Vince Cable Pensioners should go back to work

Im still working after 51 years, i do plan to retire but how soon depends upon my health, im a cancer survivor, have several long term illnesses. Not complaining as i like being financially independant.
Can these people not realise that we change as we get older, theres not many who could do full time like the younger ones. Also not many employers would want arthritic, pain ridden individuals taking sick leave.

Chardy

Chakotay Sorry but if your pension is £50 less a week than people on the new rate it is because you didn't contribute the same.
Govt website says for a full state pension
You’ll be able to claim the new State Pension (£179.60/wk) if you’re:
a man born on or after 6 April 1951
a woman born on or after 6 April 1953

Born before those dates, it's £137.60/wk (£42 less)

That's nothing to do with qualifying years (which are different for the 2 pensions - 30 basic, 35 new) because that's full pension. Am I missing something?

Yes you are missing the fact that the old pension was made up with 2 elements, the basic of £137.60 plus any additional state pension you could have accrued.

With the new pension you cant accrue an additional pension anymore the new FULL pension is £179.60 and unless you have a protected payment, that's all you will ever get no matter how many extra years you pay in, because its capped

Calistemon

^Chakotay Sorry but if your pension is £50 less a week than people on the new rate it is because you didn't contribute the same.^

Untrue, Chakotay.

Yes it is true the person I responded to said and I quote 'My pension is approximately £50 per week less than someone who contributed for the same number of years who is on the new rate' that is not true, the old rate is for 30 years, if someone had paid in for more than 30 year's under the old scheme they would get more than £137 a week because they would have accrued more pension under the additional state pension, and that is an actual fact, why do you think members of my family get more? that's because they paid in for longer than 30 years and accrued the additional state pension (45 years in my husbands case) why do you think I get more than the new full pension, its because I would have got more under the old scheme due to the additional state pension I accrued before 2016 so I get a protected amount, what is NOT true is younger pensioners automatically get the extra money due to their age, in fact I know several people who get far less than the new full pension because they didn't pay in for 35 years

varian

You were better clued up than I was Monica after starting work after graduating in 1965,

Me too!

I worked for the Area Health Authority and took their advice (it is a misselling scandal).

Varian it wasn't me, it was the women I worked with. who knew all about it.

Additionally no one could opt out unless they were also paying into a professional or private pension scheme. So what I said was correct!

varian

Many married women were instructed by the government in the 1960s to pay the "married womens contribution" NI.

But it was never spelled out how that would effect state pensions,

It had nothing to do with whether or not you had a private pension.

varian
I’m perfectly well aware that the married woman’s pension had nothing to do with whether or not you had a private pension. However, I was not discussing the married woman’s pension because I never paid the married woman’s pension. When I returned to work in the 80s the married woman’s pension didn’t exist, except for those who had already opted to pay it previously to it being abolished. Therefore I paid a full rate NI stamp, reduced slightly because I was opted out due to paying in contributions to my professional pension.

You were better clued up than I was Monica after starting work after graduating in 1965,

I am surprised by what people are saying about the married womans stamp.

I started work in 1964 and where i worked whether to pay full stamp or the married woman's stamp was hotly debated every time someone married. Most of the women were in secretarial and clerical jobs and they were very aware of the results of their decision. Most were opting for the full stamp because they wanted a pension in their own right.

I was fooled then.

I have been a lot more savvy in my scepticism of government advice since then and obviously I never allowed myself to be fooled into voting for brexit,.

Chakotay Sorry but if your pension is £50 less a week than people on the new rate it is because you didn't contribute the same.

Untrue, Chakotay.

varian

Many married women were instructed by the government in the 1960s to pay the "married womens contribution" NI.

But it was never spelled out how that would effect state pensions,

It had nothing to do with whether or not you had a private pension.

Yes, it was more or less forced on us if we worked in public services and missold as we were told we would get our pension based on our husband's contributions.

