Time to get on our bikes and mopeds to earn extra money to live on?

Nor do I, but it is used against people in means tests.

Doodledog Norah, what’s the point in setting aside for yourself if that is going to be used against you? I don’t mind paying for those who are unable to work, and would very much like to see higher wages all round and a more progressive tax system; but I do object to the idea that my contributions be given to someone who has chosen not to work because someone somewhere has decided that my occupational pension (for which I paid a significant amount each month) puts me over a threshold that they deem suitable for someone in my position, so their ‘need’ is greater than mine.

No. I said: "What is a logical answer? Setting aside for yourself?"

I don't see how your own 'set-aside' could be used against you, no idea why that could happen. That was not part of my idea.

I may be wrong - I don't find independent saving a bad thing.

I get so bored with that - sorry. I don’t care if there is a ‘pot’. I care that everyone who works has to pay in, and does so in the expectation that they will get out. If the scheme has been managed so that nobody has a ‘pot’ that is not the fault of the public, who have contributed in good faith.

Norah, what’s the point in setting aside for yourself if that is going to be used against you? I don’t mind paying for those who are unable to work, and would very much like to see higher wages all round and a more progressive tax system; but I do object to the idea that my contributions be given to someone who has chosen not to work because someone somewhere has decided that my occupational pension (for which I paid a significant amount each month) puts me over a threshold that they deem suitable for someone in my position, so their ‘need’ is greater than mine.

M0nica

The State Pension may be a benefit, in the way occupational pensions talk of benefits, but it is not a Benefit, which is an official term, applying to non-contributory benefits.

In that case, Universal Credit shouldn't be called a benefit because most people contribute to it while they're working.

The state pension is not like other pensions because people don't build up a personal "pot" and the amount paid out has a very weak relationship with the amount people have paid in, as it's based on the number of years people have worked rather than the total amount people have paid over the years.

Doodledog .... I’d put money on it affecting pensions before now though, and it will be sold as ‘targeting’ benefits to those who ‘need it’, or ‘can afford’ to do without. People will buy this as many like to boast that they ‘don’t need’ help, but nobody defines ‘need’ or recognises that when we let others tell us what we ‘need’ we are giving up the right to influence our own futures.

I agree to the term benefit, but I understand those who object. Defining 'need' is always an issue, your 'need' is my 'extra' and so on.

What is a logical answer? Setting aside for yourself?

The State Pension may be a benefit, in the way occupational pensions talk of benefits, but it is not a Benefit, which is an official term, applying to non-contributory benefits.

I can see why it is referred to as a benefit, but that meant something different in the days when ‘the dole’ was not called benefit, and things like Universal Credit didn’t exist. I can also see why people object to the term, as for most people a pension represents payback for years of contributions to the pensions of others.

Nevertheless, I think that using the term more widely than before is softening us up for a means test, so that yet again people are penalised for making provision for the future. As ever, it’s fine to inherit the family pile or Granny’s jewels, and if you haven’t worked you will be provided for; but if you are Mrs (or Mr) Average, working, saving and paying into a pension you are considered entitled (or even greedy) for wanting more than a basic lifestyle when you retire. Means testing is a way of keeping the class system stable, and I hate it in any shape or form. I’d put money on it affecting pensions before now though, and it will be sold as ‘targeting’ benefits to those who ‘need it’, or ‘can afford’ to do without. People will buy this as many like to boast that they ‘don’t need’ help, but nobody defines ‘need’ or recognises that when we let others tell us what we ‘need’ we are giving up the right to influence our own futures.

This was the DWP response to a 2015/6 petition asking to stop calling the state pension a benefit:

Some people have a negative association with the word ‘benefit’ as synonymous with the means test; however this legal description provides consistency with other contributory benefits.

It is, of course, also consistent with private pensions where traditional pension schemes which are earnings linked such as final salary schemes, known as ‘Defined Benefit’ schemes. The pension paid out by these schemes is defined as a ‘benefit’.

State Pension entitlement is based on having paid into the National Insurance scheme for a required number of years. However, use of the word “benefit” for retirement pension (latterly known as State Pension) has always been classified in law from the time of the 1946 National Insurance Act, which applied from the inception of the National Insurance scheme. No offence is intended by the use of this term.

Furthermore, the term “contributory benefit”, forms the legislative framework of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. Section 20 of that Act is entitled “Descriptions of contributory benefits”. Contributory benefits under Part II of that Act are listed, and the sixth is retirement pensions.

