Jeremy Hunt commits Tories to Triple Lock

[Billy Horner]

Not sure what you mean by pulling the ladder up after themselves with the triple lock? If we don’t increase the pension by this each year the pension will be smaller for each year it is not implemented. ( this is why the doctors are asking for 35% pay increase to take their pay back to where it should be in part.) therefor people who are 20 plus years of state pension age will receive a state pension much worse.

Except that the government periodically reviews the age at which people are entitled to receive state pension and one of the criteria is that total expenditure should stay below 6% of GDP. Therefore, every time the current state pension increases by more than the rate of economic growth (which the triple lock pretty much guarantees), then the age at which current working-age people are likely to receive their state pension also goes up.

The triple lock is quite simply a bribe to current pensioners and is of virtually zero benefit to anyone else. In the long-term, it just makes the system more and more unaffordable, meaning that today's workers become less and less likely to receive a state pension at all.

 

[r00fie1]

Does anybody really believe anything said by this lot?
They are all LIARS telling LIES!

 

[Laughing]

I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other but pensions in the uk are pretty bad when compared to pensions across the EU. They needed to rise and rise substantially.

I think we are currently 17th in Europe, you would expect us to do a bit better than that.

 

[Uwefuchs]

The problem we have in this country is that the pensioners will be pitted against the junior doctors/nurses/railway workers etc. The triple lock isn't about looking after the pensioners it's a bribe to win votes. Then we'll hear about how the government can't give nurses a fair pay rise because the money isn't there.

I'm not saying the pensioners don't deserve the triple lock but I think workers should be given payrises which match inflation as well. I live in a road where the majority of people are retired and most of them seem very comfortable financially, most of them had good jobs, good private pensions and could buy property a lot cheaper than the current generation can.

It would be nice if working people could enjoy a few of the benefits of working hard as well. Yearly pay rises which match inflation so you can afford to live a comfortable life, support a family and enjoy 2 weeks in the sun. That's a luxury now for a lot of working people not a basic standard of living.

 

[1finny]

I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other but pensions in the uk are pretty bad when compared to pensions across the EU. They needed to rise and rise substantially.

I think we are currently 17th in Europe, you would expect us to do a bit better than that.

Yes - we treat our pensioners appallingly relative to other countries.

I’m not sure how they respond to the wealthy pensioners tho - it would be good to find a system that gives more to those in need. Accepting, of course means testing costs ££££

 

[thewanderer]

Maybe the wrong adverb. But you could be saying to people coming into their benefit years that the previous commitment to non means tested payments based on their history of NI payments no longer applied, a means tested system would be in place.

While it isn't a savings scheme (I think we all know it is paid out of current taxation), the government wouldn't be able to just change the agreed benefits based on decades of government policies and statements without legal challenge.

The system can be changed I guess with some notice for future pensioners to make alternative arrangements. I guess even then you would be needing to give the current working population years, if not decades, for them to make alternative arrangements to compensate for the possible loss of future pension.

Maybe this why Sunak and Hunt are now floating this abolish NI idea, to break the link that has been established between paying into NI and future state pension entitlement.

Of course they could change it.

 

[thewanderer]

NOT A BENEFIT

It absolutely is a benefit. It is paid for out of current taxation like the rest of the welfare state.

 

[thewanderer]

It's not a benefit but you wouldn't think so reading and listening to much of the media. Their propaganda is picked up and regurgitated, despite it not being true.

What propaganda?

 

[thewanderer]

State benefit is taxable, whatever you get is taken from your yearly tax allowance at source. Then you pay tax on your private pension also. It's not all milk and honey.

State benefit is below the free tax allowance so it is not taxable on its own.

 

[Transitarmy]

State benefit is below the free tax allowance so it is not taxable on its own.

Your free. tax allowance is reduced by your state pension amount.

 

[Laughing]

Yes - we treat our pensioners appallingly relative to other countries.

