Pensions triple lock - doomed ?

Pensions triple lock - doomed ?

Author
Discussion

chow pan toon

12,356 posts

236 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
sidicks said:
johnxjsc1985 said:
these greedy pensioners paying for 50 plus years and then living the high life on £115 a week.
Of course most of those pensioners have paid in nowhere near enough to fund the benefits they will receive, but that's another story!
Nope, but they were sold it throughout their working life so blame the lying governments. The guaranteed above-inflation increases wind me right up though.

otherman

2,190 posts

164 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
bloomen said:
Pensions, along with much else in British society, are a Ponzi. At some point it has to crack. May as well be now.
Ponzi schemes fail because people stop putting money into them, and they only work while money is going in. The government goes on collecting, so it's not a ponzi.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
chow pan toon said:
Nope, but they were sold it throughout their working life so blame the lying governments. The guaranteed above-inflation increases wind me right up though.
Of course they should get the pension, it's the triple lock that can't be justified.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
otherman said:
Ponzi schemes fail because people stop putting money into them, and they only work while money is going in. The government goes on collecting, so it's not a ponzi.
Except it is, because of increasing longevity - the cost of pensions is not realistically affordable from the current contributions (without those contributions increasing continuously).

johnxjsc1985

15,948 posts

163 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
sidicks said:
Of course most of those pensioners have paid in nowhere near enough to fund the benefits they will receive, but that's another story!
So have you paid in more than you will take out including using the NHS. They didn't set the rules they have paid what was asked of them.
There is a myth that Pensioners are living the highlife when the reality is many of them have dire lives and barely exist. There is a slowly building anti "oldies" narrative including complaining about there driving standards and it just isn't right.



sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
johnxjsc1985 said:
So have you paid in more than you will take out including using the NHS.
Almost certainly. The majority don't, but that's the nature of a progressive economy where the 'rich' subsidise the less well off.

It was an observation of the facts, not a judgement about this being unreasonable!

johnxjsc1985 said:
They didn't set the rules they have paid what was asked of them.
And neither have I said they should be denied the pensions. There's no justification for the triple lock, that is all.

johnxjsc1985 said:
There is a myth that Pensioners are living the highlife when the reality is many of them have dire lives and barely exist. There is a slowly building anti "oldies" narrative including complaining about there driving standards and it just isn't right.
I've said no such thing.

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
otherman said:
Ponzi schemes fail because people stop putting money into them, and they only work while money is going in. The government goes on collecting, so it's not a ponzi.
Not quite.

They may still get people paying in - but the system collapses because there aren't enough people paying in, to pay out the promised returns.

grumbledoak

31,499 posts

232 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
Not quite.

They may still get people paying in - but the system collapses because there aren't enough people paying in, to pay out the promised returns.
yes Nation Insurance was a Ponzi scheme from the outset. Medical advances have turned the NHS into one.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,248 posts

149 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
johnxjsc1985 said:
these greedy pensioners paying for 50 plus years and then living the high life on £115 a week.
If were talking about the ones down my street, maybe they can downsize their £2m houses bought for £5K in 1965 to release some capital. Or just supplement their state pension with their final salary private pension.

mike74

3,687 posts

131 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
Anybody who is of pension age now and is having to rely on the state pension have only themselves to blame if they were too stupid to not take advantage of the ridiculously generous private and works pensions that were available throughout their working lives

GadgeS3C

4,516 posts

163 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
Oh the benefit of hindsight wink

stongle

5,910 posts

161 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
sidicks said:
stongle said:
Bit ironic coming from one of the more vociferous Brexit posters! With inflation being driven by GBP devaluation you have to wonder about the competence of the electorate. If you have a private pension, particularly invested in U.K. Equities the FX effect would actually be helping you given the effect of ftse companies with US earnings (and the current low interest rate environment).
You appear to be confusing those who are saving for their retirement within a pension scheme (which will likely have equity exposure) and those who are already retired and hence are much less likely to be exposed to equities!
I'm not confusing anything. Anyone whom is solely reliant on a state pension and made no other provision is (for want of another word) a ponce. I'm well aware of the benefits of tapering risk as you approach retirement (or adjusting portfolio toward "safer" investments) - the point I was actually making to the OP, is that Brexit comes with up and downs.

The short term benefit to Eqty has been post Brexit reaction thus far, however structurally we cannot afford the welfare programs in place nor their commitments. We have to start reducing the social cost burden to the tax payer otherwise many potential Brexit benefits will be undeliverable (i.e. introducing more fiscal led policies to rejuvenate areas outside the SE).

