8 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

Also funny how they fail to mention that people who provided for themselves continue to pay income tax when retired. And VAT. Funny how they never mention all the income tax, VAT and NICs that pensions paid through their working life. Funny they the don't mention IHT. Funny how they don't mention the qualifying period was 44 years, I contributed for 54 years

The self-centred whineyness is a huge part of it

On 5/27/2026 at 4:22 AM, baansgr said:

I watch morning TV, I see people on QT, I see it on tok tok, FB and in the comments.... All bashing the OAPs

That's your problem. You watch the very places stuffed full of hatred towards anything that will give the dopamine hit now demanded by many. The places which also tediously claim that London is the most dangerous place in the world and you will die within hours if you visit (despite being one of the safest capitals on the planet)

The triple lock was set up to a) give the impression that the government cares about pensioners and b) to cover up the fact that the UK pension is so poor when compared to all its competitors.

Lack of available housing is a problem. When I bought my first house back in the 80s, we had it very easy - I got a place for £30000 when my salary was a modest £12k - 2.5 x salary. The same house today would cost around £650000 and the same sort of job would pay around £32K - 20 x salary.

Lack of decent jobs is a problem. Add to that the disgraceful way the youngsters were treated during covid - closing schools, having uni courses by zoom (but still paying the full cost) and taking away all the schemes to help the young into work just to save money, while pouring money into the pockets of the wealthy by way of covid recovery loans and more tax breaks. But not many oldies cared about that, preferring to label them as lazy - parroting the line spun in the gutter press.

The more recent idea seems to be to treat all youngsters as feckless and idle and to force them into work by cutting any tiny benefit they may have been entitled and cancelling any schemes designed to help them into a job.

I can understand the young complaining about the privileged oldies who constantly complain about the deprived young, but when speaking to them I don't find any real animosity but then I approach them with sympathy, not constantly whining and moaning. I can see that their life is far worse than I ever experienced at their age and yet there are still plenty who are happy to exploit their fears and make lots of money from the misery they expound.

This generation is the first that will be poorer than their parents because a lot of the oldies have an 'I'm all right, Jack' attitude and are happy to let the young subsidise their lives but not lift a finger to help them.

5 hours ago, baansgr said:

An 85 year old with a property worth £350,000 with a pension of just over £700 a month....council tax this year is almost £300 a month...leaving this "wealthy" pensioner £400 to buy food and pay utilities...get real..you are living in cloud cuckoo land

Why is the pension only £700 per month. The current state pension for a four weekly period, as near as a damn it a month, is £975.20. If this person is below the minimum why aren't they on pension credit?

27 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

If the Nazi Silent Gen had won WW2 Yookay would probably still be 99% white.
Yeah so maybe "wE'd aLl bE sPeaKing gERman n0w" but that would be better than what's happened.

Yookay silent gen were fooled - fought for NOTHING since Poland was given to Stalin)- and
England was sold out / given away by their degen boomer kids generation.

Stick to X with your vile hatred and have a spliff

On 5/27/2026 at 7:59 AM, Hummin said:

All they are doing is pushing more people onto social benefits and disability retirement.

The state wants control. They make people beg, wait, and stay trapped inside the system, instead of letting them take their hard-earned pension and live where they choose, whether that is Spain, Asia, or somewhere else.

Instead of giving people freedom after a lifetime of work, they tie them down at home and call it policy.

Been the plan for over 50 years, a benefit based society.

Early 70s the so called state pension was moved from the National Insurance Act to the Social Security Act as part of the plan.

In 2005 a reference was made in the House of Lords to the "Citizen's Pension" a non contributory means tested pension for all.

The views of some are influenced by government rhetoric rather than actions.

I’m not at all convinced young people hate pensioners.

There’s plenty of effort to stir hatred in British society, be that hatred of pensioners, young people, immigrants, women, men. LGBTQ, people adhering to any of the religions, motorists, cyclists, dog owners, cat owners, the list goes on.

But do many people actually hate animals of these groups?

Some do I’m sure, but I suspect they are a minority, and probably hate people from multiple groups, most of whom they’ve never met.

