SINGLE OAP PENSION

[ez8004]

22 hours ago, hackey lad said:

Some people are not in the fortunate position to plan , even for the minimum

The government cannot afford to give out handouts on the scale you propose. It is no where near close to being able to afford it. 

 

People need to take more responsibility for their financial planning especially in terms of retirement. 

[Mikes10]

The Pension Policy Institute has some interesting facts:

 

https://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/research/pension-facts/

 

 

[hackey lad]

46 minutes ago, ez8004 said:

The government cannot afford to give out handouts on the scale you propose. It is no where near close to being able to afford it. 

 

People need to take more responsibility for their financial planning especially in terms of retirement. 

What ,exactly am I proposing ?

[spilldig]

5 hours ago, Cyclone said:

Still don't know how you came to those conclusions.

But why don't you take a look at how much of government expenditure is on pension payments 

That's the way I interpreted it, but anyway let's have a look about this business of bankrupting the country. Well perhaps if they had thier priorities right.  Croatia give 129% of earnings, so if the same was applied here every pensioner would get £33,862 per year.       The Netherlands and Turkey are  ext at over 100%, then India, Portugal,Italy Austria,Argentina , Hungary, Bulgaria,luxombourg, Slovakia,China, Cyprus, Spain,Denmark,Brazil,Iceland,Israel,France,Lithuania,European u,nion 28 countries,Belgium,Indonesia Saudi Arabia,Finland.Oecd, Czech Republic,LatviaEstonia,Slovenia , Sweden,Greece Canada,Rumania,Germany,USA,Norway Korea,Switzerland,New zealand,Australia,Ireland,Malta,Chile,Japan,Russia,Poland Mexico, and then, in a disgusting 49th place comes the UK on 29%. As i say, the government should be ashamed.

[Cyclone]

Okay, now that you've listed some random statistics, tell us how much of government income already goes on pensions and how much that would be if it was increased to the amount you've proposed.

[Ms Macbeth]

As a woman in my 70s, I get nothing for the years I looked after my children, there were no credits back in those days.  I also worked in part time, low paid employment for several years, and paid 'the married woman's stamp'/reduced contributions.  Nothing for those years either.  My state pension is around £80.   I worked full time from 16-23 , then again from my early 30s until  I was fortunate to get a state pension at 60.  Around 33 years of contributions, but I was also contracted out for part of the time.  My occupational pensions (which amount to nothing near 40 years in a final salary scheme) preclude me from any add-ons, and of course as part of a couple, our pensions are assessed together.

 

The new scheme rewards those with small extra pensions, the old one, because of Pension Credit, penalised those savers.

 

 

 

 

[ez8004]

8 hours ago, Ms Macbeth said:

As a woman in my 70s, I get nothing for the years I looked after my children, there were no credits back in those days.  I also worked in part time, low paid employment for several years, and paid 'the married woman's stamp'/reduced contributions.  Nothing for those years either.  My state pension is around £80.   I worked full time from 16-23 , then again from my early 30s until  I was fortunate to get a state pension at 60.  Around 33 years of contributions, but I was also contracted out for part of the time.  My occupational pensions (which amount to nothing near 40 years in a final salary scheme) preclude me from any add-ons, and of course as part of a couple, our pensions are assessed together.

 

The new scheme rewards those with small extra pensions, the old one, because of Pension Credit, penalised those savers.

 

 

 

 

I have no idea what you are talking about.  When you mean the new scheme, I am assuming the current scheme.  It can actually work out.  I have over a decade's worth of contributions in a final salary scheme that is deferred until I retire.  My current employee scheme contributes the equivalent of 18% (which is still relatively low compared to something like a final salary scheme) of my gross salary into a pension scheme.  I have been prudent in having various investments since I started working so I have built up a regular income outside of work which will contribute to my pension income.  My wife claims child benefit, so she gets 12 years of NI for free effectively.  We should both max out our NI requirements (I have 19 years contributed so far, so need another 16 years from 30 years of work lol).  Total pension income when we retire in today's money will be about £40k. This is not the same as the income I get from working, but then again I shouldn't have outgoings like a mortgage to service.

 

It is not all doom and gloom.  You lot need far better financial planning.

Edited April 18, 2019 by ez8004

[hackey lad]

11 minutes ago, ez8004 said:

I have no idea what you are talking about.  When you mean the new scheme, I am assuming the current scheme.  It can actually work out.  I have over a decade's worth of contributions in a final salary scheme that is deferred until I retire.  My current employee scheme contributes the equivalent of 18% (which is still relatively low compared to something like a final salary scheme) of my gross salary into a pension scheme.  I have been prudent in having various investments since I started working so I have built up a regular income outside of work which will contribute to my pension income.  My wife claims child benefit, so she gets 12 years of NI for free effectively.  We should both max out our NI requirements (I have 19 years contributed so far, so need another 16 years from 30 years of work lol).  Total pension income when we retire in today's money will be about £40k. This is not the same as the income I get from working, but then again I shouldn't have outgoings like a mortgage to service.

 

It is not all doom and gloom.  You lot need far better financial planning.

Any chance of an answer to post 43

[Annie Bynnol]

9 hours ago, Ms Macbeth said:

As a woman in my 70s, I get nothing for the years I looked after my children, there were no credits back in those days.  I also worked in part time, low paid employment for several years, and paid 'the married woman's stamp'/reduced contributions.  Nothing for those years either.  My state pension is around £80.   I worked full time from 16-23 , then again from my early 30s until  I was fortunate to get a state pension at 60.  Around 33 years of contributions, but I was also contracted out for part of the time.  My occupational pensions (which amount to nothing near 40 years in a final salary scheme) preclude me from any add-ons, and of course as part of a couple, our pensions are assessed together.

 

The new scheme rewards those with small extra pensions, the old one, because of Pension Credit, penalised those savers.

 

 

 

 

Winners and losers but also swings and roundabouts.

You have benefited by at least  £25 000 by being able to get your pension through the old system at 60 ( 6years X 52weeks X  £80)

 

A 59 year old woman will have lost up to £30 000 since the 2009(not the 1981) changes (4years X 52weeks £150.)

A difference of £55 000. That that will take about 800 weeks ie at least 16 years before the 59 year old catches up with you and passes.  

(fag packet reckoning).

[Cyclone]

Ah, I think that you could have been more clear there.

 

The change in pensionable age for women having moved from 60 to now 66 or 67 means that women who are now in their early 60's or approaching 60 have (largely unexpectedly) lost out on 5 - 7 years of pension compared to what they were expecting and compared to other women who might only be a few years older  (In fact this includes my mum, having been delayed to 65.5 and my aunt, being maybe 3 years older and having been receiving pension since 60).

I'm not sure, but I suspect that in this case, both receiving full state pension for the date they retire that my Mum will never catch up.

 

The way this change has been administered has seemed particularly detrimental to women who's birthdays span approx 5 years.  Waspi are fighting it though and it's up for a judicial revue in June I think.