Vocal Voices

Two new recommendations from a government review by John Cridland say that that those under 40 should not receive an old age pension till they are 68, and those under 30 not receive one till they are 70.

Men and women currently live, on average, till they are about 80.

OK, Mr Cridland, here's my view. If I was under 40 I would be taking a forensic look at different political parties and voting for one, any one regardless of my political leanings, which promised to bin your 'recommendation'. If I was under 30 I would be looking to leave and turn out the lights.

I would (am) also be asking what work all these 'old timer' fire officers. police, construction workers, commercial drivers (of anything), pilots, binmen, warehouse staff, you get the drift, will be expected to do?

As I understand things, jobs offering transport to work, a free lunch and £300 per day 'working' allowance are limited, to say the least.

I found it hard enough still teaching a large primary school class at the age of 61. I couldn't imagine still being able to do it much longer than that.

That's the same age my mother retired from teaching Rodo.

Yes there are jobs over 60's can still do. Whether they will be given a chance to do them is another matter. I worry about what the future holds for my children, but I think there isn't much I can do about it; just help them if I can.

Re teaching, I am also with Rodo.

When it comes to jobs...

The largest number of those in receipt of benefits are actually in work and receiving in-work benefits such as tax credits or income support.

The implication of the above is that they do not have money to put aside to buy a pension worthy of the name. They are also more likely to be in manual jobs and will probably be physically unable to carry on past age 'x', which will not be in the region of 68 to 70. Another thing is that a lot of those jobs will have ceased to exist by the time a 30 or 40 yr-old is due a pension. What then?

It is one thing sitting at a desk, like Mick does, until 66 (his current State Pension age) but quite another to be standing all day in a shop, or painting and defrosting, or bricklaying, or being a paramedic or nurse

I don't think that whoever decides these things lives in the real world

On a flight to Stockholm in 2000, I was sitting next to an American who worked in the Pensions industry. He told me that most countries in the EU would have to raise their pensions age to 70 in the next two decades. He also told me that the UK was the only country in the EU worth investing in for pensions due to the Thatcher reforms.

Shortly after that Brown raided British pensions and we are where we are.

The person who decided that pension ages would be what they are was Brown. All for a lousy 19 billion. Which costs the government over 50 billion a year to service.

Utter moron.

I thought that Brown's raid was on company pension funds earned on stock market dividends.

Cridland is talking about the State pension funded by NI contributions.

Not that it really matters. The jobs will not be around when those who are now in their 30s and 40s reach even the old traditional pension age of 65.
Thinking that they will still be in work is pie in the sky stuff.

On the QT the tories are talking about allowing pension funds to lower payments to their pensioners if the fund is "hard pressed". It just gets better and better. Green light for some major fiddling if you ask me.

The raid was on pension tax relief, pulling people out of private pension funds and back into SERPS and driving the full weight of greater pensions back onto the government instead of into the corporation tax profits of companies that can be taxed.

Something Brown and Labour as a whole, were completely unable to understand.

Just to emphasise what I was saying about future jobs PwC has issued a new report.

Robotics and artificial intelligence could affect almost a third of UK jobs by the 2030s....

The study estimated that 30% of existing jobs in the UK were potentially at a high risk of automation...

"more manual, routine jobs" which "can effectively be programmed" were the most at risk.

Over to you, genius Cridland. A whole raft of those currently well under 30 will only be in their mid-30s when jobs disappear. What will they be doing for the 35 years until their OAPs kick in?