Search

Pensioner household incomes overtake those of working age for the first time

PUBLISHED: 09:06 13 February 2017 | UPDATED: 09:06 13 February 2017

Finance. Picture: Sonya Duncan .

Finance. Picture: Sonya Duncan .

ARCHANT EASTERN DAILY PRESS (01603) 772434

Pensioner household incomes have overtaken those of working age equivalents for the first time, a new study found.

Elderly spending power has been boosted by a new wave of pensioners who tend to still be in work, own a home and receive generous pension pots, analysis by the Resolution Foundation for the Intergenerational Commission shows.

The As Time Goes By study, which charts income changes across different generations during the past half century, states low growth for working age households has coincided with a surge in pensioner wealth.

After housing costs, typical pensioner households are now £20 a week better off than typical working age ones, according to the report.

This is in marked contrast to 2001 when typical pensioner incomes were £70 a week lower than working age ones.

The growth appears to have come from the recent cohort of pensioners, as while total income in the sector has grown by 30% since 2001, for those who reached 65 in that year, it had only increased by 7% to 2014.

The biggest drivers of wealth growth for new senior citizens were occupational pensions, which account for over a third of gross pensioner income growth since 2001.

A quarter of pension income growth since 2000 is accounted for by employment, with the proportion of senior households in which at least one person works growing from one in eight in 2001 to nearly one in five.

Another quarter of income growth is down to pensioner benefits growing by 8% since 2001.

Housing has also been a major factor with 73% of pensioners now owning their own homes, up form 64% in 2001.

However, the report shows a sharp divide in wealth levels among pensioners.

The top fifth of pensioner households account for 74% of employment income, 66% of investment income, and 52% of occupational pension income.

In contrast, the poorest fifth of households are almost entirely reliant on benefit income.

The study warns that with falling home ownership levels for millennials, low generational income growth and less access to defined benefit pension schemes, it cannot be assumed the trend in richer seniors will continue.

Adam Corlett, economic analyst at the Resolution Foundation, said: “One of the most intriguing aspects of the recent living standards story across Britain has been typical pensioner household incomes overtaking working age households for the first time.

“This has led some to assume that all pensioners are enjoying some kind of boom amid the painful squeeze for everyone else. The reality is quite different - the incomes of individual pensioners grow relatively slowly, particularly once they’ve stopped working.

“Instead, the main driver of pensioner income growth has been the arrival of successive new waves of pensioners, who are more likely to work, own their home and have generous private pension wealth than any previous generation.

“Of course, not all pensioners can draw on these income sources, which is why the state pension will always be the main income for many pensioners. We can’t assume either that young people today will be able to draw upon the kind of wealth that recent pensioners have accumulated, given the recent fall in home ownership and decline in generous defined benefit schemes.

“The big challenge we face as a society is to ensure that the record incomes that a new generation of pensioners are enjoying are not a one-off gift, and can endure for future generations too.”

Search hundreds of local jobs at Jobs24

134 comments

  • @sarah b- you are absolutely right and it's only getting worse. That's why I was suggesting we need some sort of complete rethink about the problem. I still believe that part of the solution is the release of a persons personal wealth (if they've got it) to contribute to the costs. That means, I'm sorry to say, for most people selling their house. But the silver lining is that whilst the person selling did indeed work hard and diligently, which is brilliant and appreciated, they will now benefit from the astronomical and inflation busting rise in house prices. For what it's worth quite a few of the most vocal commentators shouting at me revealed in an article yesterday on landlords and UC that they own multiple homes and rent them out. That's great and well done to them. But it's likely that most of them bought their second and subsequent properties in the period after the high interest rates of the 70's and 80's and therefore took advantage of the cheap mortgage rates they bemeon, as well as helping to push up prices for first time buyers (koenig, el dingo, ted all commented as landlords). It's a complex problem which will have complicated solutions...I just feel at some point something is going to have to give.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Thursday, February 16, 2017

  • The sad point is this - this research is flawed because it is just looking at pensioners' income when they retire. The reality is this - care costs are astronomical and no occupational pension scheme, no matter how great it is and will be so much less now in monetary value because final salary schemes have been replaced with money purchase ones, will provide for your care in retirement. There needs to be a real rethink for our elderly care which is so lacking compared with our European counterparts.

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Thursday, February 16, 2017

  • @nfn - That's the heart of the issue. The cold facts point to a imminent and potentially catastrophic failure. But rather than consider potential solutions it seems that it easier to just kick the problem down the line. That's probably what we'll have to do. It looks impossible to even raise the issue and or deal with a number of pretty entrenched positions. I've accepted that we'll need to just let it play out and see what happens. We'll either muddle on through and in 15 or 20 years when the current crop have left us we can reduce the state pension. In the meantime we'll need to increase taxes to try and plug the difference. I imagine that the government will be pretty busy negotiating with the eu to deliver brexit and this will give the government a good excuse for taking their eye off the ball with domestic policy. Alternatively we won't muddle through and something else will happen. It's seems pointless to try and speculate which it will be...

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Thursday, February 16, 2017

  • SarahB. Nobody begrudges your relative her pension...but its extremely unlikely that she's paid in more than taken out. The differrence is borrowing with the younger generation to make good. Only tonight on the TV by 2030 there will be over 3 million more pensioners and likely 300 thousand less workers. Somethings gotta give else there will be no state pensions for anybody.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • RHC3, can`t reply properly site keeps crashing, is it me or everyone?

    Report this comment

    John Bridge

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @john- Where I'm struggling is understanding what the hell this has got to do with pensions and pensioners wealth, perceived or otherwise!

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @john-Look John, it's been a long day and I haven't thought about Polina or the accident for a long time. How would the Muscovites feel about their culture? Well on the one hand these are the people that burned their city rather than hand it to napoleon, but in the other hand it was the home of the ussr and so the centre of a vast area and collection of people who all lived and worked in Moscow. It's a pretty cosmopolitan place, like any other major European city. As one of the biggest countries in the world they are, in my experience, pretty comfortable in their own skin and their place in the world.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Actually Jonno65 I find your comments very offensive because you have no idea how hard I work or my family does so why are you so judgmental? I used 'immigrants' as an example because they are relatively 'new' to our workforce. They haven't contributed 50 plus years to the taxation system. I just want a fair system for our elderly people who have helped us and our country over very many years.

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Thank you Andy for your support. So many people just don't understand until they experience them! This is quite an emotive subject for me, close to my heart and I would like to help others who are in the same position as I am now with an ageing relative who has worked so hard for so many years and now needs myour support. Thank you.

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • RHC3, would Moscow be so welcoming if their culture was being turned upside down?

    Report this comment

    John Bridge

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @Francophile - Thanks. You couldn't have known the circumstances. I was sorry that it worked out that way too.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Rc3 Sorry did not know the circumstances.

    Report this comment

    francophile

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @exlab - Sorry, but you don't seem to have answered my questions to you. Perhaps you could actually provide an opinion on this article rather than harping on about me. As for you 'big hole', well I think you'll find we simply disagree and there are about 8 people on here who also disagree. That's ok, disagreement is fine. I certainly respect that your opinion is different to mine and I trust that you respect that I think differently on this, and many other, issues to you. Where we differ is I don't suggest you or anyone else book a trip to North Korea just because we disagree. For what it's worth I would have thought a country that has no immigration and no dissenting voices would be a more natural place for you than me. That is, after all, the model that you would seem to like the UK to follow.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @rc3 .you have dug yourself a big hole with your previous comments about life saving treatment and pensions and seem to be backtracking rapidly . Francophile is right . Maybe you should book yourself a nice little trip to north korea because you don't seem to like anything at all about this country or its people

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @Francophile - I Loved Russia and living and working there. I went there in 2004 because my girlfriend was Russian and she wanted to move, from London, back home. It's a beautiful country with interesting and generous people. Unfortunately after about 10 months my girlfriend was killed in a road traffic accident. After that, I felt quite isolated, I just didn't want to be there. So I came home.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • At last, we now know where RC3 is coming from. A voluntary emigration from the UK to Russia but after a year he found the Russians were too right wing for him and his beliefs.So we now have got him day after day spouting ultra left wing drivel. A good future for a left wing architect could be North Korea .I am sure we could raise the necessary funds on the Giving ap.

