Britain's state pension age review sparks media frenzy

[webfact]

Britain's state pension age review sparks media frenzy
Source: Xinhua

LONDON, March 3 (Xinhua) -- Young Britons woke up to front page headlines Wednesday telling them they'd have to work well unto their 70s or even 80s before qualifying for a state pension.

Most national newspapers cited 75 as the likely retirement age of the future, but the Sun said experts they had spoken too raised the prospect of people having to work until they are in their 80s.

The media frenzy came after the government confirmed Tuesday an independent review of the future state pension age.

Sir John Cridland, the former head of the Confederation of British Industry has been recruited to produce the review to be published in May 2017.

Full story: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-03/02/c_135148915.htm

-- Xinhua 2016-03-03

[thaiduncankk]

I felt aggrieved having to wait another 10 years or so, when I will be 66. Doesn't feel so bad now, but for the youngsters of today, it will be a case of 'work until you drop' for a lot of them. Not a nice thought.

[sirineou]

The average life span in the UK is 81,5 years as of 12012

a retirement age of 80 will effectively eliminate most state pensions. I think the 80 retirement age is just a trick to make a lower raise of the retirement age more palatable

[chiang mai]

"The Sun newspaper said...", I stopped reading after that.

[shirtless]

Ok make the rules across the board it also should apply to Government employees and politicians.

[sirineou]

Ok make the rules across the board it also should apply to Government employees and politicians.

I am American. so I dont know a lot about the UK

But I know this, Some professions can work until a late age, For instance an accountant,or a politician could possible work until a late age, but some other professions take a toll on the body.

[pitrevie]

Ok make the rules across the board it also should apply to Government employees and politicians.

All the pension rules, salary increases have always applied (been imposed) on government employees the trick has always been that they never applied to MPs.

I was once informed by a very knowledgeable Daily Hail reader that government employees receive two thirds of their final salary as pension and that it was index linked.

[MUSTYJACK]

If people want to retire earlier, then all they have to do is start saving and investing earlier, and to help them save more they need to stop wasting money by continually buying lots and lots of useless shiite on credit, most of which is unnecessary and does not improve the quality of their lives.

Edited March 3, 2016 by MUSTYJACK

[DeepSea]

The fundamental problem with Social Security in the U.K., and the U.S., is that these systems work as classic Ponzi schemes.

There is no public sector large pot of cash, stashed away for future payments to be made to retirees, whatever age they retire. Money is confiscated from individuals and businesses and used to pay the Social Security commitments on a month by month basis. If you did this in the private sector, you would (hopefully), be locked up for a very long time.

Nobody should be surprised by this. In the U.S., the General Accounting Office is a non-partisan, independent watchdog, working for Congress. They have clearly stated that the level of U.S. Debt and unfunded liabilities is unsustainable, and that Social Security in the U.S., will be bankrupt in the next 10 years.

Thankfully there is enough BS on TV, and little shiny objects being flashed in all directions, to distract the majority of the disengaged general public from issues of real importance. In large part, we are responsible for our own demise, a shrinking sense of personal or collective responsibility, and a hands out entitlement culture and this is the result.

[phantomfiddler]

I guess this is the easiest way for the government to save enough money to pay the enormous cost of supporting the hordes of illegal immigrants and those who have no wish to work

[manarak]

at some point people who have already worked for 20 years will realize their pension payments have been stolen.

[cadcat]

British Pension Provider Warns Of "Death Of Retirement"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-02/british-pension-provider-warns-death-retirement

British workers will have to work until they are 81 if they want to build up savings that guarantee their parents' standard of retirement, according to a new study by pension provider Royal London. Without significantly higher levels of engagement in pensions, the report concludes rather ominously, "we may be witnessing the death of retirement."

As AP reports: The research released Wednesday comes as the British government embarks on a review of pensions that has prompted speculation it will raise the retirement age to compensate for a burgeoning older population. The retirement age for men and women is already set to rise to 66 between December 2018 and October 2020.

Royal London says changes in workplace pensions mean workers aren't saving enough to ensure they have the same kind of retirement their parents expected.

