Pension Age Will Rise To 67 Sooner Warns MP

[Saint in Paradise]

The Government is likely to bring forward an increase in the state pension age to 67, in order to extend the working life of millions of people under 50.

This won't affect me though but it will affect lots of you poor souls. Wonder how Dune will defend it?

 

http://news.sky.com/home/business/article/16067083

 

 

.

[hypochondriac]

A necessary evil

[Junior Mullet]

I'm 33 years old and expect the age to rise to around 75 by the time I get there. Personally I expect to work until around 70 in one guise or another (ideally collecting the trollies in Asda car park), although I hope to give up my main career and all the pressure it brings by the time I'm 60.

[pap]

A necessary evil

 

Not really. Just a failure of imagination. There are plenty of other places that the Government could get the money.

[Raging Bull]

I'm 33 years old and expect the age to rise to around 75 by the time I get there. Personally I expect to work until around 70 in one guise or another (ideally collecting the trollies in Asda car park), although I hope to give up my main career and all the pressure it brings by the time I'm 60.

 

Yep, I'm in my mid thirties and although I'm self employed with the future well & truly in my own hands I feel pension/retirement age etc will be vey different even from what we are predicting today by the time our age group get there.

 

If someone our age is to retire at 55-60 they'll have done pretty well IMO.

Edited 12 September, 2011 by Raging Bull

[Window Cleaner]

The Government is likely to bring forward an increase in the state pension age to 67, in order to extend the working life of millions of people under 50.

This won't affect me though but it will affect lots of you poor souls. Wonder how Dune will defend it?

 

http://news.sky.com/home/business/article/16067083

 

.

 

 

but how many of those "poor souls" started work at 14 as most of us did,paper rounds,saturday jobs a necessity if you wanted

any money of your own cos parents didn't just dish it out by the bucket load in those days. How many of them will have to find work at every Uni vac because without that they just couldn't survive?

[iansums]

Heard this on R5L this morning along with a piece about a potential new cancer treatment. Therein lies the problem, we keep finding ways to prolong peoples lives but it has to come at a cost i.e. ever increasing retirement age.

[$$$]

I would be interested to know where all the extra jobs will come from?

[Raging Bull]

Heard this on R5L this morning along with a piece about a potential new cancer treatment. Therein lies the problem, we keep finding ways to prolong peoples lives but it has to come at a cost i.e. ever increasing retirement age.

 

Deliema that one isn't it. I know which one I'd rather have.

[Clapham Saint]

Hypo is right. It is a necessary evil.As people live longer and longer they can't expect to retire at the same age.If taken to the extreme, (and a little way off yet but stay with me), once the average life expectancy reaches 100, would it still be reasonable to retire at 55? You'd have worked for less than half your life. How could that possibly be viable.The retirement ages has to increase. I completely understand why some people who will fall just short of whatever cut off point is set will be annoyed, but the line has to be drawn somewhere and regardless of where/when that is there will be some who miss out on retiring earlier.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

I'm in my early 30s and fuly expect to be working until I'm 70 odd. This change has come far too late, for me it's not party political or reflection of priorities, it just reflects basic realities - people are living longer than they were when the age limits were originally set.

[bridge too far]

For once, I'm glad I'm as old as I am!

 

Being able to retire at a (comparitively) young age means I have the time and energy to look after my grandchildren a couple of days a week, so helping their parents to return to work. It would have been touch and go as to whether they could have afforded to do so, given the high cost of childcare, had I and their other grandparents not been able to help out.

 

That's probably one element of a later retirement age that hasn't been thought through (together with the effect on carers of elderly relatives).

[Verbal]

It's a vicious circle though. Working on beyond 65 will itself increase the average age at which people die - there's long been an association with earlier retirement and earlier death. And the converse is true: people who work longer are healthier and live longer. So we'll constantly be chasing our tail.

 

Of course, the problem that will never be solved by this is that the pensions industry, public and private, is a giant Ponzi scheme - however you do the numbers, they'll never add up, and the only people who can feel secure about their pensions are the ones already on them.

 

The only people getting rich from it are the fund managers and traders who see pension funds as a vast source of personal wealth.

[Johnny Bognor]

The Government is likely to bring forward an increase in the state pension age to 67, in order to extend the working life of millions of people under 50.

This won't affect me though but it will affect lots of you poor souls. Wonder how Dune will defend it?

 

http://news.sky.com/home/business/article/16067083

 

 

.

 

If you are having to blame the tories for raising the pension age, then are you going to give them the credit for making people live longer?

[rocknrollman no2]

If you are having to blame the tories for raising the pension age, then are you going to give them the credit for making people live longer?

 

Not really because it was a Labour government who invented the NHS,thus allowing people to live longer.

[Gingeletiss]

Not really. Just a failure of imagination. There are plenty of other places that the Government could get the money.

 

Like where?, indulge us please. Then ask Mr Brown, why he sold our pension funds down the river!

[Gingeletiss]

Not really because it was a Labour government who invented the NHS,thus allowing people to live longer.

 

Then also credit them with it's ruination over the last decade plus! what with all the 'managerial' positions, and red tape they created.

[rocknrollman no2]

Then also credit them with it's ruination over the last decade plus! what with all the 'managerial' positions, and red tape they created.

Wasnt it the Tories,Thatcher in particular who started the privatisation of the NHS?

[Patrick Bateman]

It's a vicious circle though. Working on beyond 65 will itself increase the average age at which people die - there's long been an association with earlier retirement and earlier death. And the converse is true: people who work longer are healthier and live longer. So we'll constantly be chasing our tail.

 

Of course, the problem that will never be solved by this is that the pensions industry, public and private, is a giant Ponzi scheme - however you do the numbers, they'll never add up, and the only people who can feel secure about their pensions are the ones already on them.

 

The only people getting rich from it are the fund managers and traders who see pension funds as a vast source of personal wealth.

 

Do you have any references for the top paragraph? Just interested as I always thought that to be true and even when I "retire", I fully intend to do something - work in B&Q, do charity work, anything to stay active and hopefully healthy!!

[bridge too far]

Then also credit them with it's ruination over the last decade plus! what with all the 'managerial' positions, and red tape they created.

 

The NHS, over the past decade, has become one of the most efficient national health service in the world, delivering best value for money of most other countries.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/nov/18/nhs-best-free-access-healthcare

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most-efficient-health-services

 

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2011/08/08/surprise-report-nhs-most-efficient-healthcare

 

and so on.............

 

The improvement in the healthcare environment has been unparalled, with state-of-the-art buildings and equipment, and research is world-beating.

[Gingeletiss]

The NHS, over the past decade, has become one of the most efficient national health service in the world, delivering best value for money of most other countries.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/nov/18/nhs-best-free-access-healthcare

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most-efficient-health-services

 

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2011/08/08/surprise-report-nhs-most-efficient-healthcare

 

and so on.............

 

The improvement in the healthcare environment has been unparalled, with state-of-the-art buildings and equipment, and research is world-beating.

 

...and almost bankrupt. Easy to spend money improving things, but at what cost now?

[bridge too far]

...and almost bankrupt. Easy to spend money improving things, but at what cost now?

 

The only way the NHS can be bankrupted is by not giving it any money.

 

However, chickens may well come home to roost because of the ridiculous PFI experiment and with the proposed commercialisation of the NHS.

[landford.saint]

Not really because it was a Labour government who invented the NHS,thus allowing people to live longer.

 

To be strictly accurrate the main reason for longer life expectancy is public health. Better diet, better housing, cleaner air, improved sanitary conditions. Medical advances has very little effect on life expectancy as a whole. To a small proportion of the population it has an extremely positive effect but the numbers are so small they dont have much impact on the total population figures. However due to the decline in diet standards, exercise taken, etc. It is forcast that our geneneration will actually have a life expectancy greater than that of our children.

[landford.saint]

I think it disgusting pension age will rise to 67 in 2026. I will be 66 in 2066 so will have to work a year longer.

[bridge too far]

I think it disgusting pension age will rise to 67 in 2026. I will be 66 in 2066 so will have to work a year longer.

 

You speak well for an 11 year old!

[Johnny Bognor]

Not really because it was a Labour government who invented the NHS,thus allowing people to live longer.

 

So it is Labour's fault that we are all going to have to work longer

[landford.saint]

You speak well for an 11 year old!

 

I have the maths skills of a currently educated 11yr old. In fact I will be 66 in 2026.

[Lord Duckhunter]

This thread highlight's in a nutshell the problem political parties have around pensions. It was obvious to everyone 20 years ago, that there were 3 options open to us. 1) Retire later 2) put more money in your pension pot or 3) Put up taxes condiderably to fund the increase in life expectancy.

 

All 3 look horrible on paper, so Govt's of both colours have put the discussion off, have fudged it and have generally played party politics with this important subject. My personally opinion is that Govt should fund a basic pension for everybody, paid at a flat rate and giving people a minimum standard of living. People then should decide how they wish to fund the "luxery retirement" that everybody seems to think is a right. Work later, save more, move in with your children ect ect.