Edited May 28May 28 by Chomper Higgot

1 hour ago, Tourist2 said:

If the Nazi Silent Gen had won WW2 Yookay would probably still be 99% white.
Yeah so maybe "wE'd aLl bE sPeaKing gERman n0w" but that would be better than what's happened.

Yookay silent gen were fooled - fought for NOTHING since Poland was given to Stalin)- and
England was sold out / given away by their degen boomer kids generation.

Forgive me for being a few days late.

Welcome to the forum.

It’s always nice to see new members, with the possibility they might voice opinions we’ve never heard before.

6 hours ago, baansgr said:

Ill give you a perfect example...and maybe closer tou your home in Paignton.

An 85 year old with a property worth £350,000 with a pension of just over £700 a month....council tax this year is almost £300 a month...leaving this "wealthy" pensioner £400 to buy food and pay utilities...get real..you are living in cloud cuckoo land....I suppose you think they should downsize???...are you that cruel, you know what that would do to this person???... And the sad fact is, this is the state so many pensioners find themselves in, can't afford the heating, buying the cheapest food and even going to food banks...This was the hate, nastiness or whatever you want to call it, that the young seem to think is ok

Just a thought, this person really needs some good financial advice. Guessing £350,000 house in Paington must be on the small size. Why is the Council tax £300 per month? That is £100 a month more than I pay on a house worth £100,000 more, in Hertfordshire 20 miles from central London. I get p155ed at paying £200 a month, for what. We can guess. They should get council tax relief. How can nearly half their monthly income go on paying the local council, disgraceful.

To the other comments, yes young people do have it tough. And whose fault is that, certainly not pensioners. Not that will stop this or a future Government screwing pensioners into the ground. Means testing is only a question of time. No shortage of money the pay France half a billion pounds to do sod all. Then they give them another half a billion pounds to carry on doing sod all.

Just in the news, more than one million young people not in work or education. Costing £125 billion a year. This is why this country is ****ed. It costs more to keep people out of work than if you paid them to actually do work. And we continue with uncontrolled immigration.

On 5/26/2026 at 9:17 PM, baansgr said:

The unfair frozen pension fiasco is something else which I didn't mention. It never comes up on the talk shows, only triple lock...yes they like control

This is 100% unfair.

4 hours ago, mrfill said:

Lack of available housing is a problem. When I bought my first house back in the 80s, we had it very easy - I got a place for £30000 when my salary was a modest £12k - 2.5 x salary. The same house today would cost around £650000 and the same sort of job would pay around £32K - 20 x salary.

Lack of decent jobs is a problem. Add to that the disgraceful way the youngsters were treated during covid - closing schools, having uni courses by zoom (but still paying the full cost) and taking away all the schemes to help the young into work just to save money, while pouring money into the pockets of the wealthy by way of covid recovery loans and more tax breaks. But not many oldies cared about that, preferring to label them as lazy - parroting the line spun in the gutter press.

The more recent idea seems to be to treat all youngsters as feckless and idle and to force them into work by cutting any tiny benefit they may have been entitled and cancelling any schemes designed to help them into a job.

Mine late 70's less than £14000. But doesn't make rich as I still need some where to live.

The university thing, as you say zoom lectures, field trips cancelled. Still paid full price. Our kids were well and truly ripped off and suffered badly. All while that **** Johnson was holding parties.

We will be gone soon enough.

Your idealism will be crushed by pragmatism, just like it was for us

Hmm, lots of replies from either end of the spectrum.

74 now, and live mainly in Thailand now. In the UK, I benefited from free Healthcare, subsidised university and occasional unemployment benefit; so never griped about paying National insurance, income tax and VAT.

I bought a house because in the 70's couldn't find somewhere to rent. Glad I did, because I made as much from increasing property values as I did from working.

Got shafted by redundancy and divorce at 55-58 so lost the house, and retired to Thailand as no jobs available. Had a,modest pension but wouldn't have survived if not for my state pension, which when it started meant I could actually save again for those unplanned expenses instead of bleeding the savings. So I got a fair deal out of the welfare state more or less. I still pay some income tax.

But the last 25 years have really screwed the young. House prices and rents through the roof, no free university and aterrible job market (takes an average of 140 applications to find a job now).

