Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Dave Beans

30% Of Under 25's Expect To Retire At 65...

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/10199379/Under-25s-still-expect-to-retire-at-65.html

They're going to be in for a bit of a shock...(well anyone under 44 that is)...

The majority of those aged under 24 expect to retire by the age of 65 even though they will not be able to claim the state pension until 68, or possibly later. A study by insurance giant Aegon UK found 30pc of young people would plan to give up work by age 65, while only 13pc plan to retire 70, which, according to experts, is a more likely retirement age.

When_plan_to_retir_2625946c.jpg

However, under plans already confirmed by the Government, anyone under 35 – or born after April 6, 1978 – will not qualify for a state pension until age 68. The Treasury has also indicated that the qualifying age will be linked to life expectancy in future. Under current plans it will rise from 65 to 66 for both men and women aged around 59 today and will increase to 67 for those aged around 45. This is an acceleration of plans first set out by Lord Turner for the last Labour government. After making the recommendations, Lord Turner said he regretted not making them more radical and suggested an eventual state pension age of 70.

Life expectancy was 65 for men and 66 for women in 1948 when the modern state pension system was created but has since risen to 78 for men and 82 for women.

Even if the pattern of increases already mapped out was extended it would mean a rise in the state pension to 69 for anyone aged under 25 and 70 for anyone aged under 15. But the rises could be accelerated.

Earlier this month Danny Alexander, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, said ministers were considering “further decisions” on the length of work required to qualify for the old-age benefit. When the Coalition reviewed retirement ages in 2010, the Pensions Policy Institute warned that to keep the length of retirement at the same level as 1981 the age of retirement would have to rise to 72 by 2030.

Edited by Dave Beans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're going to be in for a bit of a shock...(well anyone under 44 that is)...

Don't be silly, a couple of BTLs and their own mortgage paid off will see them sorted by 50.

The man in the Bank said so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will inherit their parents house which by then will be worth 8 million times the average salary, solved

...all gone on care fees.. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will inherit their parents house which by then will be worth 8 million times the average salary, solved

....but at what age will that be if there is anything left worth spending?........and that is after the split about the other siblings after tax and costs paid.

There are perfectly healthy active people well into their 90s living a worthwhile life and still learning something new every day, some have been retired for 40 odd years and counting.....some are already spending their houses to top up their pensions........many younger ones help their family in other ways like helping with free child minding. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh just useful optimism being used to market pensions.

Did they ask the blokes what they thought their chances of sh.gging one of the fit birds of Hollyoaks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recognise those retirement ages. The increase to 67 affects anyone anyone born April 1961 or later (i.e. now aged 52 or under), except apparently in Northern Ireland.

Those aged under 24 have demographics on their side. That is to say, when they reach pension age, there will be fewer pensioners above them (few left of the post-war boomers), and the 2000s-boomers still of working age to support them.

It's people retiring now and probably in the next twentysomething years who are getting b*****-all annuities. So if you're in your early 50s it's the worst of both worlds: later state pension and rob-us-to-pay-the-older-pensioners-and-stretch-the-pot annuities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh just useful optimism being used to market pensions.

Did they ask the blokes what they thought their chances of sh.gging one of the fit birds of Hollyoaks?

Odds on I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well people may scoff at that objective/dream but it does depend on their vision of retirement and life style. Sure you wont be going on cruises, no car or TV to tempt the wallet, weekend breaks rather than 3 weeks abroad. Retiring like the guys in there 70's not a chance, So what? The way things are going, that is what will be happening while you are in a job! I am more interested in how government, industry, retail, and leisure is going to keep the plates spinning once people workout their life style is pants regardless how hard they work.

I intend to go part time at 45, the mortgage on the flat paid off. I worked my **** off to do that and I will not be 'upsizing'. Worst case our household (2 people) ran on 13k (2009-2010). Still went out had long weekend holidays, and that was with a £420 mortgage.

Edited by pathfinder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most will be retired by their mid to late fifties, only instead of pensions it will be giros...

30% of under 25s probably won't reach 65 anyway, unless you subscribe to the life expectancy bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recognise those retirement ages. The increase to 67 affects anyone anyone born April 1961 or later (i.e. now aged 52 or under), except apparently in Northern Ireland.

Those aged under 24 have demographics on their side. That is to say, when they reach pension age, there will be fewer pensioners above them (few left of the post-war boomers), and the 2000s-boomers still of working age to support them.

It's people retiring now and probably in the next twentysomething years who are getting b*****-all annuities. So if you're in your early 50s it's the worst of both worlds: later state pension and rob-us-to-pay-the-older-pensioners-and-stretch-the-pot annuities.

I think they were a bit slow increasing the retirement age for women from 60. Those who squeezed in before 5th April 2010, were particularly fortunate, and can expect thirty years of state pension on average. Those women that go in 2028 will certainly not live seven years longer.

Moreover, the goalposts will probably move further, because the sums still don't add up. I do think that those under 25 may have their state retirements postponed until about 75.

It does seem particularly selfish that boomers have been up in arms about the movement of the state pension from 60 for women, on the basis some had not time to plan for a later retirement. when the arrangement was clearly overly generous.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will inherit their parents house which by then will be worth 8 million times the average salary, solved

Yes, my son's pension is my house.

...all gone on care fees.. ;)

No, not under any circumstances.

It does seem particularly selfish that boomers have been up in arms about the movement of the state pension from 60 for women, on the basis some had not time to plan for a later retirement. when the arrangement was clearly overly generous.

Not by me. I've had my retirement age upped twice from 60 to 64 and 3 months then to 66. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Have to say though I'll be mightily hacked off if I don't make it to 66 and collect at least a few state pension payments - 7.5 years to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, my son's pension is my house.

