What do you hope for in the budget?

“Those of us who had to wait obviously appreciate the new pension, but as I pointed out, people on the old pension receive up to nearly £3000 less, but still pay the same prices.” Mollygo

Not ALL on the old pension receive less Mollygo. - my husband gets £1000 pa more than me and I get the full new one!

Exactly Pantglas2.

That’s the point several of us have been making Mollygo - not everyone on the old pension receives less than those on the new pension.

I have a friend who received her pension at 60, so she’s on the old pension. However, because of SERPs she gets more than I do. No SERPs for me; and my friend received 6 years more pension than I did. At a conservative estimate of £8k per year … £48k!!!

Gotcha? There was no gotcha-unless your post is one. I obviously touched a nerve there.
😂
that's exactly what I was getting at - the constant need to 'catch someone out'. No nerves touched, I can assure you.

I wasn't talking about the government - I was talking about the daft 'riddle' about all the money that 'some people' got and others didn't, that ran on for days, and the statement that you care about those who don't, suggesting that others don't. Would you prefer every statement about the pension to be prefaced by an hour or so explaining all the possible amounts that people might get, depending on their age, marital status, number of contributions, whether they were contracted in/out, paid SERPS or not etc? That has never happened under any government, and I have never seen a complaint until now. The audience would be asleep before they found out what the statement was going to be.

Nobody has said that they don't care. What people have said is that if they are better off on the new pension it is because they have paid extra, or because they worked longer, or both. It has also been pointed out that many on the old pension get more than many on the new, so it's a false equivalence anyway.

It has been specifically stated (including by people other than you) that this doesn't change the fact that those on less still pay the same prices - a fact that is true of all age groups - and AFAIK nobody has defended the way the WFP has been handled.

Everyone seems to be of one mind, so there is no need for the riddles and the point scoring.

Have it your own way.
Carry on with your own version of point scoring.
I haven’t been point scoring nor do I suggest that others don’t care, but if that’s how you see it-that’s your problem.
Go ahead.

LizzieDrip

Exactly Pantglas2.

That’s the point several of us have been making Mollygo - not everyone on the old pension receives less than those on the new pension.

I have a friend who received her pension at 60, so she’s on the old pension. However, because of SERPs she gets more than I do. No SERPs for me; and my friend received 6 years more pension than I did. At a conservative estimate of £8k per year … £48k!!!

Exactly. That has been pointed out over and over, but ignored to suggest that people on the new pension are better off and consequently don't care about those on the old. The fact that the new pension has been around for ages and nobody has complained until now is 'interesting'. Wasn't it Ed Davey who said that pensioners should wear jumpers and hats indoors to keep warm, when in coalition with the Tories?

Molly Nobody on either pension is laughing all the way to the bank, but to suggest that one is necessarily higher than the other, and that I [sic] too see that there’s an I’m all right Jack^attitude from this who get more, and equally from those who don’t need the WFA. is offensive and unnecessary.

Suggesting that
as I pointed out, people on the old pension receive up to nearly £3000 less, but still pay the same prices is also unnecessary when people had already made the point, and to follow up with the virtue-signalling the point that older pensioners are still paying the same price for food, fuel, living etc whilst having to do that on up to £2688.40 less per year, or £224 less per month or 51.70 less per week evidently bothers me more than it bothers other, perhaps because I’ve seen the impact on people I know makes matters worse. How is it 'evident' that you are bothered more than others? How do you know whether others on the thread are aware of people who will struggle, or whether they will struggle themselves?

Nobody knew what you were talking about, as you were deliberately speaking in code:
If you get it, you get it. If you don’t, you don’t. It’s too late to claim it.

Those who qualify already get it. Those who don’t won’t ever get it, unless the LP or any other government realises how bad it is.

But just imagine what a difference £2400 pa would make for those who don’t get it.

You were asked repeatedly to clarify, but refused, and then suggested that people were deliberately misunderstanding because we are blinkered:
I believe there are people on here who don’t recognise when things are presented in a way that tells a story different from what they want to believe.

What was the point of all that if not to score points? And to what end?

LizzieDrip

Exactly Pantglas2.

That’s the point several of us have been making Mollygo - not everyone on the old pension receives less than those on the new pension.

