Talk Quesada forum

Chrisdee wrote:Jeremy,is cutting NI Contributions by 2p, with pensions increasing, and pensioners living longer than they used to, that ain't gonna work is it? Don't really make sense

Ha ha!
Living longer than they used to,
To true they are,
(Or living longer than they should)
Thats why the pension age was jacked up,
Theres load of women looked forward to retiring at 60,
Thats gone! 68 for some now,

lexia wrote:People retiring over the last few year’s and in the future do not receive SERPS anymore ! I have wrote to two pension ministers wanting the reason why. Still waiting for a reply.

https://www.unbiased.co.uk/discover/pen ... 20pension'.

Gladys Street wrote:I don’t like the idea of calling the pension “benefits” instead of pension.

I couldn't give a monkeys what they call it as long as they keep paying it!

I read an article recently about pensions and systematically over the last 30 odd years, they have changed the state pension from a contribution based senior citizen pension to a “social security Benefit”
This is because a lot of pensioners made a lot of noise that it should be changed to a contributory pension outside the scope of work and benefits, similar to paying to a pension pot with a pensions company.

This sent shivers up the backs of our politicians, as the money could not be used for anything other than State Pensions and each pension would pay based on the total contributions in a persons working life.
Just like private pensions do..

The difference then would be that those who paid higher NI contributions, would actually gain a higher pension. The fear of the politicians is that low paid workers would demand higher pay in order to have larger contributions and women who went on maternity would have years of basic and small contributions and get a lower pension on retirement.

The idea of turning it into a benefit, like the dole or social security or tax credit benefits was so that politicians could in future years cut off the payments on the basis that lack of money meant they could not pay “Benefits” how cynical is that.

Personally I think it’s wrong to pay anything other than the New Higher rate pension and it’s crass to pay £156.00 basic pension to those who worked hard all their life but through mismanagement if politicians are now forced to live in £50.00 a week less than people who may never have contributed to pension pots getting over £200 a week. And even that is too low in todays climate.

Gustav wrote:Thought the uk state pension
Was classed as a benefit by DWP, does that mean all uk entitled pensioners are on benefits now,

Yes. And it’s wrong. As a benefit it can be stopped or altered at will.

lexia wrote:People retiring over the last few year’s and in the future do not receive SERPS anymore ! I have wrote to two pension ministers wanting the reason why. Still waiting for a reply.

I think this maybe because you & the company you worked for opted out of serps some years ago. I remember discussions at work many years ago about this, basically it was sold to us by saying it enables the pension fund to put more money into your own pension.

Some people I know didn’t do it & get a better state pension, personally, it hasn’t affected me.

Of course, I could be completely wrong, but I’m sure someone who is a bit more knowledgeable on the subject will be put me right if I am.

"Some people I know didn’t do it & get a better state pension, personally, it hasn’t affected me."

but they do get a Serps payment which should make up for the smaller basic state pension they recieve.

Gladys Street wrote:I don’t like the idea of calling the pension “benefits” instead of pension. I worked bloody hard for that pension and to see the government trying to politicise it as a “benefit” riles me. It’s an entitlement! I paid into it, they have my money, earning interest on it and keeping it if I drop off the perch early. Shysters the lot of them!