No, not under any circumstances.

Not by me. I've had my retirement age upped twice from 60 to 64 and 3 months then to 66. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Have to say though I'll be mightily hacked off if I don't make it to 66 and collect at least a few state pension payments - 7.5 years to go.

Well it couldn't be postponed indefinitely with reference to UK women having a life expectancy of 88 years once the age of 60 is reached (I'm guessing 90 when the outcome is known in thirty years time). And the longer this concession went on, the later their followers would have to retire to pay for their early retirement. I think inter-generational fairness should over-ride promises; but it generally never does.

Those at the top of a Ponzi always get the promise met first even if it equals bankruptcy...................I'm thinking Equitable Life.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they were a bit slow increasing the retirement age for women from 60. Those who squeezed in before 5th April 2010, were particularly fortunate, and can expect thirty years of state pension on average. Those women that go in 2028 will certainly not live seven years longer.

Moreover, the goalposts will probably move further, because the sums still don't add up. I do think that those under 25 may have their state retirements postponed until about 75.

It does seem particularly selfish that boomers have been up in arms about the movement of the state pension from 60 for women, on the basis some had not time to plan for a later retirement. when the arrangement was clearly overly generous.

I have always thought it was rather unfair that in the past women got to retire at 60 and men at 65 when women mostly live longer than men......must have been something in the past about the size of a woman's pension rather than the length of time they got to receive it . :unsure:;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it couldn't be postponed indefinitely with reference to UK women having a life expectancy of 88 years once the age of 60 is reached (I'm guessing 90 when the outcome is known in thirty years time). And the longer this concession went on, the later their followers would have to retire to pay for their early retirement. I think inter-generational fairness should over-ride promises; but it generally never does.

Yes I'd agree with what you say. It's a pity they didn't equalise the pension age far earlier and up it to 68 for my generation. It would have made my pips squeak a bit but I really don't think the young are getting a fair deal. To be honest, when I started work at 15 I thought that by the time I'd reached my late 50's I would be feeling pretty decrepit and ready for retirement at 60 but I don't and neither do my friends. In fact once the children have grown up and become responsible for themselves you get a feeling of regeneration. Most women in their 60's that I know are still happily working and collecting their pension though part of that might be psychological as it is a choice not a need in most cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I'd agree with what you say. It's a pity they didn't equalise the pension age far earlier and up it to 68 for my generation. It would have made my pips squeak a bit but I really don't think the young are getting a fair deal. To be honest, when I started work at 15 I thought that by the time I'd reached my late 50's I would be feeling pretty decrepit and ready for retirement at 60 but I don't and neither do my friends. In fact once the children have grown up and become responsible for themselves you get a feeling of regeneration. Most women in their 60's that I know are still happily working and collecting their pension though part of that might be psychological as it is a choice not a need in most cases.

I have met also those that are collecting their old age pensions, are working paid and unpaid hours of their choice, doing what they choose to do as opposed to what they once had to do, only have themselves to look after, have paid for their homes ages ago and also collect extra benefits for winter fuel/travel etc. They feel fitter healthier and freer than all their younger years put together, days when worked long hours and bringing up a demanding family. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have met also those that are collecting their old age pensions, are working paid and unpaid hours of their choice, doing what they choose to do as opposed to what they once had to do, only have themselves to look after, have paid for their homes ages ago and also collect extra benefits for winter fuel/travel etc. They feel fitter healthier and freer than all their younger years put together, days when worked long hours and bringing up a demanding family. ;)

No I think old people are just as miserable as old people! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm 35 and I doubt I will be able to receive any pension at age 65. Whats worrying is I wonder if I will have a job at 65, people don't like employing oldies.

Damn right they have got you pencilled in for 68 already (or a few days shy if you fall in the transitional period for those born before 5th April 1978) + the moving goalposts which will take it to over 70 by then.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1535575/When-can-you-retire.html

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in other totally unrelated news, 30% of under 25s expect a job in the public sector. And will be furious with retiring as late as that. But it's Friday, they have flexitime and it's warm and sunny. So they aren't complaining today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm 35 and I doubt I will be able to receive any pension at age 65. Whats worrying is I wonder if I will have a job at 65, people don't like employing oldies.

I think you will find that most SME's don't care what age you are as long as you don't have I am entitled to sick pay and an hour lunch every day at this time mentality.

Unfortunately most people who have been employed into their fifties seem to have this attitude. Our receptionist is 63 and has the mindset of a twenty year old but she is quite rare I think.

Edited by Greg Bowman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always thought it was rather unfair that in the past women got to retire at 60 and men at 65 when women mostly live longer than men......must have been something in the past about the size of a woman's pension rather than the length of time they got to receive it . :unsure:;)

Well, within living memory, women played only a very secondary role in the workplace. Pensioning them off young was an extension from getting rid of them as soon as they married.

The mistake was in not equalising the retirement age when we equalised state pension entitlements. But the Harfwit wing of the "womens movement" has been in the ascendancy for a long time, with an agenda to equalise in one direction only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find that most SME's don't care what age you are as long as you don't have I am entitled to sick pay and an hour lunch every day at this time mentality.

Unfortunately most people who have been employed into their fifties seem to have this attitude. Our receptionist is 63 and has the mindset of a twenty year old but she is quite rare I think.

I think thats probably true...Many see oldies as more reliable, and bring more knowledge than a younger person...especially when overheads are tight...

I think ageism will not be totally eradicated in the next twenty years, but it'll largely go...it will be a much more common sight to see older people working - because they have to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 246 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.