Royal London notes that changes in workplace pension provision mean that coming generations of retirees could have a radically different experience of retirement from their parents. Unless today’s workers begin to save significantly more for their later life, many will find that the quality of later life enjoyed by their parents will be unattainable unless they work well beyond traditional retirement ages.

For many people, continuing to work to these much higher ages may simply be beyond their physical capability. Without significantly higher levels of engagement in pensions, we may be witnessing the ‘death of retirement’.

[soalbundy]

I felt aggrieved having to wait another 10 years or so, when I will be 66. Doesn't feel so bad now, but for the youngsters of today, it will be a case of 'work until you drop' for a lot of them. Not a nice thought.

I don't think it will be work until you drop, many will be incapable of continuing to work into their 70's and will be unemployed,they will then be aggressively 'offered' a very reduced pension to retire 'early', saves a lot of money. I cant see employers being happy with 70+ year old's continuing to work for them considering the increased number of sick days that would inevitably occur.

[NovaBlue05]

Probably the optimum scenario for any government is that you work as long as physically possible and then have a massive coronary at your retirement luncheon

[NeverSure]

A mistake is for people to rely solely on the government pension in the first place. I feel sorry for anyone who has only this. Few people, even at age 45, really accept the idea that some day they will be truly old and much less do they believe it at age 21. They simply don't prepare.

I didn't truly plan for retirement. Just by my nature I always saved and invested. I wound up with at least a paid for home in the US, some money, and more than one income stream. If I lost my SS check I wouldn't miss any meals.

I don't know at what point people got duped into turning their safety and well being over to governments...

Cheers.

[MUSTYJACK]

I don't know at what point people got duped into turning their safety and well being over to governments...

Those that naively believe socialism is the only way will usually end up embittered, envious and impoverished to some degree and dependent on the government for support.

[does]

No, it's the easiest way for the government to save enough money to start a new war and prepare for another wave of immigrants who have "no wish to work."

I guess this is the easiest way for the government to save enough money to pay the enormous cost of supporting the hordes of illegal immigrants and those who have no wish to work

[steve187]

Ok make the rules across the board it also should apply to Government employees and politicians.

it does, but they get an adiitional pension from their jobs, as do thousand of private sector employees, as well as people in privately funded pensions, don't forget the government (no i don;t like them) has forced all employers to provide pensions, so in the future the problem will not be as bad as it is now for the baby boomers, and slightly later people who had no access to the private and work place pensions,

a lot of people retiring now will depend solely on the government pension, wheras in the future it will just be a top up pension.

I too will have to wait an extra year for my state pension, thgat £6,000 odd £'s i have compributed to the state, its been unfair that the pension cahnges were brought forward when Cameron came into no10, but it was a lot unfairer to the women who had to wait about 3 years more because they were born a little later.

some one posted that they had to wait 10 years more, i don't where he /she got that from

[i claudius]

I hate to say it , but if you think its getting bad now , just wait in the years to come as more and more economic migrants leave their hell hole country's to get to the west , i can honestly see that in the future the govt pension will just keep you from starving , its a doomed future for pensioners ,and i bet that those who saved into private pensions will get them stolen , A,LA GORLMLAS GORDON .

[timber]

I appreciate the sacrifices of the people in the UK for their government workers and politicians. With the benefits that are accrued for one term in office you cannot afford to work for small business or industry, Your children have to be politicians or government workers. Most creative people such as artists of all type will be dead before thep stop working. Sorry don't understand.

[roquefort]

The fundamental problem with Social Security in the U.K., and the U.S., is that these systems work as classic Ponzi schemes.

There is no public sector large pot of cash, stashed away for future payments to be made to retirees, whatever age they retire. Money is confiscated from individuals and businesses and used to pay the Social Security commitments on a month by month basis. If you did this in the private sector, you would (hopefully), be locked up for a very long time.

Nobody should be surprised by this. In the U.S., the General Accounting Office is a non-partisan, independent watchdog, working for Congress. They have clearly stated that the level of U.S. Debt and unfunded liabilities is unsustainable, and that Social Security in the U.S., will be bankrupt in the next 10 years.

Thankfully there is enough BS on TV, and little shiny objects being flashed in all directions, to distract the majority of the disengaged general public from issues of real importance. In large part, we are responsible for our own demise, a shrinking sense of personal or collective responsibility, and a hands out entitlement culture and this is the result.

