Surely the point of encouraging people to invest in a pension is to make life after retirement more comfortable as everyone is entitled to the state pension on reaching retirement age anyway

I thought it was to obtain investment capital by any means, by which companies could maximise profits whilst risk to the company (by laying off poor investments against their clients capital investments).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

I guess it gets reduced in comparison to those that live longer...so that's a bit of a paradox/oxymoron.

What I would say is that those who life debilitating conditions are also more likely to utilise the system more and their treatment cost more than those who simply live a healthy normal (if there is such a thing) life until they pass away.

Also, the life expectancy for someone with Dementia isn't as long as you or others would think...it's around 5yrs on avg.

I work in Social services, I see how much Residential and nursing beds cost..its criminal and EXACTLY why there's a push for preventative care to stop people getting to this stage in the first place.

Swings and roundabouts I guess

Edited by Lyons550 (13 Jun 2017 11.13am)

The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

The problem with NIC or the stamp is most people did not understand what they were paying for. Most thought they were saving stamp for their own retirement when (originally) they were paying for current pensioners on a very short “just in time “window, a couple of weeks I think. Obviously, this money is now just subsumed within the general tax burden.

As such perhaps pensioners should pay NIC or get rid of NIC and add into an adjusted income tax, which would be my preference.

You could remove the triple lock, or means test the basic state pension, or even remove the state pension and replace it with the stakeholder scheme, but contributions would require increasing shifting the burden of pension provision entirely onto the private sector, there would be some form very basic state net for those who did not contribute, but not for those who opted out.

I think it is probably too late to solve this solely by taxing pensioners and probably requires general taxation over the short-term to medium term (60 years); typical of a mixed economy, whilst the falling rate of birth and added longevity stabilise.

You bring in young temporary workers who could contribute to the tax yield from the rest of the EU, but that has been kyboshed mainly due to racism.

Some good news is that demographic trends have shown a slight worsening in longevity which should be encouraged, laws and taxation against smoking, drinking should be relaxed to draw maximum tax return against mortality. Recreational drugs should be legalised and taxed.

The baby boomers have had the best gold-plated pensioners, free education, the best of the NHS, perhaps we should treat them like the under 30s who have loans to pay off for state services. Perhaps the elderly should have a loan account on which they can draw upon (not just for a Dementia Tax but increased income, for example, and offset against all assets. An IFA would perhaps call this an enhanced nationalised equity release scheme. I would envisage that inter-generational responsibility would be a must.

You could always take their house and savings.

For Becky – During employment NIC was taken on standard pension contributions but not salary sacrifice, a loop hole HMRC is ready to close.

"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

Long term renter here. You make some very important sensible points. However the conservative government in its manifesto was banging the drum yet again of home ownership. Obvious reasons. If you fall on hard times you cannot claim housing benefit so it doesn't cost them anything. When you get old and possibly need care it's sold to fund it so again they don't have to pay anything or if they do it's massively reduced. And then the whole cycle repeats itself. There is no rent cap , longest tenancy you can get is a year so it's constant worry and uncertainty with it . Nigh on impossible to get a local authority property . Labour were the only party which addressed this issue in their manifesto. My rent for the house I live in is twice the mortgage. But I can't get a mortgage and I can't save the deposit so in effect trapped in this cycle. Quite what happens once I am old with no income and having to move all the time I don't know.

When I was a young girl my Mother said to me.. You listen here kid you're CPFC

You are referring back to a time when most women didn't work so had the time to look after elderly parents.