Scrap triple lock pension to avoid raising retirement age to 74, IFS warns
Scrap triple lock pension to avoid raising retirement age to 74, IFS warns
Posted by TheFergPunk
Scrap triple lock pension to avoid raising retirement age to 74, IFS warns
Scrap triple lock pension to avoid raising retirement age to 74, IFS warns
Posted by TheFergPunk
26 Comments
Yeah I’m pretty sure I know how this one is gonna turn out
Welp, looks like I am never gonna see retirement. always wanted to drop dead at work
I think we all know what will eventually happen. The triple lock will be scrapped for everybody not currently on the state pension whilst being maintained for all current pensioners. So that people currently receiving the state pension get an ever escalating value of their pension whilst people not yet claiming will get a lower rate.
scrapping the triple lock might be unpopular but raising the retirement age to 74 is unrealistic and unfair esp for people in physically demanding jobs who won’t make it that far. we need a balanced solution that protects both pensioners and younger generations.
It should have been scrapped ages ago. About time the generation that has routinely voted to pull the ladder up behind them feels a bit of pain and helps out
No the rules are “let the boomers have all the sweet retirement benefits they want, bankrupt the state and then make drastic changes when the oldest of gen X is about to retire”.
We cant change things before then. It’s cruel and unusual to expect a boomer to retire without a summer cruise payment, what are you expecting, that they’ll only go on two holidays a year?
bear in mind OAPs kicked up a fuss so big over WFA changes that it forced a partial u-turn from starmer.. to even posit removing the triple lock would be orders of magnitude worse.
Honestly, the triple lock state pension is starting to look like one of the biggest intergenerational scams going. Its a politically untouchable Ponzi scheme in all but name that benefits older generations today while sticking younger generations with the bill. If you are under 50, there’s a very real chance you’ll never see a proper state pension as the whole system is spiraling into unsustainability. The IFS says the triple lock could cost an extra £40bn by 2050. The only ways to pay for that are:
Hike taxes (guess who pays that?)
Raise the retirement age (how about 74?)
Cut other services (suprise suprise)
Scrap the triple lock (which no major party wants to do because “grey votes” are sacred).
Meanwhile, we are working longer, paying more into a system that’s giving less back. It’s not even just about fairness anymore, it’s about maths. You can not keep promising inflation busting pension increases while the working-age population shrinks and the number of retirees explodes. That’s the definition of a Ponzi scheme: current contributions funding current payouts, with the hope someone else will be around to foot the bill later.
This is all avoidable, but no one in power wants to have an honest conversation about it because pensioners vote and younger people don’t. So we keep pretending it’s sustainable, while kicking the can down the road. The triple lock has to go.
We are more likely to nuke Austria than this getting scrapped.
It needs to happen at some point. But unfortunately it’s political suicide for any party that does it
Ah yes, the choice between pensions being unliveable or existing at all.
The conversation we need to have is simple: does retirement actually exist anymore? The answer would seem to be functionally, no. If that’s where we start from, the discussion makes a lot more sense.
I think this is inevitably going to come to a crashing point.
Scrapping the triple lock will be unpopular. Raising retirement age will be unpopular. Raising taxes to pay for this adequately will be unpopular.
I imagine the public will just fixate on stories like “£500k spent on X” and convince themselves that we can modify the existing system into some wasteless perfect machine that will conveniently pay for all of this.
But what are we going to do about it? They continually raise retirement age and we sit around and just accept it? When do we get angry? When do we get off our arses and fucking show them?
I’m retiring at 55 regardless of what the government say is my retirement age. Squirelling cash away to make that possible.
My dad’s recently retired, and he constantly rubs it in every time he gets a “raise”, whilst having a free bus pass and complaining about how kier Starmer hates the hard working pensioners and how much better Farage would be.
Irritates me so much because my wife and I, who are both working full time, don’t get anything and have less money as inflation goes up.
I’d rather die than still be working after 66. I will absolutely join a cult circle of 15 oldies living together just so I can share rent and bills.
Do you think a single work place besides supermarkets and garden centres will want a 70 year old in their workplace? Majority of the time, the only oldies you see *wanting* to work past retirement are CEOs and directors who are doing more harm than good but have more money than we can dream of so they’re bored and need something to do.
The triple lock has to be scrapped at some point, as it guarantees the state penison increasing forever, which it obviously can’t do.
At some point, after it’s reached a certain level, it could be converted to a double-lock, and no-one would be worse off.
Everyone aged 18-40 should be living off the assumption the state pension will either be unavailable or means tested when they retire. Either hope you’re lucky enough to inherit money from relatives and/or save for a private pension.
Boomers are the richest generation to have ever lived, if they want a triple lock then they can afford to pay for it without raising retirement age. Instead unexempt over-65s from National Insurance and make it payable on pension income. Alternatively, give the lock to someone else like teachers or nurses.
Bringing in workplace pensions was a great idea to help fund current working generation actually having the funds to retire.
In reality, it’s just paying the extra on current retired generations pension pot.
I get that the retired have worked hard through their life and paid their way, but in reality, based on the existing system, there’s absolutely no point having a workplace pension if you can’t access it until you’re in your 70s. As what’s next? When you’re dead?
Will starmer risk the pensioner vote and be a 1-term PM who does good.
Or will he try to placate the pensioners,tufton St and sun editors; whilst ignoring the rest of the country; and become a 1-term PM who does nothing.
In some parts of the UK the average male life expectancy is as low as 76.5.
Enjoy that sweet 2.5 years of pension you’ve earned, if you make it that far.
This is literally a message to boomers. “Give up some unfair increases on income or screw your children and their children over”. And ofcourse the boomers will say no and protest.
Only chance of this happening is if young people start voting, because right now it’s the boomers upwards who dictate policy by dint of simply voting in greater numbers.
The only element of the triple lock I would remove is the 2.5% automatic increase. Link it to wage inflation or CPI. Those are the real metrics that count.
Theresa May suggested downgrading it to a double lock at the 2017 general election and she lost her majority. It needs to be scrapped, but I’m not holding my breath to see if anybody actually does it.