It isn't, that's just how lots of people like to think of it. There is no investment in anything, no big pot that has been contributed to and then later paid out of when it comes to state pensions. State pensions are simply funded by taxpayers i.e. mostly the current workforce at any time.
It isn't, that's just how lots of people like to think of it. There is no investment in anything, no big pot that has been contributed to and then later paid out of when it comes to state pensions. State pensions are simply funded by taxpayers i.e. mostly the current workforce at any time.
It isn't "directly" but it is indirectly. The money collected through taxation is invested into initiatives/ideas/policies that should ensure the "next wave" of population are able to fund the previous wave. Otherwise it'd just be a big ponzi scheme tied to birth rate.
Well, the wording on that isn't exactly clear. To be entitled to state pension, you have to have contributed 35 years of National Insurance contributions. It's implicit that you're contributing towards something.
Well it kind of is a big Ponzi scheme. A lot of GDP growth is just population growth. We're addicted to it.
If we actually had a declining population, politicians everywhere would be screaming that the end is nigh.
It's not sustainable, but we can keep kicking the can down the road...
If we actually had a declining population, politicians everywhere would be screaming that the end is nigh.
It's not sustainable, but we can keep kicking the can down the road...
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,207
Ahh yes... i was thinking of SERPS (later renamed to S2P) which is no longer a thing is it...... however from my point of view at the time - when i chose to opt into it, from my perspective it very much was an investment. what the government chose to do with it i was not interested in.
i forgot it was no longer a thing however as my current job is unusual and i can choose to opt in or not to paying any pension part of my national insurance..... i do choose to so again perhaps it isnt technically an investment, but from my practical point of view, its a optional payment i can choose to pay to give me a payment when i retire....... which kind of sounds like me investing in a future return to me.
I still think if you pay your NI you are essentially paying into your government pension however but if you want to be literal about it then fair enough i stand some what corrected.
Last edited:
Yea, but you can get a NI credit (to go towards the 35 years needed) without ever paying a penny of NI, since the threshold for the 'tick' is the LEL (Lower Earnings Limit) but you don't start paying NI till the PT (Primary Threshold) which is higher.
Yeah but that is offset by the fact that the return is a fixed amount which will be "lower" than what it could have been if folks who couldn't afford to pay, had paid.
I wonder how many people have actually paid in enough NI to afford a full state pension if it was just an annuity. Plus you qualify for all the other benefits bus pass, free prescriptions, housing allowance.
It's a giant Ponzi scheme, and it's very hard to predict how far the age will go up.
That's not to say it should be any lower it's not a huge amount. Just people underestimate how much pensions costs.
It's a giant Ponzi scheme, and it's very hard to predict how far the age will go up.
That's not to say it should be any lower it's not a huge amount. Just people underestimate how much pensions costs.
Pretty likely that a much bigger industry than merely fleeing to Spain in pursuit of melanoma will pop up in the Philippines or such where people with a 'small' pot can live fairly happily for the rest of their time in a somewhat decent country with only the worry of getting blown away by immense tropical storms.
Honestly sounds like a decent idea to leave for work in your 20's/30's and just... never come back tbh.
Last edited:
Soldato
Soooo. Landlords, tenants and housing then...
The money that was collected via NI and tax from previous generations was not only spent but the government has also spent rather more on top too thus the national debt.
You could frame paying the salaries of nurses and teachers as an "investment" for sure in a slightly different sense of the word and those things are important to pay for but the point is the state pension paid right now is funded by the tax collected and debt issued now not whatever tax and NI was collected and spent on benefits, doctors, nurses, police, armed forces etc.. a generation ago.
Yes there is a requirement re: time you've been paying NI and that's perhaps what contributes to that line of thinking, of course, you can still get some state pension without that or indeed if you've been unemployed and on benefits then of course that counts as NI "contributions"/credits too.
Last edited:
Just because we have debt doesn't mean we aren't seeing return on investment.
No one said otherwise, paying for nurses and school teachers or infrastructure etc.. is indeed an important "investment". But again, see the previous post re: the point being made here.
Last edited:
Unclear what your point is then. You made it - maybe elaborate what the linkage to the national debt is?
This:
should perhaps read current and future workforces tbh.. given the deficit.
As the belief was along these lines:
Last edited:
Yikes:
www.theguardian.com
Husing costs are included in inflation right? So again, part of this is the supply issue we have in this country and the ridiculous red tape/planning system.
Britons ‘need to accept’ they’re poorer, says Bank of England economist
Chief economist Huw Pill says workers and firms should stop trying to pass on rising costs by hiking prices or demanding better wages
www.theguardian.com
Husing costs are included in inflation right? So again, part of this is the supply issue we have in this country and the ridiculous red tape/planning system.
The funnier part is they're refugees, so it's their family friend who is footing it anyway
