Conservative plan to increase retirement age

[Von Smallhausen]

Not bad for her, bad for the taxpayer though. Retiring at 48 is ridiculous.

How so ?

I have never known a police officer to retire and not go on to work elsewhere, much like someone who retires from the military after 22 years.

They retire with a lump sum and pension but go on to work and pay tax into the system.

 

[RDM]

How so ?

I do not know for sure but I assume the police pension is like many other public sector pensions where your pension contributions are not actually used to invest into a pension fund but are instead used as government income or to reduce government expenditure on wages. Which means that rather than a pension fund paying your pension when you retire it will be current tax payers paying it. A full pension at age 48 (by my poor maths making it a 1/45th scheme) which is probably final salary too would cost considerably more than 11% of your wages.

Rather than investment of pension contributions paying for your pension taxation will instead. This is the major problem with public sector pensions (rather than their generous terms) that needs to be dealt with but probably never will.

 

[Rich_L]

Just out of interest, isn't the National Insurance Fund which pays for the state retirement pensions running at some stupidly high surplus, like £34-50 billion or something?

 

[dirtydog]

How so ?

I have never known a police officer to retire and not go on to work elsewhere, much like someone who retires from the military after 22 years.

They retire with a lump sum and pension but go on to work and pay tax into the system.

RDM has beaten me to it. The 11% you pay will not cover what you receive for a start. I don't see why anyone should receive a pension before at least 55, especially when the taxpayer is (even partly) funding it.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

That is how it works.

Policing is inherently more dangerous than sitting at a Whitehall desk and I don't feel guilty for being fortunate enough to get such a pension.

I am statistically in an early grave as well so while it may draw criticism, I will happily draw it knowing I have earned it.

 

[dirtydog]

Just out of interest, isn't the National Insurance Fund which pays for the state retirement pensions running at some stupidly high surplus, like £34-50 billion or something?

It is moot because NI is not ring fenced and is used for general expenditure as well as benefits (including pensions). And the public finances as a whole certainly don't have a surplus

 

[dirtydog]

That is how it works.

Policing is inherently more dangerous than sitting at a Whitehall desk and I don't feel guilty for being fortunate enough to get such a pension.

I am statistically in an early grave as well so while it may draw criticism, I will happily draw it knowing I have earned it.

Well we could debate this if you like - while policing is more dangerous than some jobs, it is less dangerous than some others which pay out less generous benefits AND don't let you take your pension until at least 55

 

[Bear]

Rather than investment of pension contributions paying for your pension taxation will instead. This is the major problem with public sector pensions (rather than their generous terms) that needs to be dealt with but probably never will.

Exactly. It will have to be dealt with eventaully as it is unsustainable considering the amount of people retiring will be growing quicker than the younger tax payers that are going to pay for it due to an aging population.

 

[dirtydog]

Incidentally IIRC my father who used to be in the army and retired from the forces around the age of 40 I believe, only received his army pension from his 60th birthday. How come police get theirs immediately they retire?

 

[Rich_L]

It is moot because NI is not ring fenced and is used for general expenditure as well as benefits (including pensions). And the public finances as a whole certainly don't have a surplus

I don't think that's quite right, the Government cannot take the money in the fund, they can only borrow from the surplus, which has to be paid back IIRC (and to date, again AFAIK, has been, with extra returns)

 

[Tefal]

meh military and police service both require members to willingly put their lives on the line to protect others it deserves some extra benefits/rewards.

Sure other occupations may be more dangerous (mining iirc) but that is more down to accidents than deliberately placing themselves between danger and a citizen.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

RDM has beaten me to it. The 11% you pay will not cover what you receive for a start. I don't see why anyone should receive a pension before at least 55, especially when the taxpayer is (even partly) funding it.

Unlike someone who pushes a desk dd, I feel justified in drawing my pension if I get there.

It is a good one, it is partly taxpayer funded ( which I appreciate .... no bull ) but given the dangers faced it isn't unreasonable to get a good pension.

I am quite happy to get work elsewhere after that and continue paying into the system. ( that I have done since I was 18 ).

 

[dirtydog]

I don't think that's quite right, the Government cannot take the money in the fund, they can only borrow from the surplus, which has to be paid back IIRC (and to date, again AFAIK, has been, with extra returns)

Yeah I'm sure you are right, but I think that to all intents and purposes NI money gets spent, indirectly if not directly, on other stuff and rightly so in my opinion - what is the point of having a surplus when we have vast public borrowing? It would be like borrowing on your credit card at 20% APR when you have money sitting in a savings account earning 3%.

We know that if there is an NI surplus, taxpayers don't get an NI rebate until the surplus is used up. Nor are benefits increased NI is just another form of income tax after all.

 

[dirtydog]

Unlike someone who pushes a desk dd, I feel justified in drawing my pension if I get there.

It is a good one, it is partly taxpayer funded ( which I appreciate .... no bull ) but given the dangers faced it isn't unreasonable to get a good pension.

I am quite happy to get work elsewhere after that and continue paying into the system. ( that I have done since I was 18 ).

There aren't just two forms of job in the world, police or desk jobs.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Well we could debate this if you like - while policing is more dangerous than some jobs, it is less dangerous than some others which pay out less generous benefits AND don't let you take your pension until at least 55

If the system changes dd I will have to roll with it but as it stands I will happily take what is on offer. Wouldn't you ?

Incidentally IIRC my father who used to be in the army and retired from the forces around the age of 40 I believe, only received his army pension from his 60th birthday. How come police get theirs immediately they retire?

I have no idea dd.

 

[dirtydog]

If the system changes dd I will have to roll with it but as it stands I will happily take what is on offer. Wouldn't you ?

Of course I would. I would say, this is unfair but I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

There aren't just two forms of job in the world, police or desk jobs.

Did I say that there was ?

I used an example as a comparison.

 

[dirtydog]

Did I say that there was ?

I used an example as a comparison.

It seemed like a blatant straw man

I know for a fact that there are many more dangerous / unpleasant jobs than police because this has been debated before and statistics were produced. Window cleaners is the most dangerous IIRC

 

[RDM]

Unlike someone who pushes a desk dd, I feel justified in drawing my pension if I get there.

It is a good one, it is partly taxpayer funded ( which I appreciate .... no bull ) but given the dangers faced it isn't unreasonable to get a good pension.

I am quite happy to get work elsewhere after that and continue paying into the system. ( that I have done since I was 18 ).

I have no problems at all with the police pension as a benefit, the problem I have is how it is funded. All pensions, public sector and private, should be subject to the same rules and should be funded correctly. It should not be taxation that is paying for public sector pensions directly it should be one or more Public Sector pension funds. Set up and run in exactly the same way as any other pension fund.

If I set up a company pension fund to work in the same way as public sector pensions I would probably face time in prison.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

No doubt there are dd but if i may use the following examples, I have been .....

Spat on, kicked, punched, had knives pulled on me, had threats to burn my gaff down, rape my other half, kill my kids ( although I have only one ) etc etc.

I would like to think there is a decent rainbow at the end of it.