09

As I have said before if people had saved for a private or occupational pension this problem will not exist.
I can only hope people like me who have saved will not be penalised.

Frank

Ariadne Sat 13-Jul-13 17:59:34

To him that hath, shall be given, and from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath?

(Yes, I know that is not what it actually means!!)

tammy1351 Sun 14-Jul-13 00:30:44

The fact that most people seem to forget is that for a lot workers there was no provision for an occupational pension I worked for 20yrs for a firm that didn't provide one,my saving grace was I then worked for 25yrs for a firm with a good pension which means that I am comfortably off but as I live abroad I don't get any of the add on's like pensoners credit or help with bus travel or TV's however I don't object to people getting these if they contributed into the systemsmile

MargaretX Sun 14-Jul-13 08:47:51

The raising of the pension age for women is to do with equality. There is no reason why women should get their pension 5 years earlier than men.
It is being phased in through the years and and does not mean a jump of 5 years waiting. I think it is the much younger women who will have to wait till 65 or even 67.

I get a % of the state pension for the years I worked in the UK but nothing else. When on holiday in England I am sometimes the only retired woman on the bus who pays for her ticket. Some of those are quite well off. Pensioners in the UK get a lot of hand outs that other Europeans can only dream of.