But you cannot make pensioners homeless to house the young, unless they adopt the Soylent green option. As has been said, government has floundered over the past 30 years to control living costs and has relied on migration to boost GDP (which has actually ended up reducing GDP per capita) while allowing wealth to flow to the few.

Yes, the young have a right to complain, but pensioners are not the real problem.

19 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

Just in the news, more than one million young people not in work or education. Costing £125 billion a year. This is why this country is ****ed. It costs more to keep people out of work than if you paid them to actually do work. And we continue with uncontrolled immigration.

Uncontrolled immigration works great for the parasite class :
Keeps property prices high &
Pushes down wages

Gotta wonder how long they can keep this going (dole culture and importing 1M+ low skilled 3rd world immigrants every year - add in AI and it looks extremely unsustainable).

21 hours ago, baansgr said:

Stick to X with your vile hatred and have a spliff

OK Boomer - These are US numbers but I guess they still count as vile hatred lols:

26 minutes ago, rickudon said:

Hmm, lots of replies from either end of the spectrum.

74 now, and live mainly in Thailand now. In the UK, I benefited from free Healthcare, subsidised university and occasional unemployment benefit; so never griped about paying National insurance, income tax and VAT.

I bought a house because in the 70's couldn't find somewhere to rent. Glad I did, because I made as much from increasing property values as I did from working.

Got shafted by redundancy and divorce at 55-58 so lost the house, and retired to Thailand as no jobs available. Had a,modest pension but wouldn't have survived if not for my state pension, which when it started meant I could actually save again for those unplanned expenses instead of bleeding the savings. So I got a fair deal out of the welfare state more or less. I still pay some income tax.

But the last 25 years have really screwed the young. House prices and rents through the roof, no free university and aterrible job market (takes an average of 140 applications to find a job now).

But you cannot make pensioners homeless to house the young, unless they adopt the Soylent green option. As has been said, government has floundered over the past 30 years to control living costs and has relied on migration to boost GDP (which has actually ended up reducing GDP per capita) while allowing wealth to flow to the few.

Yes, the young have a right to complain, but pensioners are not the real problem.

Students use to work in bars or similar, do a 3 year BA and on ya way...now they refuse to work while studying and taking the biggest student loans they can get so they can take a gap year..go figure

19 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

Just in the news, more than one million young people not in work or education. Costing £125 billion a year. This is why this country is ****ed. It costs more to keep people out of work than if you paid them to actually do work. And we continue with uncontrolled immigration.

'NEETS'.

Government are making it hard for young UK natives with IT/Computing Qualifications fresh out of Uni etc with this type of nonsense:

Under the new UK-India trade deal, huge Indian IT outsourcing firms (TCS, Infosys, etc.) can temporarily post their Indian employees to the UK for up to 3 years and pay ***zero UK National Insurance (neither employer nor employee NI)***. How it disadvantages UK IT professionals:

• Indian contractors become ~15.8% cheaper on payroll costs compared to UK hires or UK contractors.

• This helps Indian firms win more UK contracts by offering lower rates.

• UK companies (clients) therefore have a financial incentive to use Indian posted staff instead of local British IT professionals or contractors.

Result: Increased competition and wage/ job pressure on UK native IT workers (so get stuck on the dole).

Apparently it's recipicol but not sure many Yookay professionals are going to work in India - if any!

Once you consider that Labour (and the BoE - run by Fabian Socialist Andrew Bailey) are not idiots but are doing this stuff on purpose, it all makes much more sense.

FWIW, I guess younger gens blame the boomers for all this stuff as the boomers are still in control and younger gens (as well as many boomers tbf) are watching whats happening, seeing 'olds' in charge and are thinking "WTF are u old ****s doing to this country?"

Edited May 29May 29 by Tourist2

23 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

Funny how they don't mention the qualifying period was 44 years, I contributed for 54 years.

You would have to explain how you managed 54 years, from 16 to 65 is only 49 years as I have. There was no NI collected after the age of 65. I left school at 15 and started work but no NI or tax at that age, gave upwork at 63 and got a couple of years credits at the end.

You are spot on about the 44 years, was dropped to 30 before going to 35, and suddenly there was no money for pensioners. Surprise, surprise.

The rot set in during the 60s when the labour government became more concerned about those that hadn't made any contributions than those that had.