Deep Sea has hit the nail on the head. Many of us were brought up to believe that the state would take care of us "from the cradle to the grave". No mention of how all that care would be paid for.

Governments don't have any money of their own, they either have to steal it from their citizens (taxes) or borrow it, regardless of whether they'll ever be able to pay it back. And when they can't pay it back, guess who picks up the bill...............yes, the good old cash cow taxpayer.

Anyone who is relying on social security to fund their retirement is living in cloud cuckoo land.

[thaiduncankk]

Ok make the rules across the board it also should apply to Government employees and politicians.

it does, but they get an adiitional pension from their jobs, as do thousand of private sector employees, as well as people in privately funded pensions, don't forget the government (no i don;t like them) has forced all employers to provide pensions, so in the future the problem will not be as bad as it is now for the baby boomers, and slightly later people who had no access to the private and work place pensions,

a lot of people retiring now will depend solely on the government pension, wheras in the future it will just be a top up pension.

I too will have to wait an extra year for my state pension, thgat £6,000 odd £'s i have compributed to the state, its been unfair that the pension cahnges were brought forward when Cameron came into no10, but it was a lot unfairer to the women who had to wait about 3 years more because they were born a little later.

some one posted that they had to wait 10 years more, i don't where he /she got that from

I said I had to wait 10+ years from now (55 now), not 10 years more than expected.

The retirement age was initially 65, but now, due to the changes, I am not eligible until I am 66 years and 3 months.

[novo58]

the big issue here is ...............................who will employ people after ( for example) the age of 50yrs old.

To me this just means a new generation of involuntary " dole bludgers"..................as the older person who cannot find that next job will just be forced on to unemployment benefits

[tigermoth]

In Australia the retirement age is to be lifted to 70. It is now 65. I worked until 71 but I was in a profession which did not take a toll on my body, I have a University degree. After about 3 or 4 years I got bored and wanted to get back in the workforce. Although with very high credentials, experience in my profession I found it impossible to get work. Many companies were advertising for staff with requirements that would require at least 20 years to achieve yet the advertisements continuely require someone with 1 to 5 years experience, ludicrous. Many companies also have a policy of forced retirement after the age of 70. Any retirement age after 70 is totally unrealistic and would have a huge affect on the young people looking for jobs after leaving school and hence cost the country a lot more than the savings they would achieve by raising the retirement age to 80 not to mention the political unrest which would follow.

[gyrosman]

That is why government needs to be smaller and SS monies paid in are in a safe account without the government using your money for other things.

"81" NUTS TO THAT.

[Baerboxer]

British Pension Provider Warns Of "Death Of Retirement"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-02/british-pension-provider-warns-death-retirement

British workers will have to work until they are 81 if they want to build up savings that guarantee their parents' standard of retirement, according to a new study by pension provider Royal London. Without significantly higher levels of engagement in pensions, the report concludes rather ominously, "we may be witnessing the death of retirement."

As AP reports: The research released Wednesday comes as the British government embarks on a review of pensions that has prompted speculation it will raise the retirement age to compensate for a burgeoning older population. The retirement age for men and women is already set to rise to 66 between December 2018 and October 2020.

Royal London says changes in workplace pensions mean workers aren't saving enough to ensure they have the same kind of retirement their parents expected.

Royal London notes that changes in workplace pension provision mean that coming generations of retirees could have a radically different experience of retirement from their parents. Unless today’s workers begin to save significantly more for their later life, many will find that the quality of later life enjoyed by their parents will be unattainable unless they work well beyond traditional retirement ages.

For many people, continuing to work to these much higher ages may simply be beyond their physical capability. Without significantly higher levels of engagement in pensions, we may be witnessing the ‘death of retirement’.

It's gonna all be o k though. The Old Etonian and Oxbridge old boy's and gals networks who are clawing their way back to running Britain will make sure the return to Victorian values includes the return of the Workhouses.

That most despised and shameful of establishments will be portrayed as offering the poor masses some sort of dignity in working for their meager life basics in old age until they die.

That's the price we will all pay when politicians and their parties sell out to the banks, financiers and big business. Forget free health care, education and equality. It will be just basic enough to get by - unless you have the money to pay.

