FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Pension Age

Jump to newest
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Nicely snuck in just before the summer recess.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

David Gauke gave a blustery non-answer on why they didn't state the rise before the General Election.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"David Gauke gave a blustery non-answer on why they didn't state the rise before the General Election.

"

Because they are cowards?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Disgusting! working people having to put in extra again!! While toffs get tax breaks...In some countries..The Tory plebs...(And I did say PLEBS!!!)...Would have been shot by now... What bullshit! Just another way to eek out more in tax from the working classes..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Whats this? Do expand OP! Give details...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *VBethTV/TS
over a year ago

Chester

It's a going up by a year for some people. Got to say it had to happen. As long as people keep living longer the pension age will keep rising. It was set at 65 when few people made it past 70. Now late 80s and beyond is hardly uncommon and plenty make it to treble figures, it costs a lot more than it used to. Something has to give.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

So when I pointed out that the chancellor had said that retirement age would rise to 70 and over in the last budget meag it was their intention to raise it to over 70 and I was told I was delusional by the rightwing blowhards I was right and this bunch of toerags have just made the first move in that direction barely 3 months after the policy announcement was sneaked out in the budget.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"It's a going up by a year for some people. Got to say it had to happen. As long as people keep living longer the pension age will keep rising. It was set at 65 when few people made it past 70. Now late 80s and beyond is hardly uncommon and plenty make it to treble figures, it costs a lot more than it used to. Something has to give. "

So you must have missed the news that life expectancy is no longer rising, but will put that to one side for the moment. We have only just had a general election, if it "had to happen" as you say, then why wasn't it in the conservative manifesto?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"It's a going up by a year for some people. Got to say it had to happen. As long as people keep living longer the pension age will keep rising. It was set at 65 when few people made it past 70. Now late 80s and beyond is hardly uncommon and plenty make it to treble figures, it costs a lot more than it used to. Something has to give.

So you must have missed the news that life expectancy is no longer rising, but will put that to one side for the moment. We have only just had a general election, if it "had to happen" as you say, then why wasn't it in the conservative manifesto? "

Probably for the same reason it wasn't in anyone else's manifesto; because it's unpopular. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have had to do it anyway sooner or later.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"Disgusting! working people having to put in extra again!! While toffs get tax breaks...In some countries..The Tory plebs...(And I did say PLEBS!!!)...Would have been shot by now... What bullshit! Just another way to eek out more in tax from the working classes.. "

Nothing quite like the threat of violence against people who don't do what you think is right to keep the democratic process in line.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

The Cons have sneaked this and the dreadful age verification requirements for every adult sexually themed site visited this week.

Who knows what other plans they have? They should have been in their election manifesto, so they could have been scrytised properly.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"It's a going up by a year for some people. Got to say it had to happen. As long as people keep living longer the pension age will keep rising. It was set at 65 when few people made it past 70. Now late 80s and beyond is hardly uncommon and plenty make it to treble figures, it costs a lot more than it used to. Something has to give.

So you must have missed the news that life expectancy is no longer rising, but will put that to one side for the moment. We have only just had a general election, if it "had to happen" as you say, then why wasn't it in the conservative manifesto?

Probably for the same reason it wasn't in anyone else's manifesto; because it's unpopular. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have had to do it anyway sooner or later."

But fox hunting was a real winner?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

It was going to rise but it's the earlier introduction that is interesting, coming the day after a report showing we have stalled on increased life expectancy and other reports showing declines for the poorest, particularly men.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"David Gauke gave a blustery non-answer on why they didn't state the rise before the General Election.

Because they are cowards?"

Not this time... and there is a reason why you will find no party criticising the decision

Because the government are following the suggestions and findings of an independent report which was asked for in conjunction with the dwp all party select committee...

