raising pension age

27BILLION from the NI fund went to pay the interest on the national debt! Thats plenty of money to pay pensions of people who cant work past 60 .Why should we pay the debts of an incompetent government while the folk who caused the recession get off scot free? Of course some of you may be Bankers or have family who are and arepleased to dodge paying your dues .

The NI fund isn't just for pensions and isn't ring-fenced in a way it perhaps should be.

The government pays nearly £100 billion a year in pensions - more if you count pension credit and housing benefit for the over 60s.

£27 billion wouldn't go very far. In any case, it doesn't make sense to have £27 billion sitting in a "pot" when higher interest rates are being paid on debt. Not paying down the debt just kicks the problem further down the line.

The amount the government pays has reduced slightly as the pension of 1950s women has been delayed, but it's due to increase massively as 1960s men and women reach pension age.

I don't think the pension age should be increased to 70 or 75 because most people over 63 have some kind of medical condition which makes work difficult. However, it's just sticking heads in the sand to think something doesn't need doing. Governments should have started doing more gradually decades ago, but they were too interested in votes.

I would like to see the value of state benefits increase to a living level for everybody, which would mean those over 60 who can't work could claim benefits until state pension age. However, that's a non-starter because people would start bleating about benefit scroungers.

I agree that people can't realistically be expected to work on into their 70s (unless they want to). We just have to accept that we'll all have to pay more one way or another. It's actuariarly obvious as lifespan has lengthened.

A retirement age of 75 would be the highest in the world.

China is 50 for women 60 for men
India is 60
Norway is 67
War-torn Lybia is 70

To quote Prem Sikka on Twitter

"Raising the pension age to 75 is euthanasia for the working class dressed up as economic policy."

I used to belong to an over 50s forum about 6 or 7 years ago. Common topics included benefit scroungers, single mothers, the "feckless" with a zillion children living in mansions in central London, etc. I'm sure you know what I mean.

When the government started cutting benefits, I remember pointing out that pensions cost far more than benefits to working age people, but was sharply put down by outraged people who said that the government would never take anything away from pensioners. They wouldn't dare!

Well, they are daring and I guess it wasn't a form of Project Fear after all.

I agree that a pension age of 75 is ridiculous. It forces people into private pension funds or other forms of investment to fund the gap between being able to work and claiming state pension.

Firstly, it's simply not fair to impose that on people without giving them 40 years (perhaps) notice, so that they can plan.

Secondly, there needs to be provision for those who are disabled or just too ill to work (and many are) and can't make provision for old age.

growstuff it wouldn't have been "sitting in a pot" if it had been used for the purpose it was meant .
My friend has just turned 65 ,she has early onset dementia.She has just finished 2 years of treatment for cancer ,this is the third time she's had cancer .She is not fit for work yet she has been told she has to find a job .Visits to the jobcentre fortnightly where she has to prove she's been looking for employment ,meantime the benefits she was getting have been cut .What a way to treat people in need !Like me she wont get her pension until she's 65 and 7 or 8 months .Thankfully I have a decent income but I've worked for 50 years so I feel the pension I was told I would get should be mine
.If I want to giveit all to charity that should be MY choice not DWP's and quite frankly I dont want to fund the incompetent eejits that are in government in Wm so using WASPI money to pay their debts makes my blood boil .How anyone can think this situation is fine is beyond me .

I'm sorry for your friend, but what you describe is a n issue with the benefits system (Universal Credit) not a pensions issue. This is happening to people of all ages. Your friend shouldn't be forced to find a job.

I'm a WASPI woman who won't receive state pension until I'm 66 and I don't have a decent income. Sorry, but I remember hearing about it in the 1990s and again in 2011. I can't say I was happy, but I realised why it had to be done.

How about fighting for an increase and improvement in eligibility in all working age benefits rather than concentrating on pensioners?

Paddyann surely you should be taking your friend to see her MP ASAP. That cannot be right ... though thinking about it in 2019 UK it probably is. But I would try the MP anyway.

Simple Growstuff. Bring in a Basic Income Payment for all.

GracesGran, I can well believe it, but my point is that this isn't just an issue for pensioners. It's happening to people of all ages. Pensioners as a group aren't all poor - far from it. The over 60s have a higher disposable income than most other demographic groups on average. The averages, of course, hide genuine poverty, which is why I'd rather fight for the poor than the old.

The WASPI movement only wants to benefit women born in the 1950s. If you look at their demands, they don't care about 1960s born women (because they're 1950s born) nor men over 60 who are also living in poverty. I'm afraid I have no time for them.

A basic income is a thought, isn't it? I'd like to see more details and maybe a small trial. The figures I've seen wouldn't provide a living wage for those who can't work for whatever reason, so I'm not sure.

There was a trial of universal basic income in Finland but it was discontinued. It can't have been successful.

All women should be benefitted...did the suffragettes suffer for nothing...are we just going to go blindly into the tunnel.
Unity is strength

I read about that, Jane10, which is why I'm a bit doubtful. One way or the other, the overall aim of raising pension age/increasing payments, will be to reduce government expenditure or at least not increase it, which is what will inevitably happen within a few years. I'm not sure that a new system would be a good idea anyway, especially at the moment; it would probably be better to sort out some of the unfairness and anomalies in the current system.

When I was in my twenties employment pension schemes didn't really exist unless one worked for a large corporation or the state. Small companies generally didn't have them so one had to go down the private pension route. So then it was a choice between contributing to a pension or maybe having a larger mortgage in order to buy a better house, or for some people, when to start a family. Now companies are required to create a pension scheme for their employees which should mean that in future the majority of people will be able to accrue a decent pension pot.

There was a trial of universal basic income in Finland but it was discontinued. [Therefore] It can't have been successful.

That's quite a leap Jane10. As I understand it there was a change in government. Various trials have been tried around the world. I believe Canada's was interesting and India are trying one too. Some are not actually Basic Income but more of a form of Negative Income tax. One form of BI is in place in Sherman County, Oregon. The United States is new to the subject but currently, there seems to some economic interest, as opposed to the social interest in most countries, in the US.

NO MP or MEP should be allowed to take their pension before 'normal' people - their pension age has to match.

jura2 Couldn't agree more.

They can't take their state pension earlier Jura. Much as I would like to agree with you, you're muddling up two very different things.

Meanwhile the tories have managed to increase the national debt and its rising....

I think you're wrong growstuff the increase was to be to 63 ..it was much more recent than the 1990's that it was raised again.Thats what the complaint is WE didn't get enough time to make alternative plans .

The state pension age has never been 63 for all.

It was raised in the 1990s (can't remember exactly when) to 65, but was staged. I remember the day it was announced and working out that my date of birth meant I was one of the youngest to have to work to 65. I cursed a lot, but I thought it was fair.

It was raised again in 2011, which I think was unfair because it gave so little notice.

I also think it's unfair that the benefits system was changed. Before 2011 men and women over 60 only had to work for 16 hours a week before being eligible for Working Tax Credit. That meant that they could wind down and possibly receive a top up to their income. Now they have to work at least 30 hours, the same as all other working age people. There have also been other changes such as raising the age for free bus passes in most areas.

There is a strange disbelief in the welfare state which protected us as we grew up growstuff. A large number of people now believe they got to where they are with no help at all. Thatcher may have meant something different, but killing off 'society' seems to be the aim of the moment.