There will be an element of short to medium term pain in Brexit those in favour (as OP has clearly been as am I) should be prepared for. Committing country sabotage over a few quid marks you out as a special sort of person (I'm well aware OP may only be proposing this hypothesis).

Edited by stongle on Sunday 23 April 18:46

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
stongle said:
I'm not confusing anything. Anyone whom is solely reliant on a state pension and made no other provision is (for want of another word) a ponce. I'm well aware of the benefits of tapering risk as you approach retirement (or adjusting portfolio toward "safer" investments) - the point I was actually making to the OP, is that Brexit comes with up and downs.

The short term benefit to Eqty has been post Brexit reaction thus far, however structurally we cannot afford the welfare programs in place nor their commitments. We have to start reducing the social cost burden to the tax payer otherwise many potential Brexit benefits will be undeliverable (i.e. introducing more fiscal led policies to rejuvenate areas outside the SE).

There will be an element of short to medium term pain in Brexit those in favour (as OP has clearly been as am I) should be prepared for. Committing country sabotage over a few quid marks you out as a special sort of person (I'm well aware OP may only be proposing this hypothesis).
It seems you are - those in retirement (who you were referring to) are highly unlikely to have any equity exposure, regardless of whether they have a state pension, final salary DB pension or annuity from savings made into a DC pension.

stongle

5,910 posts

161 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
No read again, I mentioned reducing risk profile approaching retirement. Anyway, I'm not gonna argue that going forward. The underlying issue is inflation and Brexit here.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
stongle said:
No read again, I mentioned reducing risk profile approaching retirement. Anyway, I'm not gonna argue that going forward. The underlying issue is inflation and Brexit here.
Apologies, I've re-read your post.

You said 'if you had a private pension' which I (incorrectly) interpreted to mean 'were in recent of a pension from a private source', when in fact you meant 'were currently saving for a pension within a private pension product'.

So I agree!
beer

crankedup

Original Poster:

25,764 posts

242 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
Dixy said:
You oldies were able to influence the current situation before it happened but failed to and have been well insulated from the recent cutbacks. Now you are whinging about having to lie in the bed you made. Finally you are threatening to sink the ship. I hope if you have children they despise you as much as I do.
Well thought through balanced debating points from an interlectural giant. hehe

crankedup

Original Poster:

25,764 posts

242 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
stongle said:
crankedup said:
As thread title, will the Tories abolish the pension triple lock or at least have a fiddle with it?
With the rate of inflation rising I foresee in my crystal ball pensioners taking a hit over the next Parliament.
Apparently us oldies are already sharpening our pencil to place a voting X in a box which is not Tory. Our PM seems to be taking a very big gamble with the grey vote.
What do you say about the issue ?
Bit ironic coming from one of the more vociferous Brexit posters! With inflation being driven by GBP devaluation you have to wonder about the competence of the electorate. If you have a private pension, particularly invested in U.K. Equities the FX effect would actually be helping you given the effect of ftse companies with US earnings (and the current low interest rate environment).

Anyway, everyone has to take one for the team to get the best result of Brexit, we need to cut welfare spending across the board. With better healthcare people can work longer anyway (with an aging population private or self provision should be further encouraged - do it right and early retirement is a feasible option).

And who is the protest vote? Labour or Lib Dems; parties whom are going to bankrupt future generations? Anyone whom does this is a bit of a c**t.
The protest vote could be any other political party or perhaps pensioners not voting this time around. Personally I will be voting Tory, I believe they can negotiate the best deal for the Country regarding brexit.

Taking one for the team is a bit rich!! Us pensioners have been stuck with savings interest rates at ground level for years, subsidising those mortgage payments. The second point I would make is the fact that pensioners have generally acted as the Bank of mum and dad helping thier children onto the housing market.

So far as the actual subject of the thread is concerned, the State pension at £115 week is hardly a Kings ransom is it. Two half percent on top is not something that I would personally fret over losing.

superkartracer

8,959 posts

221 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
sidicks said:
johnxjsc1985 said:
these greedy pensioners paying for 50 plus years and then living the high life on £115 a week.
Of course most of those pensioners have paid in nowhere near enough to fund the benefits they will receive, but that's another story!
Actually the return on the funds collected is very poor , it should be £600 week.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
superkartracer said:
Actually the return on the funds collected is very poor , it should be £600 week.
Nonsense. The value of a £7k inflation-linked pension to a 65 year old is around £250k (more with the 'triple lock').

Most people won't have earned anything like that from their contributions.

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 25th April 10:08

Rovinghawk

13,300 posts

157 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
crankedup said:
interlectural giant.
Unfortunate time to spell badly, methinks.