 

If somebody has spent their working life ****ing their money against the wall, smoking fags at £5 a packet, jollys to Spain and Turkey every year, then they may have to work to 75, or retire in a situation where every penny counts. Everybody is in charge of their own lives and their own future. I would rather work later and have a good time now, whereas somebody else may want to save and retire at 65.We should educate our teenagers now, that their retirement provision is down to them. Retiring on a great pension at 65, is rightly or wrongly not going to be given to you as a right, your decsisions over your 40+ years working life, decide your retirement.

[bridge too far]

I think you're right Lord D, in many respects.

 

The thing that worries me more than anything else is that, currently, many young people simply can't afford to pay into a pension scheme, be it public or private.

 

So we'll be stacking up problems long term because, if people haven't been able to afford to plan for the future, then the state will have an even bigger amount to pay out to subsidise those people in their old age in the form of pension credits etc.

[Barney Trubble]

There won't be a state pension in about thirty years, at some point in the future you will be on your own. The NHS will have to go too(in it's present form)

 

Feel free to abuse me, quote articles etc but we all know that the projected costs of the NHS/State pension are totally beyond any government to manage, due to (you know what, but we can't say). The only way it will still exist, in it's present form is by taxing those that create the wealth even further, and that isn't fair.

 

I'm all for the NHS/welfare state/a good pension but it's all being abused beyond belief and the burden on the state isn't manageable in the not too distant future.

[Ken Tone]

Surely the only sensible answer is that we can all have a fixed term of retirement, say 10 years? You can retire when you like, but after the 10 years, euthanasia.

Society would welcome some early retirers, because their organs would still be worth re-using after their 10 years are up.

 

Or maybe we just stop funding the NHS completely and raise the death rate to the level of our third world competitors?

 

The trouble with these politicians is they chicken out of the logical extension of their ideas!

[Verbal]

Good grief.

[Verbal]

Do you have any references for the top paragraph? Just interested as I always thought that to be true and even when I "retire", I fully intend to do something - work in B&Q, do charity work, anything to stay active and hopefully healthy!!

 

There's quite a bit out there, but here's something from the BMJ in October 2005 - or a precis of it.

 

Early retirement, as is commonly believed, does not help retirees to live longer and it may even shorten one's life. This is the conclusion of a study published on October 21 by the British Medical Journal. The research involved tracking more than 3,500 employees working for Shell Oil in Texas over a 26-year period. The workers retired at 55, 60 or 65 and were monitored to see what effect their age at retirement had on their lifespan. Researchers considered factors such as gender and socioeconomic status in ascertaining whether retiring early is associated with better survival. It seems the findings have displaced the myth that spending our golden years at a leisurely pace away from the daily grind of the nine to five will increase our longevity. It appears that retiring later provides for a longer life.

 

The results were astonishing. The life expectancy of employees who retired at 55 was significantly reduced compared with those who retired at the age of 65. The researchers concluded that: “Retiring early at 55 or 60 was not associated with better survival than retiring at 65 in a cohort of past employees of the petrochemical industry. Mortality was higher in employees who retired at 55 than in those who continued working.” Leader of the research team Shan Tsai said: “Although some workers retired at 55 because of failing health, these results clearly show that early retirement is not associated with increased survival. On the contrary, mortality improved with increasing age at retirement for people from both high and low socioeconomic groups.”

[Seaford Saint]

I listened on Saturday morning telly to the finance expert Paul Lewis saying that a pension pot of £30K buys around £35 a week aged 65 and less if you index link etc.....shocking IMHO

 

 

The experts say millions of us aren't putting aside nearly enough for retirement. But lots of people no longer trust the stock markets where pension funds are invested in or the Government to protect them if things go wrong.

 

Mr Lewis said paying into a pension was an act of faith......he wasn't joking but he could not really finding that much positove to say about them. I have been saying for ages that its an assumption that we wil get anything from our funds.

[Johnny Bognor]

I think you're right Lord D, in many respects.

 

The thing that worries me more than anything else is that, currently, many young people simply can't afford to pay into a pension scheme, be it public or private.

 

So we'll be stacking up problems long term because, if people haven't been able to afford to plan for the future, then the state will have an even bigger amount to pay out to subsidise those people in their old age in the form of pension credits etc.

 

Legislation comes into force where employers have to deduct pension contributions from their staff and by 2014, companies have to contribute 3% (I think, off the top of my head), so don't worry, the private sector will pick up the tab (again).

Edited 12 September, 2011 by Johnny Bognor

[Verbal]

Legislation comes into force where employers have to deduct pension contributions from their staff and by 2014, companies have to contribute 3% (I think, off the top of my head), so don't worry, the private sector will pick up the tab (again).