    Report this comment

    francophile

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @exlab- what had brexit got do with it? I answered your questions and you've failed to address mine. What are you hiding?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @rc3 . Why do you dislike our old age pensioners . You have continued to attack their benefits time and time again . You have even questioned their right to vote . . Our old age pensioners have put more into this country than any other group and should be entitled to take something back for all their hard work . . If you are annoyed that many of these people voted for brexit thats tough . . Get over it

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Ted - that really is the pot calling the kettle black - all 'older' generations have always said the same about younger ones - including yours and mine. We should just accept that this generation of baby boomers are living in a gilded age - we even got tax relief (MIRAS) on our mortgages (some forgot to mention in that in their rose tinted view amongst the high interest rates) - 3x basic being enough to get on the property ladder. The young generally can't afford to buy. Rents are astronomical (and more than a mortgage). Of course it will all end in tears as it always does - a property or financial crash that will sweep away the status quo.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • it seems to me the younger generation are too busy servicing unnecessary debt, we the baby boomers were brought up to save first then buy, new cars are a prime example, adverts never show the ' buy it now price' just the ' monthly payments' Continental holidays paid for on the credit card, monthly credit cards statements - minimum payment made. every thing is on the tick, live now pay latter, mugs game, but then it would seem the world is full of mugs these days. there is one good thing though that comes out of this, the wise can make strong money from the mugs, and the mugs are just too thick to see it.

    Report this comment

    ted

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • This is pathetic, I hope people realise how the economic generation divide is happening and real... oh to have been a baby boomer, don't think it's going to be like that anymore...

    Report this comment

    Garbador

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @Patrick - I'm sorry for that grammatical mistake. Thanks for pointing it out, very kind of you. Do you have any thoughts on the subject of the article?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • " and everyone who's views I have commented on .. " - whose - surely?

    Report this comment

    Patrik

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @smh - That's great, thanks. I changed my position to try and reflect your points. That's why I suggested earlier that if the treatment only adds a couple of months to someone's life, at a certain age, or if the treatment is expensive then it's not the nest use of limited resources. I've refined the initial suggestion. I've already apologised for the tone of my statement, but I'm happy to apologise again if that's what it takes to get a discussion going. Sorry. I think I've conceded a number of points, accepted and respect our difference of opinion and recognised that my 'tone' isn't to everyone's taste and tried to moderate it accordingly. Somehow I still feel like I'm being browbeaten and this new cordial approach is, it feels to me, a one way street.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • RC3 - providing aspirin or Warfarin to those with heart conditions is "life prolonging treatment". Providing insulin to diabetics is "life prolonging treatment". Providing an epi-pen to someone with allergies is "life prolonging treatment". It's only later you added "expensive". Can you really not see the tone of the original statement, just like the tone of your first discourse on this story? Obviously not.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Too many words. Too little wisdom.

    Report this comment

    guella

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @smh - Ok, thanks. I'm sorry if my language was not to your liking and I'll try and moderate it to be more benign. I'm grateful to you for all your help and your suggestions. I'm happy to apologise to anyone and everyone who's views I have commented on or attacked; sorry to those people. What I'm not sorry for it trying to start a discussion on this subject. I looked through the quotes you helpfully provided from a previous discussion and, as far as I can see, I said straight off the bat that 'life prolonging treatment' was the thing that shouldn't be offered, you even provided the quote. So it was a little unfair for you, this is the quote from you last night "that retired people should not receive NHS care, then later you'll expiate it claiming that people deliberately misunderstood you, with you changing it to "artificial life extending treatment". But let's leave that aside. So in the spirit of your suggestion I acknowledge and respect your opinions on this subject and look forward to hearing them. Can you please acknowledge that I have a different opinion on this matter to you and discuss the subject with me, rather than simply attacking my position?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • SMH, you are of course quite correct. I did engage in posts with the verbose one but he is too easy to wind up and so stopped. These days if I see a long post I look to see if it is RC3, if so I never bother reading it. Bit like if you come across a busker on the street and think 'that's rubbish' and quickly walk on by without listening to more than you have to. Probably says everything in that the claim is that it is 3 because it was banned twice. Frankly who cares?

    Report this comment

    andy

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @RC3 - Why not crawl through old comments? You do it, and it shows the way that you change what you say whilst demanding apologies from people for not understanding something you didn't write down. Debate would be acknowledging different opinions, discussing them and then suggesting a change, not attacking those opinions, only discussing those that agree with you, changing what you say and then claiming it's what you said all along. Anyone can read your comments and see how they change, yet you haven't apologised for the way you've attacked people for not holding your view. So, yes, I will continue to hold you to task for expounding extreme views and then blaming everyone else for misrepresenting you.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • So much blind envy borders on evil. You cannot make the poor rich by making the rich poor.

    Report this comment

    Patrik

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Never seen such persistent garbage and offensive drivel - 'alternative facts' (lies?) - as runs through this thread.

    Report this comment

    Patrik

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • @smh- Andy is spot on don't get wound up by this discussion and definitely don't waste valentines evening trawling the edp website to dig up quotes from over a month ago! All I see in the quotes you've kindly produced are ideas on healthcare and the state pension that are being amended and shaped by discussion. Isn't that a good thing? An idea is suggested, some alternate suggestions or reasons for amending that idea are offered by other people and the idea evolves. Isn't that how we make progress? Put aside all the 'emotional language' red herring and look where we are. We, or st least I've, reach a point where I think that the state pension should be reduced to the JSA level and the difference available as a means tested benefit. I'll leave it for others to define who receives that additional benefit. In terms of the other, older, discussion I'd say that, further to some excellent comments and opinions from others, I think the most expensive life extending treatment should only be available to those prepared to pay for it. Again that will need to be defined. My suggestion is treatment that only extends life by two months or less should not be freely available to those receiving the state pension. I know that putting a line in the sand will provide some with ammunition, but you've got to start somewhere. So the above sets out two positions shaped by discussion. What do you think about those ideas? Can you at least agree that to achieve a balanced position that debate and discussion are required and that it's reasonable and healthy for ideas to evolve and be refined as further information is available? Or do you think that a person has to be 100pc right from the beginning and to then stubbornly never change or alter their opinion regardless of new things they learn? I think it's best at this point to also say thanks for helping me to evolve this idea. It really is, whether you believe it or not, appreciated.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • The comments in the report by the Resolution Foundation are contained in the opening Executive Summary and not in the conclusion of the report. The latter specifically expresses the concern that many pensioners are on low incomes. It also states that more pensioners than ever are having to work to supplement their pension which it quotes as being £25,000 per household. How many of the ranters on here on that level of income? The state pension is of course taxable income but some either do not realise this or do not want to acknowledge that. Lastly it is worth remembering that the Resolution Foundation is a decidely left of centre organisation chaired by David Willetts, a former tory MP who was very much on the left of the party, frequently winning praise from the Guardian, etc.

    Report this comment

    andy

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Sarah, smh and ex, don't let yourselves get wound up by verbosity. Really not worth it.

    Report this comment

    andy

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • Sarah B how low to turn this into an immigrant issue - A vast majority of immigrants work a lot harder that you for a lot less - I'd rather they benefit than the low life home grown trash that scrounge off the welfare state all their lives.

    Report this comment

    Jonno65

    Wednesday, February 15, 2017

  • In this story you've gone from "The solution is simple, the state pension must be immediately reduced to the same level as job seekers allowance...The difference...should be available to those in need be it ought to be means tested." to "The only people I would envisage seeing their pension drop to the same level as JSA are the wealthiest who don't need it." Or are those comments of yours "misrepresented or conflated"?

