armsid Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 i see scotland is considering lowering the retirement age by 2 years due to the lower life expectancy in scotland why is it increasing here and who foots scotlands bill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Wee Jimmy Krankie Sturgeon will find it from "their North Sea Oil". Sadly some simpletons will believe her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Wont apply to me either way; I'll keep on working 'til I no longer can. Isn't the retirement age going up to 70? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drut Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Wee Jimmy Krankie Sturgeon will find it from "their North Sea Oil". Sadly some simpletons will believe her. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyD Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Does it really matter, only six Scottish people have ever lived long enough to collect a state pension, and they were all millionaire living in other countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konnie Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Always tell my father ( he's 82) I am part of the generation that will die working, be interesting to know what I will be doing at the end as i'm a stone mason so heavy manual work all the time, got a image of me being like Mr burns from the simpsons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobba Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Wee Jimmy Krankie Sturgeon will find it from "their North Sea Oil". Sadly some simpletons will believe her. Talk to the Islanders eg Shetlands, Orkneys, Western Isles. It's not Scotland's oil it's theirs. Had there been a yes vote then the Islanders were suggesting they would become self governing like the Isle of Man. Presumably taking their oil with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krugerandsmith Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 i see scotland is considering lowering the retirement age by 2 years due to the lower life expectancy in scotland why is it increasing here and who foots scotlands bill? Its a con ..... They are now talking about raising the pension age to 75. Unless you are a Royal or MP there is very little chance of our young people receiving their rightful pension. What's happened to the people of this Country the French would never take this lying down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crowdie2013 Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Ignoring your gripe with scotland; most of us will be working until we drop I'm afraid. It's not scotland your subsidising, it's the mass of home grown spongers, immigrants, foreign aid and most recently the surge of transgenders! It's a **** state of affairs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winnie&bezza Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Only on this planet once and your literally working til you drop! What a sad state of affairs we have done to humankind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fse10 Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Ignoring your gripe with scotland; most of us will be working until we drop I'm afraid. It's not scotland your subsidising, it's the mass of home grown spongers, immigrants, foreign aid and most recently the surge of transgenders! It's a **** state of affairs Whats wrong with helpping out Chicks with *$%@'s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 In Scotland, in the build up before the referendum, a campaigner on my aunt's doorstep told her the SNP were going to double the old age pension in Scotland if they got independence. It was never true but its a common socialist trick, bribe the voters with public money. The pension age has to go up apparantly but the flaw is what jobs are there for people in their mid sixties? You have to be able to balance the equation, men who have done physical jobs can't just work on indefinitly I know I probably sound like a stuck record but if we weren't handing out money left right and centre to the undeserving ......................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Everyone wants to retire with a state pension, have a minimum wage, have state benefits, have bobbies on the beat and an army that can travel the world not to mention a national health service. With an increasing age population, who is going to pay for all of this? As a nation we have lost our grip of the economic situation. First sniff of any reform and the pram goes over whether it be a bedroom tax, chopping legal aid, closing tube ticket offices or lifting a tenner off anyway going to see their doctor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Surely the biggest driver of the increase in the retirement age is the aging population. Significantly more people are living 20, 30 years beyond the 'traditional' 65 years and this requires funding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norfolk dumpling Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 There are parts of Scotland where life expectancy for males is mid-50's so many will never see retirement and a pension. This is a life choice, I suppose, with smoking, poor diet and far too much alcohol the factors behind this. I don't agree the rest of us should subsidise this however as there are others who will live much longer, work longer and pay the taxes to subsidise the rest. Also the self-abusing Scots will cost us more in NHS costs so there is a balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 There are parts of Scotland where life expectancy for males is mid-50's so many will never see retirement and a pension. This is a life choice, I suppose, with smoking, poor diet and far too much alcohol the factors behind this. I don't agree the rest of us should subsidise this however as there are others who will live much longer, work longer and pay the taxes to subsidise the rest. Also the self-abusing Scots will cost us more in NHS costs so there is a balance. Its not just Scotland where