I’m not sure how they respond to the wealthy pensioners tho - it would be good to find a system that gives more to those in need. Accepting, of course means testing costs ££££

Yup. I haven't really got an answer except nobody should be homeless or hungry in an economy the size of ours. It shouldn't be the retired or the working.

 

[Osboro]

Tax the rich not the pension.
Introduce an asset tax.

 

[Nano]

I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other but pensions in the uk are pretty bad when compared to pensions across the EU. They needed to rise and rise substantially.

I think we are currently 17th in Europe, you would expect us to do a bit better than that.

It's not at bad at that in reality. We had this conversation on another thread recently. Other countries like France and Germany have their version of employer and occupational pension administered by the state so are included in their figures. The "replacement rate" which is calculated as how much of your wages a pension covers is a better metric. When all are included then we are pretty much comparable.

It's a hard thing to compare though because of different contribution rates, eligibility, pension age, cost of living etc.

 

[Laughing]

It's not at bad at that in reality. We had this conversation on another thread recently. Other countries like France and Germany have their version of employer and occupational pension administered by the state so are included in their figures. The "replacement rate" which is calculated as how much of your wages a pension covers is a better metric. When all are included then we are pretty much comparable.

It's a hard thing to compare though because of different contribution rates, eligibility, pension age, cost of living etc.

The breakeven rate was the metric I used nano. We were still 17th though marginally above 0%.

Luxembourg was no1 with a monthly pension of 5 grand and a similar cost of living to the uk.

 

[Ingleby_Flash]

He has pledged the Conservatives to this if they win a General Election on Kuenssberg programme this morning.
So I imagine that pensioners will be looking for Labour to follow suit.

They tried to take away the triple lock a couple of years ago and got a kicking for it, so they’re not going to visit that topic in an election year. I know they won’t win, but I’d bet my pension that if they did it would be gone at the first budget.

 

[Nano]

The breakeven rate was the metric I used nano. We were still 17th though marginally above 0%.

Luxembourg was no1 with a monthly pension of 5 grand and a similar cost of living to the uk.

Luxembourg is weird because it's tiny but has some very high paying jobs that really skew data. 5 grand is a lot but it's below the average wage of 6 grand there and people on low wages will be getting nowhere near that.

We're definitely not one of the best and I wouldn't argue that we are but we do have some major benefits that other countries don't which don't come into any of the figures and that is things like the NHS which means there is never a need to pay for any treatment and our high level of home ownership so no housing costs for the majority.

That's what makes it tricky to compare effectively.

I'm of the opinion that the (typically younger) people need to understand that scrapping the triple lock wouldn't really harm the current generation of retirees. Any changes to pensions will affect the people due to receive them most in the future and reducing them now will have a massive compounding effect when those younger people are eligible to receive theirs. The best thing people can do is always makes sure that pensions are protected and push back against any reductions in the rate and any increases in the age it will be received. I hear loads of people saying things like "there won't be a state pension when I get to that age" but of course there won't if you are always negative about it. It'll be something easy for government to reduce if everyone supports reducing it.

 

[NYboro]

It absolutely is a benefit. It is paid for out of current taxation like the rest of the welfare state.

It's only paid for that way because successive governments have used NI as just another tax.

 

[Lottowyn]

State benefit is below the free tax allowance so it is not taxable on its own.

The thresholds for paying tax have not been updated in budgets and thus changes to state pension have made people pay tax who did not previously do so. I can see this happening with people I know.
This of course means that every income is included when calculating tax to be paid. Thus state pension, private pensions and other income are all taxable.

 

[sherlock]

How about reducing the welfare bill by ensuring employers pay people enough not to need benefits to top up their wages?

A huge part of the welfare bill is spent on subsidising private sector employers.

 

[Blf]

Due to fiscal drag from this April the basic state pension is now about £1200 short of the average personal allowance. Anyone with any occupational pension will be paying tax on it.
Many in this thread seem to be talking about pensioners like they are some evil subsection of society
They are your parents and grandparents and in time they will be you.
I think I've stumbled into some sort of Tory chancellor traning group.
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
"