[wabothai]

The fundamental problem with Social Security in the U.K., and the U.S., is that these systems work as classic Ponzi schemes.

There is no public sector large pot of cash, stashed away for future payments to be made to retirees, whatever age they retire. Money is confiscated from individuals and businesses and used to pay the Social Security commitments on a month by month basis. If you did this in the private sector, you would (hopefully), be locked up for a very long time.

Nobody should be surprised by this. In the U.S., the General Accounting Office is a non-partisan, independent watchdog, working for Congress. They have clearly stated that the level of U.S. Debt and unfunded liabilities is unsustainable, and that Social Security in the U.S., will be bankrupt in the next 10 years.

Thankfully there is enough BS on TV, and little shiny objects being flashed in all directions, to distract the majority of the disengaged general public from issues of real importance. In large part, we are responsible for our own demise, a shrinking sense of personal or collective responsibility, and a hands out entitlement culture and this is the result.

Deep Sea has hit the nail on the head. Many of us were brought up to believe that the state would take care of us "from the cradle to the grave". No mention of how all that care would be paid for.

Governments don't have any money of their own, they either have to steal it from their citizens (taxes) or borrow it, regardless of whether they'll ever be able to pay it back. And when they can't pay it back, guess who picks up the bill...............yes, the good old cash cow taxpayer.

Anyone who is relying on social security to fund their retirement is living in cloud cuckoo land.

I don't know about you English folks, in my country my SSec is paid for by myself.

[chilli42]

It's not that the state can't afford pensions, it's that they are a low priority for the state and the wealthy that run the state. It strikes me that this and medical services will end up being slashed.

The EU economies are low growth,low productivity with a cost to service the population that is growing out of control. With few exceptions this is not a sustainable model and not a competitive model vs Asia. The good times are behind us. The day of left wing politics and "free" social services is passing. The income structure is in full reverse with ever larger numbers of middle class joining the poorer classes - while the rich few get insanely rich. The future is right wing political dogma and austerity.

Very depressing. Glad I live in Asia!

[stevenl]

When these plans were set up, (some time) after WWII, life expectancy was not much over 65, and there was an ample work force. These days life expectancy is much higher and the work force is aging. So yes, these systems are not sustainable in the present setup anymore. Unfortunately nobody in government has seen this coming, or was willing and able to do something about it, meaning that in stead of tweaking the system and keeping it sustainable the years of inaction now mean the whole system has become unsustainable and a big overhaul is inevitable.

[Grouse]

British Pension Provider Warns Of "Death Of Retirement"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-02/british-pension-provider-warns-death-retirement

British workers will have to work until they are 81 if they want to build up savings that guarantee their parents' standard of retirement, according to a new study by pension provider Royal London. Without significantly higher levels of engagement in pensions, the report concludes rather ominously, "we may be witnessing the death of retirement."

As AP reports: The research released Wednesday comes as the British government embarks on a review of pensions that has prompted speculation it will raise the retirement age to compensate for a burgeoning older population. The retirement age for men and women is already set to rise to 66 between December 2018 and October 2020.

Royal London says changes in workplace pensions mean workers aren't saving enough to ensure they have the same kind of retirement their parents expected.

Royal London notes that changes in workplace pension provision mean that coming generations of retirees could have a radically different experience of retirement from their parents. Unless todays workers begin to save significantly more for their later life, many will find that the quality of later life enjoyed by their parents will be unattainable unless they work well beyond traditional retirement ages.

For many people, continuing to work to these much higher ages may simply be beyond their physical capability. Without significantly higher levels of engagement in pensions, we may be witnessing the death of retirement.

It's gonna all be o k though. The Old Etonian and Oxbridge old boy's and gals networks who are clawing their way back to running Britain will make sure the return to Victorian values includes the return of the Workhouses.

That most despised and shameful of establishments will be portrayed as offering the poor masses some sort of dignity in working for their meager life basics in old age until they die.

That's the price we will all pay when politicians and their parties sell out to the banks, financiers and big business. Forget free health care, education and equality. It will be just basic enough to get by - unless you have the money to pay.

A related issue is that the UK state pension is less than 30% of average wages. Compare that to 100% in Greece and 75% in Italy, Spain and Portugal