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • "remove all life prolonging treatment from the nhs after the pension age. At that point an individual has a choice, they either use their savings, their assets, an insurance policy or rely on their family to fund their artificially life prolonging treatment or the natural course of events happens." - RushallChap3, Jan 9. "The issue, as I see it, is the potential costs are eye watering for, in some cases, very little extension of life. We need to be able to draw a line somewhere" - RushallChap3, Jan 9. "Have a look, if you are interested, on a paper produced by the Nuffield Council of Bioethics called expensive life extending treatments by Christopher Wareham." - RushallChap3, Jan 9. Always quick to denigrate, then embellish what you said and claim everyone should have understood that from the beginning.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • RC3 I can't accept what you say because my view is that if people have worked so hard in their lives for so long then they should benefit. They deserve to be looked after by the NHS etc because they have paid so much in taxes. Too many people in this country expect help when they haven't contributed in taxes , especially those who are immigrants Our NHS is under severe strain - you only need to read the news!!

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @smh-ps you are being a wee bit unfair. In the first post on this article I said just the state pension to match JSA and add straight after it that the difference between the current state pension and JSA should be available to those in need but it ought to be means tested. That was the initial premise and I haven't wavered from it. I'm all for a discussion but it's hard if things people say are constantly misrepresented or conflated. I also haven't once mentioned 'reading the report', that was somebody else! I lived and worked in Russia for over a year. I emigrated there. Then when circumstances changed I decided to come home. I was all in, everything I had a disposed of. I thought an expat worked and lived somewhere but kept a base elsewhere. But that's splitting hairs.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @smh - no, I don't see that as arrogant at all. But no doubt not seeing that is arrogant too. Oh well.... night night, my risotto is ready and my wife is waiting. Sweet dreams x

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @sarah b- for what it's worth I agree with you, we should look after our elderly better. I'm quite heavily involved in dementia care and creating appropriate places for people with that particular, unique, set of requirements. The bit I can't square with you is that the state should fund this care if the person has assets they could use to, at least, partially fund their care. We won't agree because you are going through this painful situation right now and I imagine it would be difficult to see it from the other side given your current experience. But the other side is that if the state pays for all the care and the persons assets are passed on to their family, well in a sense all that's happening there is the state is providing private wealth (in the form of assets) for private families. That's great if you benefit from it (inheriting a mortgage free house to sell or live in), but it's not really fair to society as a whole. I know you won't agree with that and I am sorry about that. But I hope you'll at least agree is an idea worth discussing and that's it's not an appalling or upsetting concept?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • "I've been an immigrant myself... I worked with innMoscow and Sicilia," (sic). That's not being an immigrant. An immigrant is someone who goes to live permanently in another country. You were an expatriate, as I've been before. That's why Sarah B said "As an immigrant" - she repeated what you said. Don't feign indignation for someone using your own phrasing, especially if that's not what you meant.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • RC3 - polemic: rant, tirade, diatribe. You have a habit of saying something to raise the hackles, such as saying that retired people should not receive NHS care, then later you'll expiate it claiming that people deliberately misunderstood you, with you changing it to "artificial life extending treatment" and "did you read the report", pointing at something you'd not mentioned before. In this thread, you've suddenly changed from "cut the pension to JSA level" to "well, all but the rich would get the current level". Do you not expect people to have a low opinion of you, if you keep changing what you say and then cry that people aren't understanding or not reading properly what you've written, then demanding that people apologise to you? Do you not see how arrogant that comes across?

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @exlab- yes, I think it's fair we offer refuge to the most desperate as set out in the government Vulnerable Persons Relocation Scheme. I also think you are misrepresenting me. I said very clearly that the state pension should be cut for those who can afford to do without it. For those that need it a means tested too up should be provided. You understand that, right? I'm saying the poorest will be looked after just as the are and the richest can help achieve that. What's unfair about that? So now I've answered your question you answer mine. Fair's fair.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Please look at our pensioners' plight. They have worked so hard and yes they have their property but because they have worked so hard for it. Why do so many people now want to take away what they have worked for over say 50 years? And the care homes cost £3k a month at least so they have to use their investments and home to pay for these fees so why should we penalise and criticise our elderly? Other countries in Europe help their elderly - why are we so critical when they have done so much to help us? Why do we treat our elderly so badly? We need to help them and their relatives!

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @rc3 . you haven't answered my question . You have said that our old age pensions are unaffordable and would like to see them cut . Yet you are happy to support people who walk straight into this country and claim everything without paying a penny into the system . . Do you think this is fair . Answer yes or no ?

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @sarah b- I'm not an immigrant. I can't help how you read my comment but I'm sorry if they upset you. The fact that you haven't read or understood what I've said upset me and I'm appalled by it. I'm not really, but can you see how pointless and futile this culture of outrage and upset is. It's no longer possible to understand if you are actually appalled or just mildly irked. I fancy it's more the later than the former. The world wars were genuinely appalling, famine and starvation are appalling; someone suggesting a portion of the state pension should be means tested doesn't really fall into the same category. Or perhaps you think it does?Sorry again.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • The problem is if someone in this country has worked for 50plus years and paid their taxes over this period of time, then why shouldn't they get a decent pension? Unfortunately, this pension is then completely eradicated for their care costs, which also contains their investments and ultimately their homes so why are the pensioners considered so well off? There needs to be a complete overall of the care sector because, we as a nation, just don't support our elderly, unlike others in Europe.

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @smh- ps- one persons 'emotionally charged' language is another persons provocative polemic. It's quite difficult to engage in a debate in this forum and sometimes the only way to raise many from their stupor is to point out a few uncomfortable, in my opinion, home truths. I'm generally quite a polite young man, but sometimes the needs are required to move towards the ends...if you catch my drift?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • RC3 I find your comments quite offensive - regarding the elderly who may need extra care. They have been working and paying taxes for very many years so why shouldn't they have help? According to you as an immigrant, you don't feel that they should be entitled to have this care. I'm appalled and upset by your selfishness.

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @smh- great idea regarding tax increases; I'd happily sign up to that if it accompanies the reduction in the basic state pension to the JSA level. Brilliant idea. Regarding your point about developers I think it's a bit more nuanced and keeping developers profits up is good for pension pots so good for everyone. But I'm all for building more and building bigger. But to do that you need the state to invest in a building programme like in the 60's. I've got no objection to that in fact I'd welcome it. But I don't know how it's funded? I'd like to your thoughts on it though....

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @exlab- I think a full state pension for the wealthiest is unaffordable, yes. It's also unnecessary and profligate. But as I've said about three times now means tested top up should be available to those who need them. The only people I would envisage seeing their pension drop to the same level as JSA are the wealthiest who don't need it. Please offer a cogent reason why that is wrong or somehow offensive. As for health care I said we needed to also look at it; it's not sensible for the state to fund ultra expensive health care for the very old. It's pointless and inhuman to subject someone to intrusive and intensive treatment to eek out an extra fee weeks. But if people, for their own reasons, want to do that's then they should be able to, at their own expense. As ever you try and portray my comments on a complex issue in an a way (and I have no idea why you do this apart from to satisfy your obsession with me) unrecognisable from what I initially said. To you last off topic point, I do support immigration. I've only ever had positive experiences with people who have come to this country to work. I've also worked and lived abroad, I've been an immigrant myself and I'll always be grateful for the warmth and hospitality extended to me by the locals and people I worked with innMoscow and Sicilia, But here we are again talking about me and my opinions. Do you have anything at all to say on this subject? Or perhaps you'd care to tell us what you would do about immigration, would you send them all home? Or perhaps you'd prefer to discuss Paul Nuttalls lies on his website that he 'lost close personal friends' at a particular footballing tragedy? I don't care what topic I just want you to say something that isn't entirely framed by a slur of me. Go on, give it a go. As I said before I'm genuinely interested to hear your opinions on a subject...what I'm not interested in is your echo chamber nonsense.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Unfortunately, there is something which has been left out of these figures - care costs! My father died whilst employed so never took advantage of a pension - my mother worked until she was in her 70's and at 88 is in a care home costing £3k a month! Just think about this before you say that pensioner income is so good. They have worked for a considerable time and paid lots in taxes and now they are having to pay exorbitant rates for their care.