2 minutes ago, sandyf said:

You would have to explain how you managed 54 years, from 16 to 65 is only 49 years as I have. There was no NI collected after the age of 65. I left school at 15 and started work but no NI or tax at that age, gave upwork at 63 and got a couple of years credits at the end.

You are spot on about the 44 years, was dropped to 30 before going to 35, and suddenly there was no money for pensioners. Surprise, surprise.

The rot set in during the 60s when the labour government became more concerned about those that hadn't made any contributions than those that had.

I paid NI since age 16 starting in 1972 ......... about 44 years (4 of those voluntary) to get my full pension.

22 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m not at all convinced young people hate pensioners.

There’s plenty of effort to stir hatred in British society, be that hatred of pensioners, young people, immigrants, women, men. LGBTQ, people adhering to any of the religions, motorists, cyclists, dog owners, cat owners, the list goes on.

But do many people actually hate animals of these groups?

Some do I’m sure, but I suspect they are a minority, and probably hate people from multiple groups, most of whom they’ve never met.

Let's get rid of the Islamist and other sexual deviants first.

7 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I paid NI since age 16 starting in 1972 ......... about 44 years (4 of those voluntary) to get my full pension.

The reduction came in on April 2010, I had reached the 44 in 2007.

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

The reduction came in on April 2010, I had reached the 44 in 2007.

I paid 54 years and there are despicable people out there who begrudge me getting a meagre state pension.

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

You would have to explain how you managed 54 years, from 16 to 65 is only 49 years as I have. There was no NI collected after the age of 65. I left school at 15 and started work but no NI or tax at that age, gave upwork at 63 and got a couple of years credits at the end.

You are spot on about the 44 years, was dropped to 30 before going to 35, and suddenly there was no money for pensioners. Surprise, surprise.

The rot set in during the 60s when the labour government became more concerned about those that hadn't made any contributions than those that had.

I paid NICs after 65? Good point, now is it the employer's or the employee's contributions that fund pensions. I continued working after 65 but freelance so continued with NICs but I honestly can't remember if the employee's stop or the employers. I think the employee's stop so you are correct in that respect but I continued paying employer's NICs. So in all was paying NICs either directly or indirectly for 54 years.

On 5/27/2026 at 10:41 AM, baansgr said:

Why are British Pensioners so despised

Not only pensioners, some of the elderly I see are grumpy, miserable guys.

My neighbour, he's retired, well off, loads of savings, not on the aged pension.

Oh, my God he's hard work, always moaning, never happy. He's been living here nearly 20 years now, still doesn't know his way around. He asks me to accompany him when he goes somewhere in his car, the guy is always on the horn, blasting the Thai road users, calling out stupid Thai. He's relentless, I won't go with him anymore.

Edited May 30May 30 by SAFETY FIRST

11 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

I paid NICs after 65? Good point, now is it the employer's or the employee's contributions that fund pensions. I continued working after 65 but freelance so continued with NICs but I honestly can't remember if the employee's stop or the employers. I think the employee's stop so you are correct in that respect but I continued paying employer's NICs. So in all was paying NICs either directly or indirectly for 54 years.

This is the way I understood it, the age being 65 in my case. I was also under the impression that employers paid on behalf of an employee which would also stop at retirement age.

1. State Pension Age: You stop paying most types of NI as soon as you reach the official State Pension age, even if you continue to work. [1]

2. Employees: If you are still working, you must provide your employer with proof of age (such as a birth certificate or passport) so they can stop making deductions from your pay. [1]

3. Self-Employed: You stop paying Class 2 NI contributions immediately. For Class 4 NI, you stop paying on April 6 (the start of the new tax year) following your 65th birthday or after you reach State Pension age. [1]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

This is the way I understood it, the age being 65 in my case. I was also under the impression that employers paid on behalf of an employee which would also stop at retirement age.

1. State Pension Age: You stop paying most types of NI as soon as you reach the official State Pension age, even if you continue to work. [1]

2. Employees: If you are still working, you must provide your employer with proof of age (such as a birth certificate or passport) so they can stop making deductions from your pay. [1]

3. Self-Employed: You stop paying Class 2 NI contributions immediately. For Class 4 NI, you stop paying on April 6 (the start of the new tax year) following your 65th birthday or after you reach State Pension age. [1]

Employers do still pay the employers NICs for over 65s. I was freelancing through my own limited company so had to pay the employers NICs but not the employees contributions. Another strange thing, I think I have this right. Once you have started to draw on your private pension you then can't make contributions if you continue working.