In addition, the introduction of the new State Pension from 6 April 2016 is also classified as a “benefit” under Section 1(1) of the Pensions Act 2014.

This word is also used to describe the advantages (benefits) provided through private pension arrangements.

petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/121267

M0nica

State Pension is NOT a benefit. It is a contributory pension. Pensioners can not held responsible for the British government's decision, from the outset to meet the cost of pensions out of current income, rather than saving and investing pension payments as any prudent pension scheme does

I have a state pension and an occupational pension for both of which I made specific contributions. My state pension is NOT a benefit.

It is a benefit.
I was told that in a letter from the then Pensions Seretary under Blair's Government when I queried the terminology.

It may be contributory but is called a benefit.

We’ve been here before.

‘The state pension is a benefit payment available to the majority of people when they reach the current State Pension age. It is a universal, non-means tested benefit available to all, so long as they have made the requisite National Insurance contributions or credits.’
www.benefitsguide.co.uk › st...
State Pension - UK Benefits Guide

State Pension is NOT a benefit. It is a contributory pension. Pensioners can not held responsible for the British government's decision, from the outset to meet the cost of pensions out of current income, rather than saving and investing pension payments as any prudent pension scheme does

I have a state pension and an occupational pension for both of which I made specific contributions. My state pension is NOT a benefit.

I was puzzled about tax on State Pension so googled and

"How much can I earn while claiming State Pension UK?
How much can I earn while taking the state pension? You can earn as much as you like and continue to qualify for the state pension. However, you will pay tax on any income above the personal allowance."

Surely it's not just the State Pension being taxed as such. All my income is pensions and I get taxed as the total is just above my personal allowance, ie all pensions are liable to tax.

State pension should not be classed as a benefit imo.

When I was watching the Sixth Commandment recently I was struck by the number of police sitting in an office reading the accused's diaries and other documents. It occurred to me that there must be many people, over 50, who would be capable of doing such work.

I have a client, a retired policeman, who, whilst his wife continued to work, went back into police employment but as an office worker. He had a good pension but his salary was more than his pension so he was fairly well off with these two sources of income.

We are regularly told that there is a shortage of police so surely, to use non-police in such investigative work would be a good thing. It would free up more police to do their job of crime fighting.

My grandparents died before retirement, yet my parents had a couple of decades each. Therefore, I do agree that people in their fifties shouldn't think their working lives are over.

Your state pension is a benefit, but not means tested. You're free to work as well - but yes, you'll pay tax. People are living longer but often in poor health. Younger generations fund our pensions and any disability benefits. I see an emerging crisis where the sums just don't add up.

AshleysGran

If you've already retired, wouldn't doing part-time work affect your pension?

Yes it affects mine. I only do 18 hours a week in the care home, but it is added to my pension and I pay over £100 a month tax..

My husband became a delivery driver at 70 years old for an Indian take away and really enjoyed it but used his car.

My husband became a delivery driver for an Indian restaurant at 70 years old and really enjoyed it but used his car.

Apart from my dyspraxia, which makes me a very unsafe cyclist. At 53 I had to stop cycling as I had developed a hip problem aggravated by cycling.

The balance problem would preclude, a scooter or electric bike.

Could I deliver on-foot? Walking causes me no problems at all.

Have you tried selling things on Facebook Market place …In selling My flat and sold quite a few odds and sods ..You’ll be surprised what people will buy😀

Doing the social media rounds.

I just looked, I'm wrong. Apologies.

The full pension age won't be up to 67 until 2026-2028. Still 66.

Doodledog

Yes, I know that.

What I am saying is that a full pension should be enough to live on. If it isn't, the government should be doing something about it. An increase in NI, or some other way to pay when people are young, so that nobody feels that they have to continue to work in older age if they don't want to.

I agree.

However, over 50 is not 67 - full pension age, which was the question (I also deviated with my around 80 year old husband). The government can't be responsible for choices below 67, imo.

Increase in NI could help, I reckon.

Nothing wrong with taking a job delivering things if you’re able to. My neighbour does a regular delivery job by day and a bar job in evenings, not every evening.My brother (also like me in his 50’s) who lost his job during Covid got work recently delivering for a company (van) not the sort of job he really wanted but it helps pay the bills.

I would say this should be left for those on the dole and getting benefits and others who should get off their backsides to earn a living?