State Pension Age Speculated To Rise To 75-81

[Pop321]

So many thought provoking posts and all with value. The key to retirement is when working out how much you need is never, ever start with "how much do I earn now".

Frugal is key, £47 return flights to Italy last year for us - and B&B in Florence. But I understand when some can't afford heating that my example is an extravagance so not meant as 'we all can do this' I know it's not easy.

I have seen people leave corporates at 50 grabbing their pension (maybe 15% of salary) and living ok. To be fair - they were on healthy salaries.

But if you ask people to work until 80 then the retirement concept disappears. Why wait? Take 10 years now then when every last penny is gone get a job again. You will need to work for the rest of your life....but wasn't that the case anyway?

I am lucky and have assets and am doing this (not formally working) in 2 years time.

I will need to go back to work at 70. When people ask what will I do if at 70 I am too ill to work - I tell them that I will be thankful I didn't wait until then to retire in ill health.

[campervanman]

Pensions were becoming dodgy in the 90s, what with the money not being put away, since then debt bubbles, especially land and houses have crippled the nation. Far too much money sucked out of the economy to allow people to think about (fund) there old age, one that needn't have been so costly.

Yes, there is a golden generation and they will be pulling up the drawbridge, otherwise their own pensions might be under threat.

I remember back in the 1990's many companies were allowed by the then Tory government to take a "pension contribution holiday" because their schemes were "overvalued". I wonder what happened to the money they didn't put into the schemes? As a matter of interest, just exactly how do people pull up the drawbridge?

[PopGun]

The pigs like King and Greenspan have exited already with their golden handshakes and given everyone else a golden shower.

The emperors clothes or the wizard of oz..

[PopGun]

Quite.

I am in my 50s and I have been to a number of funerals recently of some current and former IT work colleagues who did not make it to the current pension age let alone 75. If the grim reaper is cutting a swathe through such a generally well educated and remunerated section of late middle aged white collar workers now I imagine he is going to collar quite a few more before they reach their 70s.

My personal view is that our current life expectancy figures are flattered by the remarkable physical resilience of many of those who grew up during the second world war and which may have something to do with the unintended health benefits of 10 years of food rationing throughout the 1940s on those who experienced it. I don't think that situation is going to continue.

The life expectancy figures are nothing but ill calculated and crudely averaged ruse.

This deliberate misleading normalising of everyone living into their 90s is a massive lie used to justify the erosion of yet more workers rights.

There was a link on a similar thread a while back to some Japanese (I think) research which outlined every year working full time after 55 had massive impacts on your long term health and life expectancy.

Edited March 3, 2016 by PopGun

[StainlessSteelCat]

After a few crappy months at work, the potential for another year's worth of it to come and the possibility of redundancy eventually - I have been strongly considering Plan B to tide me over for the next 20 years or so until my sixties. I have my own place, live a frugal lifestyle, a micro business and have been considering ways as a means to kicking income over the threshold. Have been considering debentures - esp in renewable energy - but there must be a reason why people aren't flocking to them.

[durhamborn]

Absolutely.

I have mentioned before on this site that my suspicion is that the British states primary aim us to prevent ordinary people accumulating Capital as that would make them free agents whom the authorities would find it difficult to control. Why else deliberately dump vast amounts of unnecessary debt on people and then tax their remaining income so heavily that there chance of accumulating any serious capital is virtually nil.The shameful way the pension and savings system has been abused over recent decades has just confirmed that belief. Most of our political class of both parties richly deserve to go the guillotine and it my hope that I will live to see it happen.

Yes i think this is 100% it.The fact is the rich/government know 20/30% of the population will be on welfare forever.To pay for that they need the people who do work to keep working,forever if possible.That way their tax can be given away to the welfare class to keep them happy in their own worlds and not hanging the landed gentry from trees and stealing their grouse moors.

The house price increase simply traps the young into working longer.More debt,longer work its as simple as that.

No chance to build up capital in income creating assets only "equity" in a rabbit hutch box that once paid for leaves no years left to do much.

[longtomsilver]

I'm going through separation right now and in 4 weeks will be receiving £120,000 cash as part of my financial settlement. I'm going to stick it in divi payers and draw £1,000 a month. I'm 39 this year and hope this will take me to 52-53. I work a bar job at the w/ends that will pay my accommodation costs, I might rent a room from an overstretched fireman expected to work in that job well into his 70s. In my area they are £100 a week bills inclusive.

This is my mini retirement. I'll be there for my young children when they need me and I'll be flying paragliders when they don't. It's a sport that may or may not kill me anyway, feck waiting to get old.

Edit: I have a condition that can be painful that isn't (Raynaud's Disease) and that'll be my get out of jail card when I retire (go on the sick).

Edited March 3, 2016 by longtomsilver

[R K]

"balance the budget" "live within our means" "pay down the debt"

blah blah blah blah blah

people are gullible. Thats it.

[crashmonitor]

At the end of the day the UK state pension is roughly equivalent to the structural deficit of 90 billion. It is an unfunded freebie that folk get at the end of their life and the Government are going to want to make those years as few as possible or the whole Ponzi will collapse. The shocker really was that folk were drawing it as early as 60 as recently as 2010, so the rest of us will have to delay receipt to pay for those that were so blessed.