On 5/27/2026 at 7:41 AM, baansgr said:

I worked 2 full time and 1 part time job

Sure you did! 🤣

22 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

Employers do still pay the employers NICs for over 65s. I was freelancing through my own limited company so had to pay the employers NICs but not the employees contributions. Another strange thing, I think I have this right. Once you have started to draw on your private pension you then can't make contributions if you continue working.

As I suspected any NIC paid after pension age is not included in the employee NI record, so now 50 years would be max rather than the 49 in my case.

"Employer National Insurance Contributions (NICs) are treated as a separate business tax and do not get added to the employee's National Insurance record. They do not count toward your entitlement to the State Pension or other benefits. [1, 2]"

On 5/27/2026 at 7:41 AM, baansgr said:

I have seen a growing hate towards pensioners from not ony the government but also from those under 50.

How can you begrudge people that have normally worked for 50 years for their pension.

You see it on a daily basis on morning TV or the internet. There are two main gripes, one being the triple lock and secondly they own their own homes.

The triple lock was barely mentioned till 3 or 4 years ago but has been in place since 2011..when pensioners actually received a good increase...this years 4.8% increase for those on the new state pension is only a 1% more increase than those on benefits...hardly an expense and only a fraction of pensioners receive it.

Pensioners are now having to work up to 7 years longer than expected, you really think a 67 year old man can climb ladders, dig roads or do other hard laborious jobs? Wouldn't it be best for them to retire and make way for youngsters, after all they are complaining there is no work?

So, you buy a house do improvements over 40 years and are expected to sell it...why?..I really don't understand the mentality, and before we even go there..my first property in UK was £60,000 in 1990 with interest at 15%...same property now is £220,000 with rates a quarter of that...I worked 2 full time and 1 part time job just to afford the £630 mortgage at the time.

Divorce, death of someone close and moving house are the 3 most stressful things that can happen to someone of age...is their no compassion?

Youngsters forget, they have sick pay, maternity pay, holiday pay, 37 hour working week all of which was fought for by the pensioners they are hating on... it's all wrong

I think it's jealousy, they are just so envious and too lazy to work

Though I can understand your complaints there a some flaws in it.

Simple speaking there is only ONE cake but growing eaters.

So to increase the retirement age according to the life expectancy is not surprising.

I did eg not working for 50 years, almost near to 35, and I admit, I would be ok to work for at least 5 years more. (and I'm able to climb up a roof)

So, to reduce high pensions by 5 or percent would be tolerable and would give the younger ones a chance of a pension which will be much more than only social welfare.

Those who are rich have to share with the poor.

If not, countries will risk their social peace.

The young ones, you are describing, envy you because they can see that the system as it is currently is very unfair.

4 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Though I can understand your complaints there a some flaws in it.

Simple speaking there is only ONE cake but growing eaters.

So to increase the retirement age according to the life expectancy is not surprising.

I did eg not working for 50 years, almost near to 35, and I admit, I would be ok to work for at least 5 years more. (and I'm able to climb up a roof)

So, to reduce high pensions by 5 or percent would be tolerable and would give the younger ones a chance of a pension which will be much more than only social welfare.

Those who are rich have to share with the poor.

If not, countries will risk their social peace.

The young ones, you are describing, envy you because they can see that the system as it is currently is very unfair.

How old are you?

6 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Though I can understand your complaints there a some flaws in it.

Simple speaking there is only ONE cake but growing eaters.

So to increase the retirement age according to the life expectancy is not surprising.

I did eg not working for 50 years, almost near to 35, and I admit, I would be ok to work for at least 5 years more. (and I'm able to climb up a roof)

So, to reduce high pensions by 5 or percent would be tolerable and would give the younger ones a chance of a pension which will be much more than only social welfare.

Those who are rich have to share with the poor.

If not, countries will risk their social peace.

The young ones, you are describing, envy you because they can see that the system as it is currently is very unfair.

Just kill the poor.

Problem solved!