Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

explain the need for a pension age extension...

Options
2456

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Pensioners and those approaching pension age vote, so governments will always seek to protect pensions.

    Eventually the demographics will mean that they have no choice, but in the meantime lack of action on pensions reform will mean less money for health, education, infrastructure and social services.

    If you are a young voter (<40) then you're going to be hit by a double whammy - reduced services for you and your family, followed by a much reduced pension.


  • Options
    #33
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,376 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    Nijmegen wrote: »
    The state pension is not backed by a fund in your name. Your PRSI contributions mostly go out as they go in. So what matters is how many working age people there will be for pensioners in 15 years. That number will be half what it is today per the CSO models on it.

    As for allowing people to contribute more to their pensions, tax relief is available up to €115,000 per year of income on contributions ranging from 15% in your 20s to 40% in your 60s. Not sure how much more generous the state could be in not taxing money you decide to save for yourself for retirement.
    It could be treated as deferred income and, subject to a limit of a % of current income and/or an absolute amount in any given tax year, be ignored in full as taxable income and only subject to any tax as the pension is drawn down.


  • Options
    #34
    amadangomor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,148 ✭✭✭amadangomor


    wmahcm wrote: »
    Irish governments always have and always will waste money.

    Do you really believe the contributory state pension is one of the worst wastage's ?

    First and foremost it should be at a sustainable level determined by how much the country can afford balanced with people having a minimum standard of living. Raising it to buy votes is wrong.


  • Options
    #35
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Pawwed Rig wrote: »
    If they stopped raising it every year to buy votes it wouldn't need an age increase. At the end of the day it comes down to cost. The govt is not able to deal with the money we give them in any kind of efficient manner so wastage has to be absorbed somewhere

    The government has absolute political cover to spoil pensioners, the public support it broadly speaking

    Willie o dea has done nothing this past four years other than demand more money for pensioners, Regina Doherty felt constant pressure to match FF promises


  • Options
    #36
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    wmahcm wrote: »
    I wouldn't worry about it, there won't be a contributory state pension by the time you retire. The ever increasing indoctrination of ageism into Irish society will ensure it has been phased out long before then.

    Ireland is indeed ageist but against the young


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,376 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    893bet wrote: »
    I am building a small private pension. Hopefully a reasonable one by the time I retire. A couple of 100 a week to add to the state one.

    My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.
    I can very well see this happening, and easy to justify when it does.

    There was a time when pay related social insurance was truly pay related.

    What you paid in was related to your income and what was paid out e.g. jobseekers benefit if you were temporarily unemployed was also related to your previous income. Now jobseekers benefit is a flat rate and the duration of the benefit has been reduced.

    I'd say it's not a matter of if but when the noncontributory and contributory old age pensions get the same treatment.


  • Options
    #38
    Galwayguy35
    Registered Users Posts: 16,310 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    893bet wrote: »
    I am building a small private pension. Hopefully a reasonable one by the time I retire. A couple of 100 a week to add to the state one.

    My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.

    Wouldn't be a bit surprised, Governments here go out of their way to look afer the scroungers and the way they do this is hammer working people with tax.


  • Options
    #39
    Nijmegen
    Registered Users Posts: 3,086 ✭✭✭Nijmegen


    FishOnABike wrote: »
    It could be treated as deferred income and, subject to a limit of a % of current income and/or an absolute amount in any given tax year, be ignored in full as taxable income and only subject to any tax as the pension is drawn down.

    Unless I’m reading you wrong, that is what occurs? So when you’re in your 20’s you can contribute 15% of your income into a PRSA net of tax. In your 60s you can contribute 40% and there’s a sliding scale in between based on age.

    So, let’s say I’m earning €50,000 per year and I decide to contribute 10% of my income to my pension, that comes out before tax. So in my paycheque I actually only lose about €2,500 of net pay, €208 per month, versus the €416 I’m actually contributing.

    Better than deferred tax then, there are really beneficial tax rules when I decide to start taking out my pension. I can draw down a tax free lump sum at retirement. Yes if my pension is worth a lot I’ll pay income tax on part of what I get month to month thereafter, but my total effective tax bill on the €5,000 I put into my pension this year will be significantly lower than if I paid 52% on it at the top marginal rate today.


  • Options
    #40
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,095 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Saying the pension age doesn’t need to be touched makes about as much sense as someone in 1972 saying the road system we have now is fine for the future.


  • Options
    #41
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Brendan Bendar wrote: »
    Saying the pension age doesn’t need to be touched makes about as much sense as someone in 1972 saying the road system we have now is fine for the future.

    The pension crisis that is coming at us like a freight train will make 2008 look like a garden picnic in terms of the impact and over a much longer period

    No TD calling for more money for pensioners should be returned to the dail


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,095 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    The pension crisis that is coming at us like a freight train will make 2008 look like a garden picnic in terms of the impact and over a much longer period

    No TD calling for more money for pensioners should be returned to the dail

    I’d agree Max, once again we have the situation highlighted by the poll results out today Sunday that it’s electioneering and populism at work.

    These ‘promises’ will be decked when the reality takes hold, but that won’t become apparent until well down the road.

    FG had a big drop in today’s polls because they stuck more or less to their guns about the need to increase the pension age.

    The other parties took the easy route, thus advancing their popularity for this period, this short period until eventual reality hits home.


    Long term misery for short term gain.


  • Options
    #43
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Samara Bumpy Storybook wrote: »
    The French didn't agree with such proposed age rises, and so have now theirs reduced down to 64.

    And then when the country runs put of money to pay them when they are old, they'll send out the kids to smash up the place again.