    Report this comment

    Sarah B

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • "This is the biggest disgrace of our age; it's morally wrong... Pensioners are the root of the financial problems of this country...We can no longer afford to feather the nest of the baby boomers...It is the responsibility of every generation to ensure that the generations that follow enjoy greater opportunities and prosperity than they themselves enjoyed. On this charge the current crop of pensioners...have woefully failed. You were asked to improve the nation on your watch and you, evidently, neglected your responsibilities. You ought to be absolutely and utterly ashamed of yourselves." You use emotionally charged language like that and expect a debate? No, you're only after people agreeing with you. It is the EXPECTATION that a generation will make things better for the next, and each generation has. Living standards, health, personal wealth and happiness... all have continued to improve. There is a current set back in house ownership, but that is not the only indicator of "greater prosperity". It's an asset that you infer is one of the roots of society's problems, and believe that everyone who owns their house should sell it rather than passing it as an asset to their children (and therefore contributing to the "greater prosperity" of the next generation). Surely the lack of housing, and therefore the rise in prices, is down to the lack of building caused by developers hitting up locations and then not building until prices have risen, and architects designing smallwr footprint houses to maximise the profits of those builders? Get the developers to build and the forces of supply and demand will bring down prices, or at least stabilise them until wages catch up. If you reduce the pension, how about increasing taxes for anyone earning over the average wage? Say 50% on anything more than 1.3x the average, 75% on more than 1.6x and 90% on more than 1.9 the average. That way those who have more disposable income are paying their fair share, just as pensioners have paid tax all their lives on their income, their savings, their pension.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Keep on topic Ex whatever. Although it would appear that without the hard working immigrants there will be nobody to staff the care homes or large chunks of the NHS. I suppose we could always make care home fees £10Kweek to attract staff.....

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @rc3 . So you think that old age pensions are unaffordable and the country cannot afford them . On a previous post you said that our pensioners should sell their houses to pay for their care in old age . . So you have no problem with the billions spent on immigration . Is that affordable in your eyes and money for our old age pensioners isn't ?

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @exlab - are you for real? Read the thread. I've put forward a suggestion to address the issue raised in the article. I've then defended that proposal against various counter arguments. That's the nature of debate. You are a few others have offered absolutely nothing at all to advance a solution to the problem. Do you have any opinion whatsoever on the subject that isn't shaped by your desire to try and insult me? Honestly, I would love to hear your thoughts on the matter; please enlighten us, or at least me.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @nFn - I agree with you, and you've put in a less polemic confrontational way that I would have, which is great. The basic suggestion I propose is to reduce the state pension as a universal benefit down to equal with JSA (£73.10). The difference (£46.20) can then be means tested. That way those who really need it would get it and those who don't wouldn't. That way the state would still be providing a universal benefit for those that feel entitled to it because they feel they've 'paid in'. The state would be keeping it's side of any 'contract' that people feels they've entered into. The root of the problem is that quite a few people commenting are looking at it from a purely personal perspective and getting very defensive that someone has the impudence to suggest they might, once again, give something back. It's not about their pocket; it ought to be about the future of your, your neighbours and everyone else grandchildren and their children. It's really quite a simple question and proposition which most people should have been capable of providing a rational response to (quite a few have), but many have, for their own reasons taken mortal offence to it. Oh well, I suppose that's their right and something else they are 'entitled' to.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @rc3 As you have trolled and offended nearly everybody on here whose comments you have disagreed with you have been hard to ignore . Maybe you should change your tactics and try put a political argument forward instead of insults . .

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Thinking what the knub of this argument is. Very very few of us (surprisingly few) will actually be over our lives net contributors to the state vs taxes or whatever. The vast, vast majority are net recipients. It used to be 3 score years and 10 (and pensions funded to match) not 4 score and 10. That coupled to the age related NHS costs and we can see how we've arrived here - a larger and larger retired set of people being supported on a smaller and smaller economically active working population that are expected to meet the 'entitlement' sold to the earlier generation. We need a dose of honesty.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • RC3: If I genuinely am not worth a passing thought, then why waste ten lines on me? Your style stops short of causing me actual offence, but boy oh boy, you must struggle to get your head through the door when you come home from a hard day's architectural endeavour. Writing the way you do, you surely must expect a modicum of criticism from those who dislike know-it-alls?

    Report this comment

    el dingo

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @exlab- it's not all about me.....do you have any opinion at all on the article? All I can see from you is futile, pathetic, impotent personal attack after attack. Isn't there an immigr,ation story or a labour story for you to comment on?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @rc3 . Your last comment . Why do you want to make everything personnel ? .I and others have lost count of your personnel insults and attacks on others who have disagreed with your comments . .

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • The Resolution Foundation report takes housing costs out of the equation. Given that some pensioners will have paid off their mortgages, this makes a big difference. What about care home costs? Those are far higher than mortgages, but they're ignored for the sake of the political statement. Plus, some pensioner households still have a mortgage to finish - the report defines a "pensioner household" as one where one person in the house has retired, but often that is only one and the other is working, so it skews the values for their income upwards compared to households where both (given then typical household makeup in the UK) are retired. Put housing costs back in and working households are better off than the median of pensioners.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Lots of comments of anecodotal evidence. The point is that the 'average' pensioner today is now better off than the average worker, but its very unlikely to be true for the younger generation when they retire. If that's the case then we need to stop giving all average pensioners bus passes, TV licenses (or why not then the average poorer workers?) and target benefits to where they are most needed. It would seem most pensioners don't need these benefits and the state pension could and should revert to double lock.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @el dingo - Why do you want to make everything personal? You need to let go and get out there and enjoy your life instead on focusing on me. There is something tragic and pathetic that you think you are 'better' at me 'having a laugh with your mates', lol...really...you think that measurable? At least that's given me a good chuckle. I don't think i'm better than anyone else at all; you read that into my comments, that's your issue not mine. As for the rest of it, you've done well for yourself, that's great. I'm really pleased for you. I'm sorry if I get 'up your snout', that's not my intention at all. I can honestly say that you don't 'get up my snout' or any such thing because I genuinely don't give you a passing thought, if only the same could be said for you about me. Your constant commenting is bordering on the obsessive. I should probably be flattered, but the harsh reality is, unfortunately, you're not my type. Sorry.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • I'm surprised RC3 has time to work given the amount of time he spends leaving comments on here!!!

    Report this comment

    YarcoDaz

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @JohnnyH --- When I was in my 20's and even early 30's my spending was on mortgage, used cars including a Ford Anglia, 1100, Maxi, etc. and holidays with family in Wales. It was the same for most of the people that I knew. Oh yes, unit trust savings policies and a flexible retirement insurance package. The splash the cash people were the factory workers and the miners and the power workers, rail workers and others 'protected' by the often communist backed unions.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @ Green Ink. I disagree. While we were in work and paying taxes we were in contract with society that in return for our taxes we would be supported in the future with the SARP. We are not getting money that we never paid for (odd way to put it) we are getting the money that we are entitled to because of the contract with the government we were obliged to enter into. How we now chose to spend the money that we receive in retirement is nobodies business but our own.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Somebody asked what pensioners spent when they were in their 20s, some 30 to 40 years ago. I seem to remember that generation being accused of spending too much as they bought foreign cars and had foreign holidays and new TVs and music centres and the balance of trade deficit was their problem, I'm sure we will hear the same in 40 years time.