The reason they could not have talked about the report during the election is that it would have broken purdah rules ....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I fall into the age group affected. TBH i dont expect to get a state pension at all.Theyll keep on putting it up. Also the pension age doesnt represent the job you do.People in my area the building trade have a shorter working life due to the strain put on the body.Your knees go and so does your back much earlier than suits in offices.I know many crippled builders who cant work long before the state pension kicks in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oxychick35Couple
over a year ago

thornaby

Well said Bob

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I fall into the age group affected. TBH i dont expect to get a state pension at all.Theyll keep on putting it up. Also the pension age doesnt represent the job you do.People in my area the building trade have a shorter working life due to the strain put on the body.Your knees go and so does your back much earlier than suits in offices.I know many crippled builders who cant work long before the state pension kicks in."

I have worked in construction since leaving skool most of it on the tools

And I dont know any builders or any of my contemporaries that are crippled

Although I do know a few suits as you call them who have bad backs and knees

Which really goes to show its not necessarily a labour intensive job that causes problems

As for retirement I think I will be going til 70 plus if I can

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I fall into the age group affected. TBH i dont expect to get a state pension at all.Theyll keep on putting it up. Also the pension age doesnt represent the job you do.People in my area the building trade have a shorter working life due to the strain put on the body.Your knees go and so does your back much earlier than suits in offices.I know many crippled builders who cant work long before the state pension kicks in.

I have worked in construction since leaving skool most of it on the tools

And I dont know any builders or any of my contemporaries that are crippled

Although I do know a few suits as you call them who have bad backs and knees

Which really goes to show its not necessarily a labour intensive job that causes problems

As for retirement I think I will be going til 70 plus if I can "
I know plenty who have their knees go and know walk on crutches.You cant compare a lifetime on a building site or down a trench to sitting at an office desk.Ive been on the tools 30 years.Most people i know want off the tools due to age and worn out cartilage.I have knee problems which my doctor tells me is work related.Maybe your mates got lucky.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So when I pointed out that the chancellor had said that retirement age would rise to 70 and over in the last budget meag it was their intention to raise it to over 70 and I was told I was delusional by the rightwing blowhards I was right and this bunch of toerags have just made the first move in that direction barely 3 months after the policy announcement was sneaked out in the budget.

"

How do you "sneak" out something in a budget which is:

(A) Read out (on camera) in the House of Commons.

(B) Published in full

(C) Analysed to feck by the press and spun to death from both sides.

The start of raising pension ages actually came about under previous labour government. I'm NOT putting blame there either as it was long overdue. As pointed out above by previous comments the pension age was set at 60/65 when pensions first introduced 100 yrs ago and life expectancy was 68. It is paid out of CURRENT taxes/NI and NOT from what an individual has paid in. To continue as it was is completely untenable. It was already factored in to increase to 68 but an independent report, supported by all parties, came to the conclusion that the change should be brought in earlier than initially planned.

It will need to continue to rise as people live longer and longer. It's simply economic reality.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

The reports I read today from Paul Lewis is that the saving will be 0.4% of GDP.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"How do you "sneak" out something in a budget which is:

"

By no saying it is our intention to raise the pension age to over 70...

But by saying: 'In future people will have to work for 50 years and more'. Sounded like a throwaway remark but in true Tory political style it was telling us that 3 months down the line the retirement age was rising to 68 and that there are plans in place to make it much higher.

Fact is the tories have 'form' when it comes to saying things in April, that sound innocuous at the time, but deliver the sting in their tail just as the house goes into its summer recess.

Maybe the reason that the press have not picked up on this is their right wing blowhard owners have ordered them not to. This last statement is just my opinion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *VBethTV/TS
over a year ago

Chester

Doesn't make it any less necessary and any party would need to do it. It should have been changed decades ago. Now we have to catch up with a population that lives a LOT longer. Yes I saw the article about life expectancy slowing but it's already a heck of a lot longer than it was when pensions were bought in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mwstaffsMan
over a year ago

brownhills

Why not just have the pension age as an average of both sexes life expectancy minus x years or as a % of life expectancy so that if life expectancy goes up then so does pension age and vice versa if it goes down

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"It's a going up by a year for some people. Got to say it had to happen. As long as people keep living longer the pension age will keep rising. It was set at 65 when few people made it past 70. Now late 80s and beyond is hardly uncommon and plenty make it to treble figures, it costs a lot more than it used to. Something has to give.