If I knew then what I learnt later ......

Many married women were instructed by the government in the 1960s to pay the "married womens contribution" NI.

But it was never spelled out how that would effect state pensions,

It had nothing to do with whether or not you had a private pension.

No Chardy, you’re not missing anything, you are in fact correct. What will reduce your pension, either the old or the new, is if you contracted out, and therefore paid a slightly smaller NI. However you’d only do that if you were paying pension contributions to another pension such as a professional pension or a private pension. I contracted out as a teacher, and so I don’t get the full state pension, the old one, because I contracted out and now also have my teacher pension as well as my (reduced) state pension.

Chakotay Sorry but if your pension is £50 less a week than people on the new rate it is because you didn't contribute the same.
Govt website says for a full state pension
You’ll be able to claim the new State Pension (£179.60/wk) if you’re:
a man born on or after 6 April 1951
a woman born on or after 6 April 1953

Born before those dates, it's £137.60/wk (£42 less)

That's nothing to do with qualifying years (which are different for the 2 pensions - 30 basic, 35 new) because that's full pension. Am I missing something?

We actually considered voting for him once then my OH had the misfortune to drive him! He was the rudest politician he drove. He was rude to my OH and rude to every “menial” he came across. Nasty and hypocritical.

Calistemon

^I'm in two minds about it. I do resent the fact that I can't draw my pension until I'm 67, whereas my bloke hasn't worked since the age I am now. It isn't fair and it has created an 'us and them' society with current retirees having it much easier than younger generations will have it^.

I ten to agree, Gagajo and think the pension age needed to be equalised for men and women, what that should be is a moot point.

However, present retirees are on a lower rate of state pension than those on the new pension rate. My pension is approximately £50 per week less than someone who contributed for the same number of years who is on the new rate.
It's all rather a shambles.

I too did childcare so both parents could work.
The other point is that, if retirees were to become as lazy as this young man imagines they are, then the voluntary and charity sector would collapse.

I don't know who he is, but he sounds like an ignorant troublemaker.

Sorry but if your pension is £50 less a week than people on the new rate it is because you didn't contribute the same.

The old rate was a platform, a platform you could build on with whatever additional state pensions were active when you were working, GRB, SERPS, S2P would all increase the basic pension and was paid automatically with the basic, due to these additional pensions my Dad gets £250 a week, my Husband £237 and my Sisters £180/£190, of course there were certain things that reduced it, opting out of SERPS was one, only paying the married women's stamp, low pay, part time and gaps in employment were others.

The new state pension is completely different first of all you only get the new full pension if you paid in for 35 years not 30 for the old basic, and its also CAPPED, I am lucky I have what is called a protected amount due to the years I paid in and the additional state pensions I would have accrued pre 2016 but I got no additional pension for the years I paid in between 2016 and March 2021 due to the cap, people with no NIC history pre 2016 will only ever get the new full pension no matter how many years they paid in.

So you see rather than people on the new full pension getting more than people on the old basic rate is actually the other way round my DS and the other young people in my family will never get the same pension I and other members of my family get and that is not fair

I wont be able to do the 'heavy' part of my job in my 60s. I struggle now tbh

To add to the remarks made by Vince Cable...yes, did most of us feel well we would still be at work, let's face it, for those living on a basic pension it would be a necessity to many. But with age comes a deterioration, the body is getting older, aches more, and everyday chores are that bit harder to accomplish.
But let's delve deeper...does Mr Cable assume we all work in the house of commons where we can have lunch in luxurcurious surroundings, have a G&T for elevenses, and do sod all else? Unlike Mr Cable a day's work for most older women would be shelf stacking, cleaning or working in old people's homes. Many of the older ladies have nursed Mums, spouses, sisters and brothers and children. Would Vince Cable work as a cleaner, shelf filler or old folks home carer doing the most menial of tasks? No, he wouldnt. Would Vince Cable wash an old person, unrelated to him, who has just soiled the bed? No I don't think so! Would Vince Cable do it all for minimum pay? If course he wouldnt.