    Report this comment

    JohnnyH

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • RC3: nice of you to define "my generation" for me. I am late fifties, retired, and with a nice early pension thanks. By the grace of hard work and a bit of luck, I never have to do a hand's turn again. The state pension is my right and I will look forward to it. If anything goes wrong, I'll just have to sell a property. And that's why you get up my snout - you think you're better than everybody else. Financially, career-wise, or just being good at having a laugh down the pub with my mates I'd knock the skin off your proverbial rice pudding any time. It's your style I dislike, not always your opinions. Those who've really got it don't verbal on about it, but I thought I'd educate you in this instance. Scholarship to a public school and University Degree in the 1970s? and all from the most humble of working class backgrounds. Now, is that you or me?

    Report this comment

    el dingo

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • It's dangerous territory to make vague comparisons when the conditions change and there are a huge range of differences for individuals. Generally the retired are getting incomes they never paid for. We are the beneficiaries of ''generous'' vote chasing politicians spending the next generation's money for them. Frankly, the baby boomers have got away with the spoils so if any of them is responsible they will consciously help the next generations in not wasting their money on too many unnecessary material goods.

    Report this comment

    Green Ink from Tunbridge Wells

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • The mortgage rate was consistently over 10% in the 80s and early 90s. Nigel Lawson was called the one armed bandit as chancellor as he would deal with every problem by raising interest rates and caused the crash in housing market of around 30% in 1990 that SMH refers to which helped those born in the mid-70s to buy housing in the 90s at an unsustainably low cost, as an example a £200k house today would cost £90k in 1989 but £60k in 1993 (and as Rushall said was around £12k in 1975). Each generation has their own challenges and opportunities

    Report this comment

    JohnnyH

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Rc3 writes "@koenig- It's nice to see that we are sending benefits abroad to entitlement complex spongers in foreign countries. Enjoy it." --- Yes, the UK does indeed send billions of pounds of hard working money abroad because of past Socialist government decisions just as thousands of families in the UK comprising of multiple wives and kids have to be housed in big expensive houses. IMO both of these is wrong and should be stopped. However the SARP is NOT a "benefit". It is an earned entitlement and one that has to brought up to a level that supports life by means tested benefits. The fact that both of us are not UK domicile is immaterial. We earned our entitlement in the UK where we paid UK taxes and UK NI. Today we are not reliant on the UK NHS, our houses are in the UK rental housing stock providing homes for two families which otherwise would not be the case, indeed increasing numbers of UK pensioners are having to downsize in order to release equity in their homes and move into much smaller places just to get by.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @rc3 , Again and again you have attacked our old age pensioner benefits and have objected to them getting back benefits which they are entitled to for all their years of paying national insurance contributions . Yet you seem to have no problem at all with people entering the country who have paid nothing at all into the system claiming everything .

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @rc3 , Again and again you have attacked our old age pensioner benefits and have objected to them getting back benefits which they are entitled to for all their years of paying national insurance contributions . Yet you seem to have no problem at all with people entering the country who have paid nothing at all into the system claiming everything

    Report this comment

    exlabnowukip

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Back in the late '80s I bought a house for the first time. It cost four times my salary and took half my gross wages to service the mortgage. The interest rate then went up to 14% and it was two years before it went below 10%. At the same time, prices plummeted and I had a house that I couldn't sell because it was worth four fifths of the mortgage. But I persevered - I saved money where I could, didn't take holidays, put what I money aside that I could so I could buy things without a loan, only buying what I really needed instead of what I wanted on the never-never. I raised a family, making sure they were fed and clothed and safe, sacrificing where I could in order to make sure they had the best start. I put money into a pension, saving for my future. All this while dealing with a chronic health condition that will be with me until I croak. But, according to some, retiring means I'm a sponger with an entitlement complex and an overbearing assumption that I should receive artificial life-extending treatment that should instead be spent on others. The fact that all medical treatment is artificial life extending doesn't matter - the money shouldn't be spent on the old who've paid into the system all their lives and not taken a penny out (apart from medical treatment). I suppose if I was earning twice the average wage I could afford to get on my moral high horse and denigrate anyone with a counter view, but I've not been that lucky. Instead I'll make sure that my children get further benefit from my lifetime of scrimping and saving when I'm gone. I've brought them up to not expect anything from others, to work and save for what they want rather than expect anything, and to hope that the taxes they pay all their lives might come back to help when they're regarded as too old to work and no employer will touch them. We've moved on from the days when the tribe kicked the old ones out to be eaten because they were a burden, and today we are supposed to be a caring society, who give succour to those who need it. Except ... not if you're old. Only if you're young.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Boy Oh Boy – Rc3, you certainly have a chip on your shoulder!

    Report this comment

    Voice of Reason

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • @koenig- It's nice to see that we are sending benefits abroad to entitlement complex spongers in foreign countries. Enjoy it.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • Rc3 still on the funny cigarettes again?

    Report this comment

    stoneman

    Tuesday, February 14, 2017

  • I wonder how many people have taken the trouble to actually read the report produced by the Resolution Foundation? It is worth reading both the 'executive summary' and the conclusion of the report on page 45 -they are not entirely consistent. Elsewhere in the report a graph shows pensioner income to be £25,000 but neglects to say if this is joint income, merely that is household income. How does this actually compare with two people in a 'working home' where both are on the average wage? Housing costs are put into the equation of course and this can and does skew the figures considerably. Using the £25K per household, or £12.5K per person, quoted in the report who still thinks a pensioner income is substantial and how does this compare with your income? Concern is expressed that the defined benefit schemes are being replaced by defined contribution and you do not have to be an economist or a pension expert to realise the consequences of this. Indeed the conclusion states that too many pensioners remain on very low incomes. Lots of broad sweeping statements both in the report and by the usual parties on here, so no change there I guess. As long as no one is going to pretend that the report is produced by an apolitical organisation or that the situation is unique to the UK. Nor is there any mention of the damage done to work pension schemes over the last 20 years or more by government increasing taxation, changes in pension rules etc. etc., by the likes of Gordon Brown and George Osborne. Pension, no matter where it comes from, is taxable. The report appears to say that a pensioner typically has a private pension or perhaps investment income of about another £6K pa - what wealth!

    Report this comment

    andy

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Oh and although it's probably not of interest or in case anyone is wondering, Yes, I pay tax on all 3 of my pensions as well, which I think is wrong considering the tax I paid all the years I worked and paid tax then. Did try to get a job when I retired and moved but no-one was really interested in hiring a woman over 60.

    Report this comment

    Spooky

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @koenig. Having also invested in my future (took out a pension at 18) you are spot on. I was laughed at. Now I am in the one laughing.

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • I notice they don't actually give you any amounts to verify the findings, only percentages, that tells us nothing. I am not entitled to any benefits like pension credits so can't claim things like free NHS Dental care, or Council Tax reductions etc, why because I have as well as the state pension, a small monthly company pension and also a small private pension that I receive once a year, this last pension although I have to wait a year for it, is calculated over the year and added to my monthly pension amount, so until the end of the year I am £50 a month short all the time, still it's a bit like yearly savings, comes in handy at Xmas.

    Report this comment

    Spooky

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @RC - At no point have I claimed to be back in the UK but I do get the UK pension here. I also get the annual upgrades and the other universal payments that are added to the UK pension by the UK treasury. My partner and I both get the UK SARP because it is our right and a thing that we are absolutely entitled to. We don't get the various means tested Benefits that are added to the UK pension entitlement but if we were still domicile in the UK we would not get the means tested Benefits either for the obvious reason. People in the UK who have in addition a to the SARP another pension income are subject to income tax as if it were earned income and so they are paying a portion oif their total pension income to HMG anyway as it is. The bottom line is that envious people are whinging because those of us who invested in our future are benefiting from our individual investments and as I wrote those who do begrudge us our entitlement, an entitlement that we worked for, can go and suck it up. Basically tough . Live with it.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Anyway, I gotta go and make use of my nice final salary pension

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • "It is the responsibility of every generation to ensure that the generations that follow enjoy greater opportunities and prosperity than they themselves enjoyed." Says who?