So you must have missed the news that life expectancy is no longer rising, but will put that to one side for the moment. We have only just had a general election, if it "had to happen" as you say, then why wasn't it in the conservative manifesto?

Probably for the same reason it wasn't in anyone else's manifesto; because it's unpopular. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have had to do it anyway sooner or later.

But fox hunting was a real winner? "

Well, amongst some, fox hunting is actually popular where as raising the pension age, whilst some accept it's necessary, is not actually popular with any.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"David Gauke gave a blustery non-answer on why they didn't state the rise before the General Election.

Because they are cowards?

Not this time... and there is a reason why you will find no party criticising the decision

Because the government are following the suggestions and findings of an independent report which was asked for in conjunction with the dwp all party select committee...

The reason they could not have talked about the report during the election is that it would have broken purdah rules ...."

You beat me to it. Whoever was in power would have done it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Well, amongst some, fox hunting is actually popular where as raising the pension age, whilst some accept it's necessary, is not actually popular with any."

I beg to differ. I'd rather see a fair and proportionate pension system than a callous bloodsport

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !"

Well you should of become a politician then shouldn't you

You've had just the same chance as everyone else has but you've obviously never wanted to go down that route.

So many people bitch & moan about others who have worked their way to a good place in life then they get it held against thrm for daring to succeed. That's "shocking"!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !

Well you should of become a politician then shouldn't you

You've had just the same chance as everyone else has but you've obviously never wanted to go down that route.

So many people bitch & moan about others who have worked their way to a good place in life then they get it held against thrm for daring to succeed. That's "shocking"!"

If you think everyone has the same chances of becoming an MP you should check the ratio of public school v state educated MPs.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !"

OK ? What should it be then ? £ 300 £ 400 £ 500/week. How on earth is the government going to pay for that with us only saving nationally a few £ 10s of pounds/week towards it and then living another 30 to 40 years after we retire. I Know..... Let's means test it so that the richer buggers don't get any of it. Oh right........ that wont be very popular with the squeezed middle who actually pay quite a lot towards it. I know....... Let's have a big tax rise. Oh right........ That's not going to be very popular either is it ?? I didn't vote for that did I. Just like I didn't vote for a huge national pay cut when I put my X in the brexit box. I think it's all about having a slice of cake and eating it as they say.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !

Well you should of become a politician then shouldn't you

You've had just the same chance as everyone else has but you've obviously never wanted to go down that route.

So many people bitch & moan about others who have worked their way to a good place in life then they get it held against thrm for daring to succeed. That's "shocking"!

If you think everyone has the same chances of becoming an MP you should check the ratio of public school v state educated MPs."

Educational backgrounds have nothing to do with standing as an MP in your constituency.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"

Well, amongst some, fox hunting is actually popular where as raising the pension age, whilst some accept it's necessary, is not actually popular with any.

I beg to differ. I'd rather see a fair and proportionate pension system than a callous bloodsport"

So would I but I'm just not kidding myself that everyone agrees with me that fox hunting is wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !

Well you should of become a politician then shouldn't you

You've had just the same chance as everyone else has but you've obviously never wanted to go down that route.

So many people bitch & moan about others who have worked their way to a good place in life then they get it held against thrm for daring to succeed. That's "shocking"!"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You do realise your pension will be 155.75 a week after all the years you have worked and need 35 years of work to attain this ... yet so called politicians earn that in a couple of hours ? Shocking !

Well you should of become a politician then shouldn't you

You've had just the same chance as everyone else has but you've obviously never wanted to go down that route.

So many people bitch & moan about others who have worked their way to a good place in life then they get it held against thrm for daring to succeed. That's "shocking"!

If you think everyone has the same chances of becoming an MP you should check the ratio of public school v state educated MPs.

Educational backgrounds have nothing to do with standing as an MP in your constituency."

Haahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahaahahahahahahahahahahah

Only half of MPs went to state schools.