that is true. I have no figures to support my theory but I would imagine the life expentancy goes down in any area of high unemployment. Obesity, poor diet, fags and booze seem to go hand in hand. These people though are living on benefits and a change in the pension age will not affect them at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Surely the biggest driver of the increase in the retirement age is the aging population. Significantly more people are living 20, 30 years beyond the 'traditional' 65 years and this requires funding. Absolutely right, however as that population gets older they become a massive drain on the NHS, far outstripping what they cost the country in pension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Everyone wants to retire with a state pension, have a minimum wage, have state benefits, have bobbies on the beat and an army that can travel the world not to mention a national health service. With an increasing age population, who is going to pay for all of this? As a nation we have lost our grip of the economic situation. First sniff of any reform and the pram goes over whether it be a bedroom tax, chopping legal aid, closing tube ticket offices or lifting a tenner off anyway going to see their doctor. Exactly this. The ONLY way to have a fully funded and functioning public sector is to have a thriving and competitive private sector. Without profitable businesses there simply would be no money to fund the likes of the NHS, the benefits system, pensions, the armed forces and police etc. The only way to address the situation we find ourselves in at the moment is to either create far more private business opportunities or cut the public services and wage bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldypigeonpopper Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 hello, while i am not into politics this is going to be the biggest con from this goverment, oh people are living longer so make them work longer and pay more money to get the basic retirement pension only to have less years to enjoy a retirement, those that can get into a private pension scheme will have a better chance but i know 20/30/40/50 year olds find that impossable with the high cost of living and family life, yes some people are living longer but how many do you know retired at 65 and died at 69 which just happened to someone i have known for many years, others i know have not even reached 65. in fact there many who do not reach 50.. i consider myself lucky but can we say that for our children and grandchildren and future generations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I would not like my views to be construed as anti- Scotland. I have many Scottish friends. Whilst parts of Scotland have people who don't live as long, there will be parts of the rest of the UK where this occurs. Different regions get better health care, yet we all pay into the same system. Student fees, prescriptions, hospital car parks - many more variations. My problem is where does Sturgeon think the money is coming from? If someone retires early, someone else has to work longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead-Eyed Duck Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 All you can do is to try and plan for it. We did without lots of 'luxuries', and managed to pay off our last mortgage 15 years before I retired at the age of 65 (this took 18 years mortgage payments). All of a sudden we had lots of money, as this coincided with both of our youngsters leaving home. For the last 15 years working I paid 29% of my salary into a pension scheme, and my net retirement income is higher now than when I was working. I know that saving and planning is out of fashion for some, as is living within your means, but it can work out if you get it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TONY R Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Its wrong to keep moving the retirement age up and up we paid our due demands, and we should get what we are entitled to, when they originaly told us we were going to get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 All you can do is to try and plan for it. We did without lots of 'luxuries', and managed to pay off our last mortgage 15 years before I retired at the age of 65 (this took 18 years mortgage payments). All of a sudden we had lots of money, as this coincided with both of our youngsters leaving home. For the last 15 years working I paid 29% of my salary into a pension scheme, and my net retirement income is higher now than when I was working. I know that saving and planning is out of fashion for some, as is living within your means, but it can work out if you get it right. You are absolutely right. It is always harder early on as ones income is typically lower and outgoing are greater. I do feel that modern youth finder it harder to prioritise. I struggle to get my son to prioritise contributing to a pension over the latest phone/Xbox/car etc. Perhaps it was always the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yod dropper Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 This helps. 2013/14 spending per head: Scotland, £10,275. England £8,678. East of England (my area), £7,950. (Which contains some of or the highest deprivation, unemployment and education standards). Even Lord Barnett admits that his funding formula is wrong and should be scrapped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitebridges Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) A lot of the problem in that contributions made today are funding the pensions of today. There is no time for these payments to grow. I figure more and more that you have to look after yourself and retire when you like. Relying on the state isn't going to get you far. In fact with such low investment returns things can only get much worse. A third of UK pensioners rely solely on the state for income during their retirement years and it's a struggle. Edited March 4, 2016 by Whitebridges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.