 

Cheers!

[bridge too far]

Legislation comes into force where employers have to deduct pension contributions from their staff and by 2014, companies have to contribute 3% (I think, off the top of my head), so don't worry, the private sector will pick up the tab (again).

 

Not quite:

 

"First, every employer who does not provide a company pension already will have to do so. Normally this will be through a new national private pension scheme called a 'personal account'. Costs are likely to be kept low and choices will be limited.

Second, everyone in work aged between 22 and pension age who earns more than around £5,000 a year will be automatically enrolled in the company scheme or the personal account when they begin working.

They will have the right to opt out of the scheme, but evidence shows that if joining is automatic, far more people become members of a scheme. People over pension age will not be automatically enrolled but will be able to join the scheme up to the age of 74."

 

From: http://www.saga.co.uk/money/pensions/TheNutsAndBoltsOfTheUKPensionPlanChanges.asp

[Johnny Bognor]

Not quite:

 

"First, every employer who does not provide a company pension already will have to do so. Normally this will be through a new national private pension scheme called a 'personal account'. Costs are likely to be kept low and choices will be limited.

Second, everyone in work aged between 22 and pension age who earns more than around £5,000 a year will be automatically enrolled in the company scheme or the personal account when they begin working.

They will have the right to opt out of the scheme, but evidence shows that if joining is automatic, far more people become members of a scheme. People over pension age will not be automatically enrolled but will be able to join the scheme up to the age of 74."

 

From: http://www.saga.co.uk/money/pensions/TheNutsAndBoltsOfTheUKPensionPlanChanges.asp

 

 

http://www.personalaccounts.info/site/421/Introduction_and_Summary.aspx

 

Yes individuals can opt out, but there is a pretty decent incentive not to. If they don't opt out, employers HAVE to contribute (i.e. employers DO NOT get the chance to opt out) and therefore it is a good deal for the employee. In fact, any employees who opt-out will need to get their heads read.

 

More info: http://www.personalaccounts.info/site/423/Industry_Reaction.aspx

 

Anyway, at least Verbal had the decency to be grateful

Edited 12 September, 2011 by Johnny Bognor

[bridge too far]

Reading that article, I see that there will be basic rate tax relief afforded to those who contribute. So I guess that's the public purse helping out.

[pedg]

Problem is that the average life expectancy has gone up in part because of less infant mortality. So the average live expectancy has gone up but for adults their average lifetime has not gone up as far as the figures imply.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

It's much cheaper for the Government if a workers retirement and death dates are brought more into line - ideally if we could all just die a week before we are due to retire then that would be just perfect. Of course as everyone is now middle class, doing some undemanding desk job in the public sector and earning well in excess of 30k a year this should come as no real problem.

 

Indeed, what are we all moaning about ?

[bridge too far]

It's much cheaper for the Government if a workers retirement and death dates are brought more into line - ideally if we could all just die a week before we are due to retire then that would be just perfect. Of course as everyone is now middle class, doing some undemanding desk job in the public sector and earning well in excess of 30k a year this should come as no real problem.

 

Indeed, what are we all moaning about ?

 

In your tunnel-visioned world, maybe. In the real world, the majority of public sector works undertake demanding and increasingly stressful jobs (due to staff pruning) and those who are 'desk bound' earn something in the order of £15K a year on average. There aren't that many on wages over £30K (apart from doctors of course).

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

In your tunnel-visioned world, maybe. In the real world, the majority of public sector works undertake demanding and increasingly stressful jobs (due to staff pruning) and those who are 'desk bound' earn something in the order of £15K a year on average. There aren't that many on wages over £30K (apart from doctors of course).

 

Oh I wasn't referring to you personally, because you're my hero actually and worth every penny .....

[bridge too far]

Oh I wasn't referring to you personally, because you're my hero actually and worth every penny .....

 

I can understand the hero worship absolutely - but I don't actually work anymore. In fact, I subsist on my meagre NHS pension.

 

Does that knock me off my pedestal?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Your position is secure.

 

As long as you don't retire from this forum then I will happily work another 10 years just to pay for your meagre pension.

 

xxx

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I have the maths skills of a currently educated 11yr old. In fact I will be 66 in 2026.

 

I hope your kids understand how little their educations mean to you.

[teamsaint]

kids rack up huge uni debts, and can't get jobs, while the over 60's are forced to work on and on.

 

I think there might just be a control agenda here....or maybe the government has loads of good ideas that I just don't understand !!

 

What a crazy world.