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Ok great, now we know where we all stand. That's a start. @john b - the two people you refer to is back to an old argument. The eu lady was a criminal who was prosecuted, so no that's not ok and it isn't. Your african lady is, as far as I could make out because you have absolutely no detail apart from a vague recollection a British citizen who happens to have a large family and be a different colour to you. If she's a British citizen she's entitled to the same as everyone else. @koenig- we disagree, the state pension is a benefit but your entitlement complex for some reason blinds you to it. It's also quite endearing that you are pretending to be back in the UK on the breadline...didn't it work out for you when you returned to Switzerland? @rancidiser- I don't really know where to start with you, but as you have no ideas to offer I'm not really interested in you or your pretty low grade insults. I also think your mantra would have been better and more appropriate in 1975 when there were enough houses being built to actually accommodate people at reasonable costs. That level of house building is now a distant dream @stoneman - hello troll, how are you?

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Mantra for 2017: Let's all get given a new house as it's our divine right Let's all get a 56 inch tv set Let's all have the latest smart phone Let's all be totally selfish There's no I in team but there is a ME

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Keonig - you have nailed it...

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • "It is the responsibility of every generation to ensure that the generations that follow enjoy greater opportunities and prosperity than they themselves enjoyed." Says who?

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Rancidiser: good film but I think some of the vocal opponents on this forum their palms are burning for entirely different reason.

    Report this comment

    stoneman

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • When push comes to shove those of us receiving the SARP gat a very low (compared to most of Europe) fixed pension and means tested social security payments to bring it up to a survival level. We earned our entitlement to the SARP by our NI contributions over the years. Our SARP is NOT a 'benefit', it is a payment that the government makes to us as a right, a right that we earned from years of paying taxes. Now we have an absolute right to be supported as we supported other people while we were working. To see the Snowflakes whinging about how unfair it is is anoying. Those same whingers who WE cared for, paid to be educated, paid so that their families could get way past what they needed and got instead what they wanted, in short blew their noses and wiped their backsides now complaining because the responsibility to support us is falling on them. Well tough luck. Suck it up. If you lot now want what we have the solution is simple. Don't elect any more socialist governments, accept that you will have to see a reduction in your living standards to what you earn and not what successive Labour governments borrow, and if you want more get a second or third job. WE earned what we have. Go and do the same and if you can't then put a sock in it.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • RC3 works or did work as an architect if I remember rightly? Probably earns enough to get by on. Won't need the state at all for anything. Some older people do. Anyone seen the film Logan's Run?

    Report this comment

    rancidiser

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Guella, you speak of a low wage low security economy, quite so. The men behind the wars and the greed laugh at us squabbling among ourselves. RHC3, its ok for an African woman to turn up and knock out six kids or a an EU woman to fleece our system but woe betide a British pensioner who as worked all his or her life and actually contributed.

    Report this comment

    John Bridge

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • I suggest a day trip to the coast there's rich pickings to be had £50 million pounds worth washed up on the beach, more than enough to supplement any pension pot.

    Report this comment

    stoneman

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @guella- you can take francophile's advice or you can engage in a discussion; which part of the assumption I made are incorrect? You gave very little to go on so I had to fill in some of the blanks myself but you mentioned to high interest periods and someone retiring recently. In terms of dates I couldn't have been too far out? I would like to hear where you think there is a difference.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • guella, leave him alone, we live in hope that he might disappear.

    Report this comment

    francophile

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • I have two sons who we have through University and who in their mid 30s are earning far more than your widely discussed £50k a year.This is because we invested over £100k in our children's education as well as saving for our retirement.

    Report this comment

    francophile

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • RC3 your assumptions sre so far off the mark as to be insulting.

    Report this comment

    guella

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @francophile- It's interesting and telling in equal measure than rather than address the issue you and el dingo choose to play the man rather than the ball, opting for insults rather than engaging. That's ok, that's your choice. It also wreaks of a lack of critical thinking and an acceptance of the cliched, hackneyed old status quo regardless of the consequences. The saving grace is that the opinions of you lot soon wknt matter and the rest of us can get in with improving the situation for our children. My focus is solely with my 14 month old son and his generation. I don't give a hoot if upsetting your petty little apple cart causes you to throw your toys out of the pram. Things need to change and this will happen without your generations help, blessings or consent. You can either try to understand that or choose to remain in your stupor of ignorance until you are buffeted by it.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Going back to RC3's original comment about reducing pensions to JSA of £73.10 a week why? Why have we got so many unemployed young people when you and all remainers want to import many more low skilled workers. Isn't about time that these jobs were filled by those already on these shores. There is also a problem, that they will keep raising the retirement age because it is cheaper to keep people unemployed than to pay a pension, so old workers will keep working. If you reduce pensions they will stay in work longer. Make those on JSA take jobs and that will reduce the benefit bill, we do not need low skilled immigration to do these jobs for us. Make people work or take benefits away.

    Report this comment

    SteveVan

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • The great grey vote bribe !!!

    Report this comment

    cal

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • RC3 Everybody is wrong and you are right.You have forgotten the old adage of when people think you are an idiot(most mild thing I can put to get it past the censor), you go and open your big mouth and confirm it. you must have a hide like a rhino.Totally agree El Dingo.

    Report this comment

    francophile

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • A lot of facts here, some true, some distorted. All I can say is that I have worked all my life, have just a small private pension which rules me out of all benefits, have been retired 10 years, get little or no interest on my meagre savings, and now I may lose the tripple lock, my upcoming TV licence and bus pass. I manage on a fraction over the state pension, because I know how to. I'm not unhappy with my lot, don't expect much, and am getting very tired of being blamed for every ill of the younger generations. Life is very much what you make it, and make of it. There is no easy way if you come from a working class background.

    Report this comment

    Sylviab

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @el dingo - you're entitled to your opinion. Plenty no doubt agree with you. I don't give a monkeys what you think about me. Sorry

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @guella - Come on, play fair. To have hit your two periods on high inflation and to be recently retired you would have been born in 1950. Let's say you bought your house in 1975, with a 25 year mortgage which you finished paying in 2000. You would have been able to retire in roughly 2016. That gave you 15 years to save up for your retirement when you were free of your largest out-going. It also meant that whilst your mortgage may have had a few peaks along the way when you purchased your house in 1975 the average price was just over 10 grand (£10,388). Whereas a person buying in 2016 when our theoretical new pensioner retired would need to pay just shy of 200 grand (£198,564). I remember reading (from the ONS) that from 1975 to present day wages have doubled in real terms, that's great but you and I both benefit from it equally (a rising tide lifts all boats and all that..) but over that same period the average cost of a house has increased almost 20 times. So I'll offer the deal that everyone my age and younger would....we'll happily go back to 14pc interest rates if we can reduce the price of all houses (and wipe out all that precious equity) by 20 times...we'll even take a half in wages if that helps.... I think you'll agree when you consider it in those terms that things are, in fact, more challenging now.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Last week I came close to agreeing with RC3. Then there's the return of the faux supremacy. What an arrogant creation you are. You REALLY should be bounced out of here. Arrogance in extremis.

    Report this comment

    el dingo

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • "It was tougher in my day." Some if us are wiser to know that statement is just human nature. Even the Romans said the same. I do recall the jump to 14 or 15% interest rates (I was in the US at the time and new at 15% I couldn't afford my mortgage. Luckily it only lasted about a day!). However, the fact remains in my 20's I I could afford to buy a 2 bed new flat in London on my own modest salary, and then a town house - and I wasn't in the financial services. I don't think our youngsters have much hope of that these days.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • FlintinChalk says it like it was. Most of the recently retired struggled with very high mortgage interest rates during TWO prolonged periods- the mid to late 1970s and the post ERM debacle of the early to late 1990s. Furthermore very many suffered redundacies as vicims of deindustrialisation and the reimaginig of financial services which paved the way for todays low wage low security economy. In warning of these dangers they were derided as stivk in the muds. You reap what you sow. Try approaching the problem laterally which in fact close reading of the analysis reported invites you yo do.

