Why under the present conditions are governments NOT looking at decreasing the retirement age to somewhere around 62/63, instead of three incredible to 67??? I know it's not a nice thought, but with 60,000 or so deaths already, how much have the govt saved on future pension payments?? Therefore, when things are better, why don't they let people of the above ages retire, after training younger people up, who have been made redundant due to the current crisis, as well as the government mishandling of the crisis, then employment will be at a higher rate than it is now, or could be higher. The unemployment rate currently will only rise. Will action like this not alleviate the problems the country will face in the future. Especially considering the amounts of money they have 'given' to their friends in the 'advisory' sector, and those other friends who haven't delivered one piece of PPE they have been paid millions for???? I know there are many more far intelligent and knowledgeable people on here than myself who may have better answers. But isn't the reduction of the state pension age worth looking at?
Thing is though it took them about 10 years to decide how to put the retirement age UP to 67. Also I think they might have more important things to be getting on with.
The money saved on a increase in excess deaths over the year will be unnoticeable in budgetary terms. Retirement age will only be moving one way.
They are going to need every penny in tax they can get what with the double whammy of Covid and Brexit (and to siphon it off to give to their mates), no way will they let people retire earlier.
I read somewhere (can't remember where), that the number of pensioners is estimated to grow by 9m over the next 50 years. I'd say that there's no chance of the retirement age being reduced. If anything, it'll creep up further. Either that or the rate will be knocked down on the grounds that more people have private (workplace) pensions.
Another not insignificant problem with your idea is that all the current pensioners who survive the pandemic would quite rightly be entitled to some back dated pension
Personally I would like to see where it becomes compulsory to contribute towards a private pension from the day you start. Not a huge amount, but let’s say 5% and it doesn’t interfere with a state pension, that way you could retire earlier if you wished based on your private pension and then later the state one kicks in too. Will be honest and say have no idea the practicalities, but I like the idea of the principal.
Mandating is fraught with problems, but the government have tried as best they can to get close to this, with workplace pensions being an ‘opt out’ if I understand them correctly. getting the under 40’s even close to engaging with a pension is a nightmare, the throwaway response being ‘ill never get to retire anyway’. whereas we all ‘logically’ know that front loading any investment is the winning strategy, trying to get people to save for 40 years into the future isn’t a priority at the side of student debt, saving for a deposit for a property, and trying to live a normal life.
Totally agree and I speak from experience that echos what you say there, I’m nearly 50 and have never contributed towards a private pension, thinking I’ll start later and now wished I had. I’ve been lucky and have a reasonable amount of money and a few properties as our pension pot. Everyone of my children have set theirs up as a result of my drumming, wether as life changes they keep up I can only hope.
They haven't saved anything. There were excess deaths during the peak of the virus. And then in the following months the number of deaths was lower than would be expected. Many of the people who died during the peak would have died in the following few months. When the calculation is made over the two year period from the start of the Covid-19 outbreak, there won't be any excess deaths. Not from the coronavirus anyway. It remains to be seen the significance of the increased deaths from other diseases that could have been treated but weren't and the reduction in life expectancy from poverty and poor mental health.