I have a friend who received her pension at 60, so she’s on the old pension. However, because of SERPs she gets more than I do. No SERPs for me; and my friend received 6 years more pension than I did. At a conservative estimate of £8k per year … £48k!!!

Do you know why?

It's because works pensions were reduced accordingly.

Blame the government, the administrators of pension schemes, not those in receipt of the pensions.

Allira

LizzieDrip

Exactly Pantglas2.

That’s the point several of us have been making Mollygo - not everyone on the old pension receives less than those on the new pension.

I have a friend who received her pension at 60, so she’s on the old pension. However, because of SERPs she gets more than I do. No SERPs for me; and my friend received 6 years more pension than I did. At a conservative estimate of £8k per year … £48k!!!

Do you know why?

It's because works pensions were reduced accordingly.

Blame the government, the administrators of pension schemes, not those in receipt of the pensions.

I don't understand what you mean by this.

Who reduced works pensions?

Allira I do blame the government of the day for their mismanagement of the extension of pension age for women.

I have no issue with the equalisation of pension age for men and women - I agree with it. It’s the way it was handled, causing women (not men) to lose a significant amount of money, that I take issue with.

I certainly don’t blame women who received their pension aged 60 - why would I? I just think it’s important to point out that those on the new pension are not necessarily ‘better off’, which often appears to be the misapprehension of some.

63 for everyone would have been fair, I think.

That means more jobs for younger people too.

It’s the way it was handled, causing women (not men) to lose a significant amount of money, that I take issue with.

Yes.

Allira I’m also a bit confused by your comment regarding the reduction of work pensions? Not sure what you mean … or how it would impact the 6 year extension of state pension age for women

Who reduced works pensions?

Gordon Brown.

Mollygo

Who reduced works pensions?

Gordon Brown.

He didn't reduce public service pensions.

In any case, what Brown did wasn't related to the increase in SPA.

You didn’t specify public service pensions. Gordon Brown affected our income both back then and now.

LizzieDrip

Allira I’m also a bit confused by your comment regarding the reduction of work pensions? Not sure what you mean … or how it would impact the 6 year extension of state pension age for women

GMP.

Mollygo

You didn’t specify public service pensions. Gordon Brown affected our income both back then and now.

How did he affect your income then?

Allira

LizzieDrip

Allira I’m also a bit confused by your comment regarding the reduction of work pensions? Not sure what you mean … or how it would impact the 6 year extension of state pension age for women

GMP.

So how much was your guaranteed minimum pension affected? Actual figures would be helpful to put it into context.

And how was it connected to the SPA?

Rachel Reeves has been urged by a group of millionaire business owners to raise £14bn from an increase in capital gains tax at this month’s budget, arguing it would have no impact on investment in Britain.

Ahead of the chancellor’s set-piece event on 30 October, the group of wealthy investors said increasing the tax rate on asset disposals would help to raise vital funds for public services and would not lead to slower economic growth.

growstuff
he ended MIRAS.
You can dance round this whatever way you want, but knowing what someone has done to your future income has an impact as soon as you know it.
Think of all the discussion on here about the tax on the money you leave when you’re dead.

Mollygo

growstuff
he ended MIRAS.
You can dance round this whatever way you want, but knowing what someone has done to your future income has an impact as soon as you know it.
Think of all the discussion on here about the tax on the money you leave when you’re dead.

Yes, he did - and I had a mortgage.

By doing so, he ended a tax subsidy to property owners, which didn't benefit renters. Those people who owned property at the time didn't too badly!! They're possibly the same people who will moan about paying IHT when they die.

Mollygo Yo really do sound bitter.

growstuff

Allira

LizzieDrip

Allira I’m also a bit confused by your comment regarding the reduction of work pensions? Not sure what you mean … or how it would impact the 6 year extension of state pension age for women

GMP.

So how much was your guaranteed minimum pension affected? Actual figures would be helpful to put it into context.

You think I'd put actual figures and details of my DH's pension on a social media page??
Really?

😂

Incidentally, it was a Conservative Chancellor, Norman Lamont, who first cut ACT from 25% to 20%. I missed the moaning about him.

The stock market crash wiped about seven times the amount from the funds pension companies held as Gordon Brown's scrapping of ACT did.