    Report this comment

    guella

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @koening - With the greatest of respect you are talking out of your hat. There is no such thing as a state pension 'package'. There is a state pension, this is universal, it is not means tested and it what is received by the majority of pensioners. There are other benefits that are only available to pensioners, as clearly noted by SMH in their post. But these shouldn't be viewed as some sort of pension top-ups, they are minimal amounts of cash, rightly, available, to those who are hardest pressed. So can you please put aside this silly notion that the state pension is in any way 'means tested'. It isn't. If the state pension was, to use your earlier phrase 'de facto' means tested then there would be a significant number of pensioners who wouldn't receive a penny from it. It's a pragmatist and can't envisage a situation where this could be pushed through by a government in the short term. A compromise would be to reduce the basic state pension to the same as JSA (some £73.10 a week) and then have the balance (namely £46.20 per week) means tested. The least well off would still be able to apply for the additional benefits they currently do such as pension credit etc..

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Pension Credit, or Minimum Income Guarantee: a means tested benefit to ensure all pensioners receive a minimum income of £151 per week for singles and £230 for couples. State Second Pension, or Serps: based on lifetime earnings. Under the current system, 30 qualifying years of paying National Insurance are needed to receive the full state pension. Before April 2010 a woman needed 39 qualifying years and a man 44 qualifying years. From April 2017 the rules change and everyone should receive a minimum of £144, but because of the complexity of the systems, a lot of people will get less. Currently 2.8 million women receive a state pension of less than £80 a week.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • So let me try to explain in terms simple. The UK State Age Related Pension (SARP) is a very low pension compared to most of Europe but is made up by a series of means tested benefits, hence it becomes a de facto means tested pension. Nothing to apologise for, if I made it clear that the SARP had to be viewed as a package that includes a means tested component. As to our entitlement, yes, it is an entitlement, because each year that NI was paid entitles us to 130th of the amount allocated by the government of the day to be the current years SARP amount. As for the mess that the UK is in today, the principle cause is that Socialist governments have paid no attention to the continued increasing in government largesse in order to increase the standard of living while ignoring the effect of ever increasing Current Account imbalance and concentrating on the low hanging fruit that the financial services from the banking sector in the form of invisible exports rather than physical exports. To make matters worse the distortion of the GDP as a result of increasing immigration in order to reduce the demand for increased yields in order to sell Gilts was is another issue, and so much more besides. For a number of years we have suffered from appallingly low interest rates that have devalued our savings, another thing that gets overlooked. On the positive side living where I do we do get our Winter fuel allowance and annual UK pension increases :)

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @flintinchalk - steady on there, the proposed 30 hours of childcare for 3 and 4 year olds has not yet come into being (it should be in September if it doesn't get kicked down the line), so it's a wee bit unfair to suggest that it's something that currently helps anyone. As for low interest rates, that's not something anyone borrowing for a mortgage has any control over and of course they could shoot up at any point. Of course if they do the UK will be plunged into a serious recession as most the current economic good news is based in house building and mortgage borrowing. It's also a bit disingenuous to bring up the 14pc interest rate, it existed for a relatively short period and in addition to that house prices were no where near as inflated as they currently are. I think, and mercifully I'm far too young to remember, that the rate you refer to was a result of black Wednesday and the UK's withdrawal from the ERM. So more of a moment in time than a sustained trend. Over the course of someone's who has recently retired and finished paying off their mortgage the average percentage was about 5pc over the lifetime of the mortgage. But if exaggerating the historical record to make your situations seem more difficult or picking holes in the future generations choices is easier than addressing the fundamental inequities of the situation that's entirely up to you.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Flintnchalk. Leave the fake politics out - but funny I thought it was Thatcher's lot that really started the council house sell off, city big bang, and home ownership bubble. The truth is that these generations believed in perpetual growth and that future generations would always be better equipped than they were to meet their promises to (our) themselves. The 2007 crash put paid to that. Oddly if you want to go back to those promises you need fast growth, a young dynamic population - exactly 'NOT' what we voted for last June.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @koening - you said, and I quote from your opening gambit, "The age related pension in the UK is de facto means tested"; so that's where you said it. Perhaps in Switzerland 'de facto' means something else, but in the UK de facto means in fact. So your sentence reads, 'the age related pension in the UK is, in fact, means tested. The state pension isn't means tested, either de facto or de jure; it's available to all who pass the state pension age. However, I see you are, clearly, a fan of Trump-esque fake news and alternate truths. You've been caught out, instead of squirming so pathetically, accept it, acknowledge it, apologise and move on. @Francophile - you are 'entitled' to whatever you like friend, enjoy it. Whilst you swan around the garden centres of the land those that you've left in the lurch will take the responsible and difficult decisions required to clear up your mess. Absolutely no jealousy at all; it's strange that you think there would be... but I suppose that's just another symptom of your generations 'entitlement' mentality, you think everything is all about you. I'm pleased you generation were so arrogant and so disengaged from the problems of your age that you feel they are not your responsibility. This isn't about you or pensioner bashing, this is about ensuring the future of the country is sustainable. You need to stop taking these comments personally (constantly looking for offence and expressing 'faux outrage'), you need to start looking beyond the end of your nose and consider the wider societal picture.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Today's pensioners did not pay in for their own pensions , they paid in plenty to pay the pensions of those who had already retired. And the taxes to build the infrastructure. But Browns voters bought into the feel rich on cheap borrowing and low taxes and now no one wants to pay. Just the other week another bunch of statistics showed that the 45-55 something age group were the best office all of us, having had no student loans, cheaper mortgages and on average lower taxes and better benefits like child tax credits etc. And they were Browns generation. Having said that, this blame culture is corrosive. The truth is we have been sold down the river by the globalists, that's why our kids are struggling .

    Report this comment

    FlintinChalk

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • BANKING! Whoops.

    Report this comment

    Davidbrian552

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Francophile. You like me will receive our state pension and any other independent pension or saving scheme we may have. However, as with the NHS it was never envisaged that would all live into our 80's or even 90's with luck and hence was (and is) never adequately funded. We have assumed the next generation (or two) would somehow make good on our largesse. We have to ensure generational fairness.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • So, the age group which is more or less the first to have decent pensions built into their work contracts are being demonised on the basis of some selective statistics. Any mention of the erosion of the average working wage by the sheer numbers on minimum wage or the oversupply of workers in some sectors? Any mention of the fact that these pensioners contributed to their occupational pensions or private pensions and their salaries and spending were determined by those contributions? Never mind stumping up NI to support those whose pension contributions were affected by the war years. Any mention of the very high rate of personal borrowing in the UK where money is being borrowed to pay for imported cars , phones, holidays etc rather than people saving in a pension fund? Perhaps the authors of this paper should look at how much the over 65 age group spent as 25 year olds in comparison with younger generations. And at tax rates over the years. And the fact that those retiring now were forced into being home buyers at 14% interest because the council houses were already occupied by their elders. . We have too many people in the UK on wages which mean they are gaining too much in the way of tax credits etc and are not paying their way.The under 65 s do OK in other respects, low interest on mortgages, 30 hours free nursery care even for those warning £100,000 pa. This is like hate speech against over 65 s.

    Report this comment

    FlintinChalk

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Breaking new - socialism (and the Labour Party) responsible for the baking crash! The flat earth society are at it again. What sort of parallel universe are they in?

    Report this comment

    Davidbrian552

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Mention has been made of the Banking Crash. In fact this was initiated in the USA but had Brown not broken the UK banking regulation by taking responsibility from the Bank of England and not replaced it with anything near as diligent the UK banks would not have been able to act as they did. Brown and Blair broke the UK. Brown sold off UK gold reserves at a knock down price in order to get his greedy hands on the UK national wealth to pay towards their obscene agenda and not content with that broke the UK 'works' pension schemes. Leave our pension entitlements alone. We earned what we get and more besides. Instead concentrate on the devastating consequences of bad profligate political biased governments.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Monday morning and nothing has changed, all three prophets of Doom are up and at it as usual.Tory bashing ,pensioner bashing and the latest left wing rubbish. I have worked for 46 years, paid my taxes and NI so why can't I retire on a decent pension paid for by myself and my wife. Smells of jealousy.

