8 minutes ago, baansgr said:

good of them to pay for my pension

That's more like it. Show some appreciation you miserble old ****.

As for the LibDums 555.
They pulled that trick on students years ago - said they'd cancel university fees -

Got power and u-turned.
Intelligent people learn from other's mistakes.

Anyway, be thankful for what you're getting - it's likely already much more than u ever paid in from your parking attendent job.

12 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Still, good of them to pay for my pension

Do they have a say in this matter?

23 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

Do they have a say in this matter?

Well they can vote, same as anyone else...who cares whether they have a say..as long as they keep on paying for my life of luxury, gen Y and all the other lot.x.z millennials..just keep on paying for my relaxation and something you will never likely receive 😁 😁 😁

On 6/29/2026 at 2:48 AM, baansgr said:

The average life for UK male is 78 years old and government say you should spend a third in retirement...so the age should be 55.

Much as I would like it if this were the case, you're using the wrong numbers unfortunately.

The government's intention is that those that reach pension age should then expect to have around a third of their adult life remaining. This takes out of the equation all those that have died in their childhood or 20s or 40s etc, and it is these early deaths that bring the average down to the figure of 78 that you quote.

For those that reach 66/67 they can then expect to live until they're about 88 so about 21 years, and their working life (which is calculated as starting at 20 years of age) would be 46 years.

21/67 = 31.3% so is enough to satisfy the requirement of up to 32% which crept in over time from the "third" used previously.

Don't shoot the messenger.

2 minutes ago, treetops said:

Much as I would like it if this were the case, you're using the wrong numbers unfortunately.

The government's intention is that those that reach pension age should then expect to have around a third of their adult life remaining. This takes out of the equation all those that have died in their childhood or 20s or 40s etc, and it is these early deaths that bring the average down to the figure of 78 that you quote.

For those that reach 66/67 they can then expect to live until they're about 88 so about 21 years, and their working life (which is calculated as starting at 20 years of age) would be 46 years.

21/67 = 31.3% so is enough to satisfy the requirement of up to 32% which crept in over time from the "third" used previously.

Don't shoot the messenger.

What I find strange is that now the retirement age is 67 and no doubt will go higher we will have truck drivers, heavy machinery operators, ships captains, airline pilots may be working until 67 or higher. And yet along with all the hatred of old people are the campaigns to drivers over 70 off of the roads or at least to have annual tests. So on the one hand you will have over 70s incapable of driving a car but before long you will have 70 year old driving heavy trucks. Can't have it both ways.

44 minutes ago, treetops said:

Much as I would like it if this were the case, you're using the wrong numbers unfortunately.

The government's intention is that those that reach pension age should then expect to have around a third of their adult life remaining. This takes out of the equation all those that have died in their childhood or 20s or 40s etc, and it is these early deaths that bring the average down to the figure of 78 that you quote.

For those that reach 66/67 they can then expect to live until they're about 88 so about 21 years, and their working life (which is calculated as starting at 20 years of age) would be 46 years.

21/67 = 31.3% so is enough to satisfy the requirement of up to 32% which crept in over time from the "third" used previously.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Interesting, massaged figures to portray a lie.. where did you get this from would like to read it myself

36 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

What I find strange is that now the retirement age is 67 and no doubt will go higher we will have truck drivers, heavy machinery operators, ships captains, airline pilots may be working until 67 or higher. And yet along with all the hatred of old people are the campaigns to drivers over 70 off of the roads or at least to have annual tests. So on the one hand you will have over 70s incapable of driving a car but before long you will have 70 year old driving heavy trucks. Can't have it both ways.

Same as voting for 16 year olds that can't drink, smoke, watch an x rated movie or even drive a car..it's all nonsense to save money....but 13 million OAPs is a very large voting block, that is only going to get bigger

28 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Interesting, massaged figures to portray a lie.. where did you get this from would like to read it myself

This was the forerunner to it all I think from 13 years ago, but there's lots more out there which explains it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c2de5ed915d7d70d1d16d/spa-background-note-051213_tpf_final.pdf

There's this if you have the will to read it.

https://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/media/w55f13ml/20160908-report-the-distributional-impact-of-spa-rises-final.pdf

55 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Interesting, massaged figures to portray a lie.. where did you get this from would like to read it myself

• Period life expectancy at birth in the UK in 2021 to 2023 was 78.8 years for males and 82.8 years for females, while period life expectancy at age 65 years was 18.5 years for males and 21.0 years for females.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/2021to2023additionaldata

Here is a link to an Excel spreadsheet.

