Life expectancy in many areas is much lower than 75.
A Tory-linked think tank has recommended that the government raise the state pension age to 75 by 2035.
The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) reckons this will “improve the country’s fiscal position” – ie save money.
It will save money of course but at what cost? For many, it will mean they never get to retire.
In places like Blackpool, Glasgow and Dundee, even boys born recently are not expected to reach 75.
For people born in 1960, who will reach 75 by 2035, life expectancy is far lower.
The reasoning for the CSJ’s recommendation is that, as the population ages, more people will be getting the state pension for longer, putting pressure on the public purse.
This is true but it’s a price we have to pay for medical progress and for having our elderly with us for longer. They’ve earned a decent and long retirement.
On top of this, the cost of our state pension is severely limited by how meagre it is. The UK has the lowest state pension of any economically developed country.
In the UK, a state pension gives someone around 29% of what they had previously been earning. In Italy and the Netherlands, this figure is more like 80%.
As accounting professor Prem Sikka wrote when the Tories announced they were raising the pension age to 68, this is regressive class politics.
Sixty-five year olds like the CSJ’s founder Iain Duncan Smith will be alright. He gets paid about £5,000 just for giving a speech. It’s low and middle earners that this policy will hit.
8 Responses to “For many, a state pension at 75 means ‘work until you die’”
Jon Davies
Sounds like a whole lifetime working then. Would maybe be attractive to some, if working longer meant a bigger pension when you did stop working, but I guess that’s not on the table.
Tom Sacold
Taxes need to be increased to fund proper social care and pensions for all. But I read that the EU wants to take over all responsibility for taxation from the elected governments.
Unless we leave the EU we will soon not have the ability to set our own taxes and levels of public expenditure.
nhsgp
Exactly. It’s ripping the poor off even more.
1. You lose, in the case of women, 15 years of state pension
2. You lose the money you could have got from investing that money
3. You pay in for an extra 15 years, so lose that
4. You lose the investment return on that money.
So why?
It’s a socialist ponzi. You advocate redistribution. All the money was redistributed as you want, even by the Tories. That leaves a debt, and its too big to pay.
Tom, It’s too late. You and Mr Min Wage aren’t paying your £450,000 debt. Even graduates can’t afford £50,000, so they can’t afford 10 times that much.
The EU idea, is that you get Swedish levels of taxation and Romanian levels of pensions
nshgp
As accounting professor Prem Sikka wrote when the Tories announced they were raising the pension age to 68, this is regressive class politics.
===============
Prem Sikka thinks no one is owed a pension. When asked about the levels of pension debts and why the debts aren’t on the books he goes very quite. Strange isn’t it?
Accounting 101, the first lesson will discuss the balance sheet and what goes on it. Pensions are on the books if you are a proper accountant.
Patrick Newman
Oh yes it’s IDS again! Remember the big idea to bring all the different benefits together to make claiming easier and to save money – nine years on they’re still working on it. In international comparison pensioners in the United Kingdom suffer from the worst deal of any OECD country, receiving just 29% of a working wage when they retire. To put this into perspective, the OECD average is 63% and the average for EU member states is 71% and even in the USA, it is 49%! The proposal is absurd but simply explained by the Tory desire for the wealthy to pay fewer and smaller taxes. The sixth wealthiest country in the world – mon derrière! Perhaps it is the EU pension comparison that motivates people like IDS to want out asap!