[@contradevian]

Quite.

I am in my 50s and I have been to a number of funerals recently of some current and former IT work colleagues who did not make it to the current pension age let alone 75. If the grim reaper is cutting a swathe through such a generally well educated and remunerated section of late middle aged white collar workers now I imagine he is going to collar quite a few more before they reach their 70s.

My personal view is that our current life expectancy figures are flattered by the remarkable physical resilience of many of those who grew up during the second world war and which may have something to do with the unintended health benefits of 10 years of food rationing throughout the 1940s on those who experienced it. I don't think that situation is going to continue.

I think the capitalist, fast food industry, sugar, grain based products, which create premature heart failure are doing a pretty good job and keeping pension liabilities down.

Here in Huddersfield, we are likely to loose our infirmary and run it from PFI indebted Halifax, so lots of extra deaths in transit on the Elland bypass. Really serious cases can die en route to Leeds.

[workingpoor]

This might actually wake the average person up to the game being rigged and thus spark a drift away from the conventional train of thought "work 50 years and enjoy retirement" etc

Most people know that the chances of making it to 75/80 in good health to enjoy retirement are not that great.

Might even spark a drift away from homebuying as people seek to avoid entrappment in this work till you drop viewpoint.

With the referendum coming up i bet Osborne is wishing this wasn't publicised.

Lots of online comments citing immigration population explosion as the real reason.

Edited March 3, 2016 by workingpoor

[R K]

The life expectancy figures are nothing but ill calculated and crudely averaged ruse.

This deliberate misleading normalising of everyone living into their 90s is a massive lie used to justify the erosion of yet more workers rights.

There was a link on a similar thread a while back to some Japanese (I think) research which outlined every year working full time after 55 had massive impacts on your long term health and life expectancy.

+1

Its the "average" versus extremes argument. You dont want to be in the left tail irrespective of the normal retirement age.

Quite bizarre how the young in particular dont even think to fight for these rights anymore & those that do, in greece for example, are ridiculed.

[crashmonitor]

+1

Its the "average" versus extremes argument. You dont want to be in the left tail irrespective of the normal retirement age.

Quite bizarre how the young in particular dont even think to fight for these rights anymore & those that do, in greece for example, are ridiculed.

If you make retirement age you have late teens of years left on average.....it's longer than folk think because of survivor bias (not from the year of birth)

Life expectancy at 67 (currently)

http://life-span.healthgrove.com/l/68/67

[cashinmattress]

It's all a mess, and in general people just aren't able or willing to catch on to the fact that they will die penniless and probably without any care facility.

And our politicians spend all our money making distractions for the public, and at all cost avoiding any talk of the future problems ahead.

How about some scary charts then?

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2011/12/the-demographic-time-bomb/

Whichever way you cut it, the world’s demographics have turned negative, and are likely to create strong headwinds for economies and asset prices going forward.

Anybody arguing that Britain doesn't need massive amounts of immigration needs to get their heads checked.

EDIT: it's not just here either.

http://www.icis.com/blogs/chemicals-and-the-economy/2015/04/swiss-pensions-bankrupt-2025-us-social-security-2030/

Swiss pensions bankrupt by 2025: US Social Security by 2030

Best that all you under 50's all start smoking 2 packs a day.

http://stats.oecd.org/viewhtml.aspx?datasetcode=HEALTH_STAT〈=en

Edited March 3, 2016 by cashinmattress

[R K]

If you make retirement age you have late teens of years left on average.....it's longer than folk think because of survivor bias (not from the year of birth)

Life expectancy at 67 (currently)

http://life-span.healthgrove.com/l/68/67

Youve fallen into the same trap & proved my point. Ta.

[R K]

It's all a mess, and in general people just aren't able or willing to catch on to the fact that they will die penniless and probably without any care facility.

And our politicians spend all our money making distractions for the public, and at all cost avoiding any talk of the future problems ahead.

How about some scary charts then?

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2011/12/the-demographic-time-bomb/

Anybody arguing that Britain doesn't need massive amounts of immigration needs to get their heads checked.

good news for wages then isnt it.

Those short of charts pretty well always assume "working" cohort ends at 64. In fact, 65+ is seeing by far the fastest % growth in employment (in US especially) so theyre very misleading. 64 seems to be the terminal age for historical and consistency purposes but needs to be widened to what is actually happening in the real world.

In EU countries like germany they can easily cope with and indeed should actively encourage millions of productive immigrants.

Edited March 3, 2016 by R K

[SarahBell]

Wonder what that number is if you take away the south east, or just look at Glasgow...

If they're going to use life expectancy as an excuse for putting up retirement age, then it should be set at the local level.

And then if you move to a early retirement age until you 'qualify' and then move back to a nice area?

[Democorruptcy]

Yes i think this is 100% it.The fact is the rich/government know 20/30% of the population will be on welfare forever.To pay for that they need the people who do work to keep working,forever if possible.That way their tax can be given away to the welfare class to keep them happy in their own worlds and not hanging the landed gentry from trees and stealing their grouse moors.

