Paying for old age

Erm, no:

Today\’s green paper will lay out various options. On retirement, everyone who can would pay a lump sum of around £20,000 up front and nothing ever again. Or that sum could be attached to the value of their home, deducted from their estate after death along with accumulated interest. Or, if you delay retirement and don\’t draw your state pension for three years, the sum would be waived altogether. These could be mixed and matched by paying a portion up front, and having a portion attached to the value of your home.

You see, we all already pay for our old age. It\’s called National Insurance.

That large chunks of what we pay are pissed up against the wall on things which are not in fact national insurance is the problem, not that we are not paying for it.

For example, in those financing options, raising the state pension age is mooted as a method of paying for such care. Given that the pension is in fact social insurance, insurance against outliving your savings, the pension age should rise anyway. To the median age of death (currently 77 for men, 81 for women or thereabouts).

That would leave plenty of money out of what we are all already paying to pay for care.

8 thoughts on “Paying for old age”

  1. Both the pension-able and the retirement age have to go up. By raising retirement we would reduce the spend and increase the revenue which , if anyone had noticed , is kinda urgent.
    What about just as a start getting the fucking parasite Public sector retirement age up the same level as the poor saps who pay for them. When you think that we cannot even achieve that you begin to see how politically explosive the area is .Perhaps you are being ironic but in my view what you have said is no more than the cold hard facts .

    PS in parts of Glasgow male life expectancy is about 50 ( way below the surprisingly Methuselan folk of the Gaza strip ), why should they pay NI that kicks in at 77 ? .

  2. “Well there it is , clear indication that the so called National Insurance is no longer anything but.”

    We should officially dub it the ‘National Ponzi Scheme’. It’d be more honest..

  3. The main rate for employees is about 11% of gross pay. But the employer has to top that up also with another 12% towards the employees NI account. If we looked at our total NI account after say 35 years of steady employment, it would amount to a tidy sum.

    Then out of the remainder we paid our income tax, and our company pension contributions. Then we did our shopping and paid 17%VAT on many of the things we bought. Paid our council tax.

    And we still saved up a little nest egg, and for years they have been slavering at the thought of getting their hot little hands on that too. They can’t sleep at night for worrying you might have a savings account that they can’t get at. There have even been cases of social workers abducting old people from the care of their own family, to shove them into an old people’s home and make claims on the poor old soul’s savings and house.

    I’d shoot myself to stop the bloody treasury tapeworms, or the council vultures getting any more of my money.

  4. Pingback: Longrider » Social Care Costs

  5. We pay them £20K and in return they promise to look after us in our old age?

    Erm, isn’t that what they promised when they took 11% of everything we earned throughout our working lives? Remember “cradle to grave” and all that guff about the envy of the world? You do?

    Then why in the name of the wee man would we believe them this time?

    All they want is some cash up front; they’ll help themselves to the rest in due course, and probably you STILL won’t get decent care when you need it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *