Cable Forum - A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - A non means tested flat rate pension for all? (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33671253)

Osem	25-10-2010 21:21

A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11618019

The idea apparently is that by taking out the complexities and costs associated with means testing etc., more could be paid out to pensioners irrespective of their contributions.

Does this sound like a good idea?

Damien

25-10-2010 21:24

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

I thought it was linked to NI contributions? Kinda sucks if you have been working your whole life only not too see that reflected. Guess it's better than people struggling on a small one though.

Hugh	25-10-2010 21:24

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Some more info from the BBC

nomadking

25-10-2010 21:43

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

It's just another wheeze to give women money for not actually doing anything.

martyh

25-10-2010 21:46

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

certainly beats phasing it out which had bets on happening

Damien

25-10-2010 21:54

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35113436)

It's just another wheeze to give women money for not actually doing anything.

Yes. It's a conspiracy. :rolleyes:

Maggy

25-10-2010 23:03

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35113436)

It's just another wheeze to give women money for not actually doing anything.

Do you actually engage your brain before speaking/typing?

The vast majority of women these days work unless they have taken time off to care for small children and then many of them return to work long before the children are ready because one wage is not enough.Whatever your particular problem with the women in your life you really have no right to judge the rest of us..because you know nothing about the majority.Your experience is not that of everyone else.Plus pension ages are just about caught up or should be by 2015.

nomadking

25-10-2010 23:15

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

From linked article in first post.

Quote:

James Landale BBC News deputy political editor
Liberal Democrats would be happy to see women and lower earners get more.

Why should people who have contributed national insurance all their lives get the same pension as those who have not?

The catching up of pension ages is not by choice, but because of equality rules eventually having to be applied after decades.

Hugh	26-10-2010 07:13

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

From the actual article

Quote:

Some women who currently fail to qualify for the full basic state pension because they have stopped working to raise children and therefore lack enough NI contributions.

Women are disadvantaged at present because they are normally the carers for children, so I believe it is right that they should get the same pension.

btw, it's a popular myth that the NI Contributions pay for the State Pension

Quote:

You are required to pay National Insurance contributions in order to ensure that you are entitled to receive certain state benefits if you need them, and the State Pension when you retire.

The contributions you make are not direct savings for your own pension: the contributions that taxpayers make today are paying for the pensions of today.

The pensions of the future will be paid for by the taxpayers paying contributions in the future

j52c	26-10-2010 08:07

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35113419)

In your link above, go down the page to the James Landale Analysis column, he says:-

"In other words, this policy is work in progress, it's not going to happen for a long while and it will only affect future pensioners."

If the above is true it is going to make some pensioners very angry indeed, and so it should.

Maggy

26-10-2010 08:22

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35113461)

From linked article in first post.

The catching up of pension ages is not by choice, but because of equality rules eventually having to be applied after decades.

And women also tend to earn less because they are the ones who take on low paid or part time jobs so they can be carers of their children and families.Then there are the full time carers of physically damaged or mentally damaged children or life partners who save the government an estimated Â£87 billion per year by being carers many of whom are women..I think they deserve a decent pension myself as well.

Damien

26-10-2010 08:24

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35113489)

btw, it's a popular myth that the NI Contributions pay for the State Pension

So goes everyone get the same regardless of contributions after they have contributed enough, however much that is, to achieve the base rate?

Hugh	26-10-2010 08:27

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Probably - that's how the tax system works at the moment (you pay your income tax, and if you need roads, hospitals, etc, you get the use of them, no matter how much/little you've paid in).

Chrysalis

26-10-2010 12:37

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35113419)

one thing that always goes unquestioned.

is why pensions (a benefit just like JSA and IB etc.) gets increases without a fuss been made but other benefits get squeezed.

the answer to your question is no, and is further evidence of "we all in it together" been complete rubbish.

Chris

26-10-2010 12:53

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Pensions and benefits are fundamentally different. They're so completely different that if you don't already recognise that to be the case, it's going to be nigh-on impossible to answer your question in any way you're likely to understand.

Chrysalis

26-10-2010 13:22

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

exactly my point, people see them as different yet they both state provided benefits.

---------- Post added at 14:22 ---------- Previous post was at 14:21 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35113690)

Maybe it's because the pensioners actually worked all their lives to obtain that benefit rather than sitting on their fat backsides waiting for the next sprog / money machine to be dropped, with no intention of ever getting a job and contibuting to the society that they expect to bankroll them.

2 corrections.

people who have never worked get a pension.

some benefits require a work history aka NI contributions including incapacity benefit.

Chris

26-10-2010 13:48

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Actually your point was not that the pension and JSA are 'both state provided benefits' ... your point was that the pension is 'just like JSA'.

The differences between the two are profound and varied. In fact the only real similarity is that they are both paid out of taxation.

Maggy

26-10-2010 13:52

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Also some of us have never had JSA or it's equivalent..;) But I do hope to pick up a pension For which I have paid full NI when working(many working wives failed to do so when they had the option of full or part contribution during the 70s) and had my contributions partially covered by receiving child benefit..Even so I'm a little short which I will have to make up at some point..

Chrysalis

26-10-2010 14:51

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35113717)

no my point was people generally would oppose 'any' benefit increase but this benefit increase because its pensions will likely be seen different.

Chris

26-10-2010 15:43

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

It will be seen as different, because it is different.

Chrysalis

26-10-2010 18:08

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35113755)

It will be seen as different, because it is different.

again proved my point.

Chris

26-10-2010 18:26

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Sorry ... that makes about as much sense as predicting the BBC will broadcast the Queen's speech on Christmas day, then crying 'I told you so!' at 3 o'clock.

Claiming that people who disagree with you will say 'pensions are different' doesn't prove any point. Pointing and looking smug when people who disagree with you, say they disagree with you, doesn't prove a point either.

Now, is there any danger of you constructing a reasoned argument in favour of your claim that pensions are 'just like JSA', or are you simply going to keep repeating it until everyone else gets bored waiting?

Chrysalis

26-10-2010 21:55

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

my point was to try and make it clearer, that I said many people if not most people believe pensions to be a different class of income to any other state benefit. You then said because it is different which is exactly what I said people think.

We have contribution based pensions funded by national insurance tax, only payable to those who have paid enough NI. It is a state benefit.
We have income based pensions payable to those who have a lack of income and savings, it is a state benefit.

Pensions come under the same budget as every other benefit and make the vast bulk of the DWP budget.

Someone could be claiming JSA or IB all their life and be considered layabouts by poeple, as soon as they hit pension age they suddenly more respected and more deserving why?

Likewise someone could be working all their life and then fall ill at 35, they then go on contribution based incapacity benefit (or ESA now days) and having paid 17 years worth of NI now claiming back due to ill health, they be considered **** and undeserving but likewise someone who claims contribution based pensions has earned it. Whats the difference?

There is certianly no reason why IB(ESA) should be different from the pension rate, they both there to cover living costs for people who dont have to work. They differ tho due to political reasons.

Hugh	27-10-2010 07:29

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

One small flaw in your otherwise reasoned argument - the premise that "they then go on contribution based incapacity benefit (or ESA now days) and having paid 17 years worth of NI now claiming back due to ill health, they be considered **** and undeserving".

Please don't believe what the red-top rags print - it's not the view (imho) of the majority of the country, the red-tops would just like to think it is (and try to make it so).

Nearly everyone I know has no issues with genuine Incapacity Benefits/ESA claimants, but it is the likes of the Mail/Sun/etc who try to tar all claimants with the same brush that leads to your feelings, I believe.

Kymmy

27-10-2010 07:46

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

I wonder how many of those having a moan about benefits/pensions would soon change their tune if we had an american system and they suddenly found through no fault of their own that they'd lost their job and couldn't get another???

I'd rather have that back-up even if I never had to use it and for others to have the same backup equal to my own even at pension age...

You know what they say if you don't like it then go elsewhere as moaning on a forum is only gonna do one thing ;)

Chrysalis

27-10-2010 09:42

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy (Post 35114017)

it would be a mixed bag as shown in the us.

job takeup would probably be a 'bit' higher since a minority dont work due to lazyness. But the reality is we would have more people on the streets as they would go from having minimal support to nothing.

if we shouldnt moan on the forum then why even have this section? :) I find forums an excellent way of knowing what others think and why they disagree with me on stuff.

---------- Post added at 10:42 ---------- Previous post was at 10:33 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35114014)

Most people seem to believe tho the recent changes are to genuinly only kick off fraudsters and legit claimants will still be able to claim fine, not the case tho. So they are falling for what the media says. Also to mention the IB rate dropped on ESA and no media batted an eyelid.

Likewise the daily mail probably spent 100s of hours looking for one of a very few housing benefit claimants who gets silly money so they can print the story and suddenly people think its a problem thats rampant. The same paper then will print stories that they feel sorry penioners dont get enough money. I think the daily mail is the worse of them all.

martyh

27-10-2010 17:34

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35113923)

part of JS,IB(ESA)or income support is stopped at source to pay the NI contributions ,so if as in your example someone works for 17 years then falls ill and has to claim IB(ESA) they will still be paying NI contributions out of their allowance .In that respect State Pension is not a benefit it is paid for throughout the recipients working life (wether they have worked or not)

---------- Post added at 18:34 ---------- Previous post was at 17:51 ----------

what about this ,i haven't heard of this before,N.E.S.T is due to start next year with all employers joining by 2016. On the face of it ,it seems like a good scheme but i can imagine it being a bit of a burden for smaller companies

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11627135

Chrysalis

27-10-2010 18:24

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

its simply moving the burden from government to individuals and business's ultimately employers will factor in the cost when deciding someone's salary.

Hugh	27-10-2010 18:30

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

And isn't that were some of the burden should be? - NI doesn't cover/fund an adequate State Pension.

martyh

27-10-2010 18:34

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35114354)

And isn't that were some of the burden should be? - NI doesn't cover/fund an adequate State Pension.

Is this scheme meant as a eventual replacement for using NI contributions for pensions? ,after all as you say NI contributions don't come anyway near covering the cost of a state pension

Hugh	27-10-2010 18:38

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

I believe it is in addition to the State Pension, focused on low to moderate income earners who may not already have a company pension.

N.E.S.T.

martyh

27-10-2010 18:54

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35114363)

I believe it is in addition to the State Pension, focused on low to moderate income earners who may not already have a company pension.

N.E.S.T.

interesting link Hugh ,:tu: on the face of it i can't see anything wrong with the idea and will certainly help my wife who earns just over minimum wage but under the Â£7,475 band as she would be able to opt in

Chrysalis

27-10-2010 20:05

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35114354)

And isn't that were some of the burden should be? - NI doesn't cover/fund an adequate State Pension.

When I last checked the figures, 2005/2006 year. The NI contributions were in profit funny enough.

There was about 12 billions worth of NI spare from NI intake that was not used on NI based benefits pensions/IB and NI JSA. Where that 12 billion went I have no idea, I expect to fund a shortfall somewhere.

The government is good at misleading people.

If the government were to drop NI related benefits, I would expect them (if moral) to likewise drop NI taxation levels. Otherwise people are paying for the same thing twice.

Hugh	27-10-2010 21:23

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

BBC

Quote:

National Insurance is now used to pay for:

The NHS
Unemployment benefit
Sickness and disability allowances
The state pension

NI is supposed to be "ring fenced" - meaning the money raised is only used for these areas and won't be spent on things like building schools or employing police officers.
However, the government can borrow from the National Insurance fund to help pay for other projects

In 2008-09, the forecast NI revenue was Â£97.7 billion (source - IFS page Page 4, Table 1, which also states on page 11)

Quote:

National Insurance contributions (NICs) act like a tax on earnings, but their payment entitles individuals to certain (‘contributory’) social security benefits.

In practice, however, contributions paid and benefits received bear little relation to each other for any individual contributor, and the link has weakened over time. Some contributions (21% of the total in 2008–09) are allocated to the National Health Service; the remainder are paid into the National Insurance (NI) Fund and used to finance contributory benefits. The NI Fund is not a true fund in the sense that it has no significant balance available for investment: current contributions finance current benefits, and their notional separation from general government revenue is a largely meaningless accounting exercise.

Officially, the fund should not fall below one-sixth of NI expenditure, to ensure there is enough money available to pay benefits. Historically, this has been achieved through a grant from central taxation

btw, the Government aren't dropping the State Pension - NEST is to supplement it.

btw2, 16% of the UK population are pensioners - that's approx. 10 million people; divide the quoted surplus of Â£12 billion between them, and that would about Â£20 a week each for a year, then it would be all gone.....

Chrysalis

27-10-2010 21:40

Re: A non means tested flat rate pension for all?

I know pensions arent been dropped, but NI based IB has been done in its ESA variant. In addition some forms of IB are to be time limited which is another budget drop.

All times are GMT. The time now is 14:44.