a flexible pension age
Interesting policy floated by Corbyn - flexible pensions, retire when you want not when the State decides.
At least with this policy he has said where the money is coming from (increases in income tax and Corporation tax) but I would like to see some figures as to the cost of this promise - allowing people to retire when they like sounds extremely expensive as well as a bureaucratic nightmare (who decides what a physically demanding job is?)
Torygraph
The current political consensus is that we must increase the pension age – scheduled to rise to 67 by 2026 and to 68 by 2044 (subject to review every five years from 2017) – and cut social care provision.
Some people will be happy to work longer, others not. But living longer doesn’t mean we are able to work longer in physically demanding jobs like that of the firefighter, police officer or paramedic. And it’s not just in the emergency services: construction workers, care workers and prison officers cannot be expected to work into their late 60s.
So we need a flexible pension age that allows people to work for as long as they want to, while also recognising that for many people the nature of their work, their health, or their disability may not allow that.
At least with this policy he has said where the money is coming from (increases in income tax and Corporation tax) but I would like to see some figures as to the cost of this promise - allowing people to retire when they like sounds extremely expensive as well as a bureaucratic nightmare (who decides what a physically demanding job is?)
Torygraph
0
Comments
The reality is we have an aging population, life expectancy is dramatically higher than it was. No amount of grubby Corbyn spin can change that basic reality
The statutory retirement age was abolished some time ago.
https://www.gov.uk/retirement-age
And we can already defer taking our State Pension.
https://www.gov.uk/deferring-state-pension/what-you-may-get
So really, the only additional flexibility that Corbyn is proposing is around taking your pension early - which would cost.
I wonder what rate income tax will be when all his lovely people friendly schemes are added together. I'm guessing it'll be about 127%
One of the aspect of our changing demographic is that we have to rethink the whole idea of retirement. It's not going to be sustainable to give up work in your 60s when the majority of people are living well in to their 80s. Of course this doesn't mean you have 75 year old bobbies on the beat, however it does mean that there needs to be consideration for types of work that people can carry on in until their early 70s.
I've never accepted this argument that you should only be expected to work in one career and then get to give it up as soon as your no longer able to do it (the footballers' 'I need to retire at 35' argument'. For one I think it benefits an individual if they still feel valued and have something to get up for in the morning.
Of course there's nothing wrong with the concept of early/flexible retirement if the burden to the state remains the same. I can't see an issue with letting people take a lower state pension earlier than usually. What we would need to do in conjunction with that is encourage a system where individuals contribute towards their own retirement in a much more meaningful way. Maybe a decent equity release system from their property so that instead of giving their children a windfall when they pass, they use the money on themselves in retirement.
Is it OK if I use filthy Tories in future posts? It's just that the right wingers in here throw muck about like a hippos tail, but always pretend to be shocked maiden aunts whenever anyone expresses their true feelings for IDS or some other bottom feeder.
People can already retire whenever they want.
What they cannot do is draw their state pension early.
Corbyn is going to fund everything through increased taxes.
And yet he also wants to eliminate the deficit through economic growth.
I would add that when you pay into a private scheme direct from your wages it is before tax so you are gaining the amount that would of gone to the Inland Revenue,
It is not fixed - by deferring your state pension you can already increase the amount received.
To wait and discover if George Osborne has triggered the second Tory Pensions Disaster in a 30 year period.
And get paid less?
Most who defer are the ones who are still working or are in receipt of hefty private pension payments, of course.
No problem with that as long a people don't expect to be paid the full amount and don't come back crying when they run out of money.
Be careful. The Tories are well prepared for such comments when the topic discussed is either public or private pensions.
In the year leading up to the 2014 Budget the Tories spent 1 week on Policy and 51 weeks working on an elaborate wind up routine in which the whole front bench would wait for the first hint of doubt and would then cry: "So you want to tell people that they can't do what they want with their own money then?"
Let's be clear. This was a brilliant tactic to shut up the doubters. Would it have been good to hear just a little more from the doubters?
We will have to wait and see.
If people do indeed blow their own money and are then dependent on the state we may have to review our judgment that Thatcher was responsible for the greatest pensions fiasco in recent history.
But as far as working is concerned we already have this - it is illegal under EU law to discriminate on the grounds of age.
67 is just the age at which the state pension is paid. Nothing stopping people working past that time.
Well I actually think it’s a good idea for folk who can get their act together.
Allowing us golden oldies to draw their state pension earlier at a reduced amount making it the same as private pensions would help to create opportunities for young people.
The very first paragraph states
He seems to be grasping that reality okay to me. He's simply suggesting that now is the time to look at how we're going to fund it
Osborne is triggering much the same sort of discussion with his Strengthening the incentive to save paper.
Of course they have "opposing" views as to how it's going to be paid for, where George would force you to pay 5% into a pension pot, Jeremy would tax you 5% to fund the uber pot.
The essence however is people need to start contributing more, and we need to talk about how best to do that
But Corbyn is saying something diferent, he is proposing different retirement ages at which the state pension is paid based on an assessment of the work an individual does.
That's not how I read what he's saying. I think he is saying their are those for which a flexible retirement age is required, and this may be because of their jobs. That doesn't necessarily mean you need to assess their work, just give individuals the choice and the responsibility.
Not that I'd expect JC to go this way but you could achieve the same flexibility result by completely doing away with the state pension, putting everyone's share into private pots which take contributions from the government, employers and employees and then those that want to take their pensions early can do so. They would also have the responsibility to fund them
That's how I read but let's assume you are right. For those for whom a flexible retirement age is required you surely need to define who they are, he cites construction workers, care workers and emefgency workers. If he is proposing giving everyone a flexible retirement age then the state pension they are paid will have to be calculated based on the age they retire at to reduce it otherwise everyone will choose to retire early.