SO many reasons why earlier retirement won't (and should not) happen. I will start by saying I and my wife ARE extremely lucky to have been born when we were. We grew up in an era where our parents, who survived the War, were materially poor by today's accepted standards. I and my wife were born the year rationing finally ended. My parents had to scrimp and save for things what are now considered basics - Fridges, washing machines vacuum cleaners etc.. Things like Double glazing, central heating, mobile phones, foreign holidays, internet etc. did not exist (even a fixed line telephone at home was prohibitively expensive with a long waiting list). Hire purchase required around a third cash deposit. Material most people born in the 90s have no idea what it was like back then, post war and during the '50s and '60s . The downsides are many. NEVERTHELESS the biggest advantage we had over people starting out in life today was OPPORTUNITY. A 'living wage' was something that existed, not just something in some party manifesto that is never realised. Many people still worked for the same company throughout their life and there was still some social cohesion and family life (largely due to the fact that many jobs meant a single wage earner could bring up a family). There are many other factors too numerous to mention but a big factor is the need for both parents in many famiies having to work with the knock on effect both financially and socially. Childcare costs are astronomical for example. The social divide existed then as it does now but in many respects social mobility was still possible. My wife and I inherited nothing and came from relatively poor backgrounds (my wife particularly so her father being a disabled ex miner but both of us have had the opportunities (that word again!) to enable us to improve our quality of life and enjoy retirement. The problem now is many of those opportunities have been taken away. The divide is now that or the past generation, the Peace dividend means that those children of parents like us will inherit. They have also benefitted from parents who had the where with all to support them as they grew and during, for example higher education. This especially applies if they have gone on to successful careers The worries of the State Pension being payable late in life (or even being abolished altogether, does not really impact those in that position as they are self supporting (far better off financially than we ever were at their age) All that is in stark contrast to young people who do not have that support structure. i.e. no future inheritance to look forward to, poor job prospects even many graduates. Even if they can get a job, many cannot afford to buy homes and renting properties in short supply are also expensive. Living day to day is a struggle so how are they expected to save for a pension? The only solutions (and it won't happen) is a major re-adjustment of expectations. 1 People who have relatively high earnings should expect to pay more tax and, yes, Pensioners like us who have private and State pension and can afford it should forego the annual rise for several years as part of that readjustment and certainly the triple lock nonsense should go. Means testing is unpalatable and difficult to implement economically and politically but probably necessary. On the other side of the coin (and even less likely to happen) the younger generation (those that can ) should readjust their expectations and priorities. There are a minority - I stress a minority -complaining about not being able to save for a house then spend thousands on weddings, holiday sand partying as well as the 'I want it now' mentality with the current, cheap money culture we have. I suppose I am implying a mild form of the mantra...'from each according to his ability to each according to his needs', but it can surely be done in such a way as not to destroy incentive and entrepreneurial spirit and be accused of being a Communist!!. Nevertheless without a major change in direction I fear for my Grand daughter and her generations future and that before the long term implications of the Pandemic.
The Wellcome Trust found the average life expectancy of those dying of COVID in the UK was over 10 years (13 for women, 11 for men). https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75 While many victims were suffering from health problems such as dementia that would have seen them die within a short period of time, many were otherwise healthy and a number would normally have lived to celebrate their 100th birthday. The lower excess deaths from July-September would account for those who died a few months earlier than expected from COVID, but even taking those into account the UK is still over 60000 excess deaths so far in 2020. At ~600000 deaths per year and ~62 weeks until the end of 2021, we would have to be ~1000 deaths per week below the 5 year average to pull back to equality and we are currently back above the average (390 or 4% in week 40). That unfortunately is not going to happen as we head into Winter and the peak period for death rates.
Get back to me in two years with this, as I said that's when to look at the figures, also include the deaths from cancer and suicide compared to previous years when we get there.
Currently 12 million people are over 65 and another 4 million are approaching it. There are only 30 million tax payers in the UK who have to fun the pensions (and associated benefits) of those that are retired. State pensions account for upwards of £90bn per year *now*, and that is only going to increase as more people get older and retire. Remember that your NI payments paid the pensions of those who had retired *then*, and aren't saved for your retirement - you rely on people paying NI when you are retired, so effectively it is a giant Ponzi scheme which relies on increasing the number of workers to prop up state pension payments.
That is why they use "excess deaths" as the standard for accessing the impact of a pandemic or other event. If you died directly from COVID, or died indirectly (your cancer treatment was delayed due to overstretched resources, or no ICU beds were available when you had a heart attack), you are still an excess death that was caused by the pandemic. Excess deaths for 2020 and 2021 will be upwards of 10% above the average for any year since 2000.
As I said get back to me in two years and do a breakdown of those excess deaths and think about how we could have avoided them. They weren't caused by the pandemic they were caused by the decisions taken by politicians.