The house price increase simply traps the young into working longer.More debt,longer work its as simple as that.

No chance to build up capital in income creating assets only "equity" in a rabbit hutch box that once paid for leaves no years left to do much.

It's not just that.

If they can shift people from renting council housing to getting in debt to buy a rabbit hutch, the governbankment gains more. High rabbit hutch prices mean people have to work more hours and for years longer so they pay more taxes. Also by owning a rabbit hutch they won't need housing benefit, so their welfare costs decline. The rabbit hutch is also an asset that can be stripped to pay for their own care costs. Eventually the asset will be taken into account for means testing for welfare and NHS costs.

[VeryMeanReversion]

The reason the government supports house price is that history shows it gets more votes, simple as that. The party that presides of a crash gets booted out. I don't think there is much thought going into it above that.

And to stay on topic, there was an idea on the "Genius" program by Dave Gorman. One of the ideas was that you should enjoy retirement whilst you were best able to do it. So take your 10 years retirement in your 20's or 30's then work til death. Made me laugh.

I have a similar plan to posters above. Get mortgage free and drop basic to a basic income to get by. However, just imagine if millions of other people do this. Those productive people paying the most taxes have just gone.

Edited March 3, 2016 by VeryMeanReversion

[crashmonitor]

The reason the government supports house price is that history shows it gets more votes, simple as that. The party that presides of a crash gets booted out. I don't think there is much thought going into it above that.

And to stay on topic, there was an idea on the "Genius" program by Dave Gorman. One of the ideas was that you should enjoy retirement whilst you were best able to do it. So take your 10 years retirement in your 20's or 30's then work til death. Made me laugh.

I have a similar plan to posters above. Get mortgage free and drop basic to a basic income to get by. However, just imagine if millions of other people do this. Those productive people paying the most taxes have just gone.

Two Ponzi schemes lacking support but with the majority of the electorate participants (homeowners plus would be retirees) the government has to resort to props.

House price falls don't appear to be a policy option, but moving the pension goal posts ( just enough to keep the wolf from the door) is.

[stormymonday_2011]

good news for wages then isnt it.

Those short of charts pretty well always assume "working" cohort ends at 64. In fact, 65+ is seeing by far the fastest % growth in employment (in US especially) so theyre very misleading. 64 seems to be the terminal age for historical and consistency purposes but needs to be widened to what is actually happening in the real world.

In EU countries like germany they can easily cope with and indeed should actively encourage millions of productive immigrants.

Britain has seem massive immigration of people in the working age range over recent years.

The number of people in jobs according to the ONS labour market survey is on the rise with 32.1 million in work. Moreover this is not just a product of immigration since the employment rate of 16-65 year olds is now 73.3% of the workforce which is the highest since records began in 1971

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10604117

Add in the fact that over 65s are the fastest rising group in the labour force with over a million in work

Given these figures you might wonder whether this crisis is being hyped by those with vested interest in diddling people out of their pension rights. It is worth remembering that in the 1940s to 1960s employed workers used to carry a huge number of non employed people including many of the boomer generation as children (people conveniently tend to forget that they were just as much a 'financial burden' when growing up as when retired) and non employed spouses as well as pensioners. To my mind the main difference is that living costs for workers in the past, particularly housing were a good deal lower.

Edited March 3, 2016 by stormymonday_2011

[Errol]

good news for wages then isnt it.

Those short of charts pretty well always assume "working" cohort ends at 64. In fact, 65+ is seeing by far the fastest % growth in employment (in US especially) so theyre very misleading. 64 seems to be the terminal age for historical and consistency purposes but needs to be widened to what is actually happening in the real world.

In EU countries like germany they can easily cope with and indeed should actively encourage millions of productive immigrants.

The jobs simply aren't going to be there. Automation will remove them. And it's coming far, far faster than the man in the street realises.

[PopGun]

And then if you move to a early retirement age until you 'qualify' and then move back to a nice area?

It just highlights how simplistic and misleading such figures and statements are.

[PopGun]

Britain has seem massive immigration of people in the working age range over recent years.

The number of people in jobs according to the ONS labour market survey is on the rise with 32.1 million in work. Moreover this is not just a product of immigration since the employment rate of 16-65 year olds is now 73.3% of the workforce which is the highest since records began in 1971

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10604117

Add in the fact that over 65s are the fastest rising group in the labour force with over a million in work

Given these figures you might wonder whether this crisis is being hyped by those with vested interest in diddling people out of their pension rights. It is worth remembering that in the 1940s to 1960s employed workers used to carry a huge number of non employed people including many of the boomer generation as children (people conveniently tend to forget that they were just as much a 'financial burden' when growing up as when retired) and non employed spouses as well as pensioners. To my mind the main difference is that living costs for workers in the past, particularly housing were a good deal lower.

Yes the crisis is indeed being over hyped by vested interests. Hence the misleading data.

[R K]

The jobs simply aren't going to be there. Automation will remove them. And it's coming far, far faster than the man in the street realises.

You're Andy haldane and I claim my 1 gold sov. Pony up sunshine.