As for the 21 year old twerp who just wants to get his name on the telly, you are 21...I worked at weekends when I was 11, walking all day knocking at doors on my dad's greengrocery round. Then at 15 I started work and retired after 47 years a taxpayer. I didn't do any gap years, though I passed my 11 plus I wasn't put forward as one of the 2% Newham cherry picked to go to grammar school, so did hard slog for the first 15 years of my career, until I found a job I loved. I would say to the Twerp how many man hours have you got on your work sheet?, At your age I had been in full time employment for six years, and at 68 I am still a taxpayer, my works pension is taxed!! So who do you think paid for your education? Who do you assume paid tax to keep the NHS going? The free dentists, the nurseries, libraries, swimming pools, all of which you used. Your still wet behind the ears son, grow up, wake up, shut up and smell the coffee!

Thirdinline I could possibly manage half an hour and then I could do a fair amount of computer work but at the age of 78, I think I have earned my retirement.

I was able to retire at 60 but living in London I had no savings so for the next 10 years until I broke my ankle I did very part-time work to achieve my goal. I did enjoy it because I felt rested.

If somebody wants to live in a flat, fine that is their choice. I prefer to rattle around alone in my small house and with luck, I will leave it permanently in a box!

You are right Thirdinline when you are describing jobs like yours which require physical strength and stamina. Some folk can continue with physical work well beyond retirement age, like several builders I know who worked well into their seventies - but they are the exceptions.

However you only have to look at the many intelligent comments posted on Gransnet to realise that brainpower does not necessarily diminish overnight at the age of 66.

95 year olds like HM the Queen and David Attenburgh demonstrate that a healthy person can continue to contribute for many years past the state retirement age.

The option of part-time work should ideally be available to us all until we feel we are ready to stop.

I’m a support worker for young people in residential care. I work full time. I love my job, but it can be physically demanding. At 62, I have 5 years to go until I get state pension and then I’m looking forward to a well-earned retirement. I don’t think many people in their late sixties and seventies would be physically capable of doing this work. There is a fair amount of lifting, running around, driving long distances, long shifts. I think an older person would struggle to keep the young people safe, which is a large part of the job. It seems a very I’ll-informed opinion!

Good post Dickens.
It’s not unknown for Vince Cable to take a pop at older citizens. He has previous form on this. In previous times times he made comments about older people from the comfort of his £80,000 plus expenses role as a Member of Parliament.

Lauren59

What if everyone knew from an early age that they’d be working until death? Now that’s a depressing thought.

... now there's a thought Lauren59!

I guess centuries earlier, that's exactly how it was for most - unless they got a bit of relief under the English Poor Law in old age?

As for Mr Cable - it is not up to pensioners to solve the debt / deficit problem, and these attempts by various politicians to guilt-trip us by emphasising the 'burden' we place on the economy, is a dangerous path to go down.

Governments have known for decades that there is a rising elderly population - what have they actually done about it, apart from faffing around at the edges.

And this government could have relieved the economic burden on the current working population by increasing taxes instead of NI contributions - that way pensioners would be contributing if they were wealthy enough.

There seems to be no plan, no joined-up thinking, and no government appears to want to do anything other than put a bit of sticking plaster around the edges. And occasionally trot out yet another mild rebuke to pensioners... because Cable's thinking is nothing new, it's all been said before, by various politicians...

lilyflower Vince Cable was born in a small house in York, his father was a maintenance worker at Rowntees. He went to the same state primary as my DGC. he came through state education like everyone else. Before he became an MP he worked in Kenya and then for Shell. In other words dependent on a monthly salary like the rest of us.

Apart from being a lib Dem, he has not worked in the city and has not made huge sums of money or owned a mansion.

He may drink champagne on occasion, as do most of us.