    Report this comment

    francophile

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @ Rushallchap3. Firstly where did I write that the UK stateage related pension was means tested? Secondly the tax paid and the NI is indeed used to meet the current year government expenditure but by paying NI credit is built up that established the entitlement to a portion of the sum allocated by the government of the day to be paid to people who qualify for the state age related pension. It is NOT a benefit, it is an entitlement built up over time. When it comes to higher education, do keep in mind that the qualifications required to benefit from such tertiary education were such as to limit it to the most able and so those who would provide most to the country once they had graduated.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • There is truth in what RC3 says - for decades the obvious unfunded hole in state pension funding has been discussed but kicked own the road by successive politicians (more tax needed?) for purely short sighted political reasons culminating in the unaffordable, unsustainable triple lock. There is also a misplaced 'entitlement' culture in some pensioners that somehow they've 'paid-in' - they haven't by a long way paid-in enough. We all have some responsibility to save for our dottage. The triple lock will finish very soon and I guess return to inflation at best only else we will be like Greece. We need to help our our youngsters now.

    Report this comment

    Normal4Norfolk

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Work your whole life and just about scrape by, saving for your retirement so you don't end up on the bread-line but have enough put by that you can afford some nice touches like a holiday or to heat your house (which you've sacrificed in order to own, rather than throwing money away on rent). Then you're told you're a leech on society and should have your medical treatment rights removed.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • Breaking news, socialism was responsible for the banking crash! What universe do some people inhabit?

    Report this comment

    Davidbrian552

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @Tootyfrooty - If you bothered to read what I wrote you'd have realised I said that there ought to be a means tested top-up for those pensioners who are struggling. So I certainly would say I have a 'let 'em starve attitude', far from it. What I am saying is that for those who are doing quite nicely the state pension is an unnecessary boost to their personal finances to the detriment to the country and a whole, including their fellow pensioners. You seem to be suggesting that the state pension is barely enough, for some, to get by on. Why then is it ok to give people who have lost their job 40pc less than that pension and expect them to be ok? Far from letting anyone starve it would be better if benefits were there to help for people in their hour of need, the inference of your comment is they currently don't because the benefits pot is being spread to thinly, to a larger or lesser extent, on those who don't need it but feel 'entitled' to it. Plus I never said I 'won't feel the need to receive the state pension' when I retire, far from it. What I said was I neither expected or would feel entitled to receive one. But 'hey', as you would say, don't let an accurate reflection of my comments get in the way actually facing up to and addressing the dire situation that pensioners are forcing this country in to. Far easier to aggressively go after the people pointing out the obvious failings and shortcomings of the current crop of pensioners than dealing with the abysmal legacy you are leaving.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • What a load of old tosh being spouted here. Reduce the state pension? You do realise that these so called surveys generally are wholly innacurate? They ask a handful of people and then equate that to being representative of the entire population. In reality there are many pensioners who are living on and sometimes below the breadline. Rushallchap3 - you say that you wont feel the need to receive a state pension when you retire in 30 years time? Well I assume it will be to do with the fact that on your salary you're able to invest a nice lump into a private scheme - good for you. However, many of todays pensioners dont have that luxury because either they werent encouraged to pay into one or the schemes simply werent available. But hey, dont let that get in the way of your "let them starve" attitude. Pull up the ladder mate - Im ok...

    Report this comment

    Tootyfrooty

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • "....Don't try to place the blame on pensioners, blame Socialism, Socialists, and Unions..... " . They were in charge of the USA banking system when its reckless lending and dodgy dealing brought about the global financial crises ? The mad rubbish posted on here defies belief sometimes .

    Report this comment

    Larson Whipsnade

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • @koening - I'm not sure how things work in Switzerland and perhaps you are having trouble go,ogling your 'facts' from there. But there are two blatant lies in your comment, that i'll correct for you. The basic state pension in the UK is NOT means tested, in any way. The richest to the poorest receive it once the apply for it. Secondly, the pension is, of course, a benefit. Tax paid on salary or wages, as you know, is spent buy the government of the day as it is received. Income tax and more pertinently National Insurance tax is not some sort of down payment or deposit. I pay a handsome amount of tax (over £1,200 per month) and expect to do so for the next 30 years as a minimum; by the time I retire I don't expect there will be a state pension and I certainly don't think I'll be 'entitled' to anything come that time. It's interesting that you use the word 'entitled', it accurately sums up the attitude and arrogance of the current fresh crop of pensioners who feel 'entitled' to continue to take from the state (in addition to the free higher and further education and plentiful state housing which in effect kept the prices of private housing down which they took and then pulled up the ladder behind them), bankrupting the country for future generations without, apparently, the slightest regard or care for the havoc they wreaked ,and continue to wreak, on the generations following on from them. If they, collectively, had a shred of decency they would be, rightly, absolutely mortified by the way the have behaved over the years and the state that they have left this country in.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • I just won that £20 bet with myself.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • People who are retired and in receipt of a pension from their past employers are actually getting a part of the renumeration package that formed a part of their contract of employment that was entered into at the time that they started the job that they did. The age related pension in the UK is de facto means tested because it has to be made up by means tested benefits, as it stands the UK state pension is one of the lowest in Europe. As regards owning property that property had to be bought out of taxed income, income that had to be earned. In any case the state age related pension is NOT a benefit. It is a thing that we are absolutely entitled to because we spent years paying a portion of our earnings to pay the pension for those entitled to their pension while we worked. Today the UK is in deep trouble because of the malign acts of Labour governments and Unions. Labour governments redistributing wages and wealth, Labour governments inventing 'benefits' that distorted markets, housing being the worst example, punitive business taxation, and rolling out budgets that were unaffordable and had to be met by governments taking on loans (Gilts) and creating a situation whereby other non-Labour governments having to contimhue with the profligate spending in order to prevent social breakdown, that and more is the cause of the now essential austerity to limit the social damage of the 'train smash' that is coming. Don't try to place the blame on pensioners, blame Socialism, Socialists, and Unions.

    Report this comment

    koenig

    Monday, February 13, 2017

  • This is the biggest disgrace of our age; it's morally wrong. The solution is simple, the state pension must be immediately reduced to the same level as job seekers allowance. This means reducing the current pension from £119.30 per week to £73.10. The difference, £46.20, should be available to those in need be it ought to be means tested. Pensioners are the root of the financial problems of this country and after the global financial crisis of 2008 there should have been a fundamental rethink of how we deal with the single largest group of benefit recipients in this country. We can no longer afford to feather the nest of the baby boomers. It is the responsibility of every generation to ensure that the generations that follow enjoy greater opportunities and prosperity than they themselves enjoyed. On this charge the current crop of pensioners, especially those who younger than 70, have woefully failed. You were asked to improve the nation on your watch and you, evidently, neglected your responsibilities. You ought to be absolutely and utterly ashamed of yourselves.

    Report this comment

    Rushallchap3

    Monday, February 13, 2017

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

Management Jobs

Show Job Lists

Newsletter Sign Up

Sign up to receive our regular email newsletter

Insight

A global boom in the use of smart meters is set to fuel the growth of a pioneering East Anglian engineering company after it struck a major production deal with a leading Indian manufacturer.

I’ve seen and heard quite a lot over the years, so it takes quite a bit to shock me.

Green 100

cover

Enjoy the Green 100
digital edition

Read
0

Meet the Team

Mark Shields

Business Editor

|

Chris Hill

Agricultural and Farming Editor

|

Business Most Read

Awards

Norfolk Future 50 EDP Business Awards Green 100

Business Most Commented