25% Went to Oxbridge.

You can claim there's no barriers, but the data is against you

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Going by YOUR data then 50% went to state schools which is a healthy proportion

You only need to fulfil the criteria, get 10 people on the voting register to sign your form for standing as an independent MP from the area you wish to stand for election then pay your £500 ticket and the rest is how good YOU are to get enough votes to win.

As I said, nearly anyone can do it

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Probably another thread I've killed using reason

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"Going by YOUR data then 50% went to state schools which is a healthy proportion

You only need to fulfil the criteria, get 10 people on the voting register to sign your form for standing as an independent MP from the area you wish to stand for election then pay your £500 ticket and the rest is how good YOU are to get enough votes to win.

As I said, nearly anyone can do it

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha "

Anyone can stand but as the party system doesn't allow that it's not that simple. How many independents sit in the House of Commons?

The issue raised was about becoming an MP. The answer you gave was about standing. The two are not the same.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Back on topic:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2017/jul/22/one-size-fits-all-state-pension-too-simplistic

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alcon43Woman
over a year ago

Paisley

I don't know that I would have the mental capacity to still carry out my work at 65 never mind 68. I am currently 49.

Surely there must come a point where the age of retirement needs to be risk assessed. I don't make life threatening decisions or have to work machinery but there must surely be an age at which we become less efficient at our jobs and therefore extending the retirement age is merely increasing the number of those who will take early retirement.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I don't know that I would have the mental capacity to still carry out my work at 65 never mind 68. I am currently 49.

Surely there must come a point where the age of retirement needs to be risk assessed. I don't make life threatening decisions or have to work machinery but there must surely be an age at which we become less efficient at our jobs and therefore extending the retirement age is merely increasing the number of those who will take early retirement. "
They'll be no money in the pot for early retirement it wont be optional.I fully expect retirement age to be 75+ in 25 years or less.The demographics are off.To many old people not enough young people.Factor in automisation taking 30% of all work by 2040 there's even less revenue from the workforce.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I don't know that I would have the mental capacity to still carry out my work at 65 never mind 68. I am currently 49.

Surely there must come a point where the age of retirement needs to be risk assessed. I don't make life threatening decisions or have to work machinery but there must surely be an age at which we become less efficient at our jobs and therefore extending the retirement age is merely increasing the number of those who will take early retirement. "

I think you raise some very good points....and tbh i think theres an easy cure to this pension stuff...if only the parties had the bollocks to do it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alcon43Woman
over a year ago

Paisley

I think more would get early retirement on the grounds of ill health.

Raising NI contributions may help.

What's your solution ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Lloyd George was the founder of the state pension system and the idea like all good ones was to provide a safety net. I've just been looking at the history of it and somewhat interestingly when first provided was at the age of 70 LOL. That was when peoples general life expectancy was 52 apparently. I find that hard to believe. Gradually over the years it's seen as an entitlement and true if you pay in for say 30 or 40 years then you should get something out of it.

One of it's fundamental flaws though is that it's not like a real pension fund. Todays Tax payers are paying the pensions of those living now. It's not like some sort of pension fund which is invested for us on our behalf and Auntie Government benevolently doles out money from the ring fence pot accrued. It's just a part of the government funding which they must try to provide for from the revenue stream in the form of NI or taxes or borrow to pay.

Didn't the chancellor try to put up National insurance to self employed last Autumn and was met with howls of humbug, cheat and such like.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alcon43Woman
over a year ago

Paisley

Raising NI contributions for the self employed is hardly going to raise the revenue required. They already pay quite a high stamp. My dad was self employed and this just puts more pressure on the self employed. Lots of construction workers and taxi drivers etc are self employed and this would have lowered their take home pay.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ah so lets tax the people who are in the PAYE system and easy to tax then .

Easy peasy . It's a no brainer really if you are the chancellor. Sorted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ah so lets tax the people who are in the PAYE system and easy to tax then .

Easy peasy . It's a no brainer really if you are the chancellor. Sorted."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top