1 hour ago, baansgr said:

Same as voting for 16 year olds that can't drink, smoke, watch an x rated movie or even drive a car..it's all nonsense to save money....but 13 million OAPs is a very large voting block, that is only going to get bigger

Just found this "for State Pension purposes starts on 6 April before their 16th birthday and ends on 5 April before they reach State Pension age’. " Now school leaving age remains 16 however teenagers have to remain in some sort of further education until 18. So why has the qualifying period for pensions been moved into line with what UK law says. ie 16 or 17 year olds should not be working so the two years 16 to 17 should not be considered for pension contributions.

Uk government is plainly robbing it's retirees and their government pensions at any excuse. But since the people are accepting it, why Stop ? Not to mention all the money given to the residents of Buckhingham.

Canada life and Scottish widows offer a single life level annuity of £13,077 per annum for just over £150,000...so I compounded my NI payments over 47 years and I would have had just shy of £200,000...anyone else think we are being robbed...or are we selfish?..you are definitely not getting back more than you put in

2 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Canada life and Scottish widows offer a single life level annuity of £13,077 per annum for just over £150,000...so I compounded my NI payments over 47 years and I would have had just shy of £200,000...anyone else think we are being robbed...or are we selfish?..you are definitely not getting back more than you put in

It's not selfish per se to expect what you were promised. The problem is these huge programs are blowing the budgets of the West with the aging population.

6 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

It's not selfish per se to expect what you were promised. The problem is these huge programs are blowing the budgets of the West with the aging population

The ageing population has paid...unless they received NI credits.

3 hours ago, SingAPorn said:

Uk government is plainly robbing it's retirees and their government pensions at any excuse. But since the people are accepting it, why Stop ? Not to mention all the money given to the residents of Buckhingham.

Not a great lover of the Royals since Lizzie passed away but you imagine how many tourists UK would get if it wasn't for the Royal Family. The King published only a few weeks ago that he's paid £12.9 million, so I would think they are actually a positive contributor to the economy.

Windsor Castle, Buck House, Balmoral all brings in billions of tourists money

4 hours ago, baansgr said:

Canada life and Scottish widows offer a single life level annuity of £13,077 per annum for just over £150,000...so I compounded my NI payments over 47 years and I would have had just shy of £200,000...anyone else think we are being robbed...or are we selfish?..you are definitely not getting back more than you put in

If you increase the £13,077 by a third you'd get £17,436 per year with no increases, so they will have paid out £274,617 over 21 years.

If you were starting on the new state pension this year you would get £12,548 per year. That then increases annually, and if I use 2.5% as the increase, and last for 21 years, the government will have paid out just above £341,000 over that period.

4 hours ago, baansgr said:

Not a great lover of the Royals since Lizzie passed away but you imagine how many tourists UK would get if it wasn't for the Royal Family. The King published only a few weeks ago that he's paid £12.9 million, so I would think they are actually a positive contributor to the economy.

Windsor Castle, Buck House, Balmoral all brings in billions of tourists money

Not just the tourist money, but the Crown Estate brings in around a £1 billion annually which far outweighs the costs of the Royals.

Edited July 2Jul 2 by treetops

On 7/2/2026 at 5:06 AM, treetops said:

Not just the tourist money, but the Crown Estate brings in around a £1 billion annually which far outweighs the costs of the Royals.

I hate that phrase "the Royals". How can you just make an adjective a noun. And they go on about falling education standards. Start with the media.

UK government is cheating it's retriees as the Govt, needs cash to fund Ukraine.

21 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

I hate that phrase "the Royals". How can you just make an adjective a noun.

I didn't. The Oxford English Dictionary and others were way before me.

3 hours ago, treetops said:

I didn't. The Oxford English Dictionary and others were way before me.

I meant generally speaking not you personally. You might expect the BBC not to the use the word so liberally.

On 7/2/2026 at 5:06 AM, treetops said:

Not just the tourist money, but the Crown Estate brings in around a £1 billion annually which far outweighs the costs of the Royals.

Isn't it funny that same terminology doesn't work for the despised pensioners? So pensioners are just a burden on society costing billions of pounds a year. Instead of mentioning the huge contribution that they made when they were working and continue to make by paying tax and VAT.