    Nothing shows the government you mean business more than wrecking some private citizens cars and businesses.



    Plus, when it suits, people of 65 are frail old pensioners that need all the help they can get, when it doesn't then 65 is no age to be throwing people on the scrape heap because 65 isn't what it used to be.


  • Options
    #44
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    Ireland is indeed ageist but against the young

    and against the old
    listermint wrote: »
    Brexit entirely disagrees with your final statement.

    trying to blaming old people for Brexit is the very definition of ageism.


  • Options
    #45
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    listermint wrote: »
    Brexit entirely disagrees with your final statement.

    as I said ageism is being promoted in Ireland


  • Options
    #46
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Pensioners and those approaching pension age vote, so governments will always seek to protect pensions.

    Eventually the demographics will mean that they have no choice, but in the meantime lack of action on pensions reform will mean less money for health, education, infrastructure and social services.

    If you are a young voter (<40) then you're going to be hit by a double whammy - reduced services for you and your family, followed by a much reduced pension.

    Funny how this "choice" didn't apply to borrowing billions for generations to preserve developers, politicians and bankers pensions and wealth.


  • Options
    #47
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    893bet wrote: »
    I am building a small private pension. Hopefully a reasonable one by the time I retire. A couple of 100 a week to add to the state one.

    My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.

    That's exactly what is going to happen, anyone who is banking on the full contributory state pension being available for them in the future is going to be screwed over by "means" testing.


  • Options
    #48
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,479 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    As the population ages (and it will - that's the pattern across the developed World and Ireland will be no different, there will be more pensioners are fewer people paying tax to fund those pensions

    Life expectancies have risen by well over a decade in my own lifetime. We now have more than double the amount of pensions to fund than when I was born and this continues to increase. there has been a near 60% increase in the population over pension age in those past 2 decades alone

    Hence the money will run out.

    It's been forecast for at least 2 decades and the chickens re coming home to roost. The pensions timebomb is pretty much upon us and people in work will become increasingly resentful that they are having to have the ever increasing burden of funding pensions (and other social welfare costs)

    Yes efficiencies can be made, but ultimately pensions have to be pared back - the easiest way to do that is to recognise the increase in life expectancy and defer the pension age


  • Options
    #49
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    On the "people have been working x years and then being entitled to the pension at the end" standpoint.

    Say a state pension of 230 or whatever its is. Considering the amount of people on low income , or no income, how many are actually paying upwards of 230 a week in tax?

    Enough to cover, say, 20 years of getting that every week guaranteed?


  • Options
    #50
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Beasty wrote: »
    As the population ages (and it will - that's the pattern across the developed World and Ireland will be no different, there will be more pensioners are fewer people paying tax to fund those pensions

    Life expectancies have risen by well over a decade in my own lifetime. We now have more than double the amount of pensions to fund than when I was born and this continues to increase. there has been a near 60% increase in the population over pension age in those past 2 decades alone

    Hence the money will run out.

    It's been forecast for at least 2 decades and the chickens re coming home to roost. The pensions timebomb is pretty much upon us and people in work will become increasingly resentful that they are having to have the ever increasing burden of funding pensions (and other social welfare costs)

    Yes efficiencies can be made, but ultimately pensions have to be pared back - the easiest way to do that is to recognise the increase in life expectancy and defer the pension age

    and what pensions are you hoping to "pare back" .. let me guess working peoples contributory one, while the welfare class and the rich will get off Scott free as usual.


  • Options
    #51
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    wmahcm wrote: »
    and against the old



    trying to blaming old people for Brexit is the very definition of ageism.

    The elderly are spoiled beyond belief in this country


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    The elderly are spoiled beyond belief in this country

    In what way exactly ? and do you think by attacking them your going not going to get old ? Turkey's cheering on Christmas.


  • Options
    #53
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    On the "people have been working x years and then being entitled to the pension at the end" standpoint.

    Say a state pension of 230 or whatever its is. Considering the amount of people on low income , or no income, how many are actually paying upwards of 230 a week in tax?

    Enough to cover, say, 20 years of getting that every week guaranteed?

    The vast majority of people on the state pension ( contributory as well) will draw down multiples of what they made in PRSI contributions during their working life

    When you hear that the elderly more than paid for what they are getting, it's entirely false in most cases


  • Options
    #54
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    wmahcm wrote: »
    In what way exactly ? and do you think by attacking them your going not going to get old ? Turkey's cheering on Christmas.

    Is that a serious question?

    Pensioners saw no cuts whatsoever during the crisis years of 2008 to 2013, they are thee most pandered to voter demographic in the land

    The state pension in thirty years will be tiny compared to today, it's completely unsustainable in it's current form


  • Options
    #55
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    The vast majority of people on the state pension ( contributory as well) will draw down multiples of what they made in PRSI contributions during their working life

    When you hear that the elderly more than paid for what they are getting, it's entirely false in most cases

    Well hopefully the contributory state pension will be removed along with any other remaining benefits for any elderly who worked and paid taxes by the time you get to that age. Oh and your house should be removed from you as well.


  • Options
    #56
    Galwayguy35
    Registered Users Posts: 16,310 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    TDs especially in FG and FF know the so called grey vote is key to them getting their arses back in the Dail at election time so that's why they will ignore it rather than do anything to reduce the pension.

    Like everything else the can will be kicked down the road for as long as possible and let some future government handle it when it can be no longer ignored.


  • Options
    #57
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    wmahcm wrote: »
    Well hopefully the contributory state pension will be removed along with any other remaining benefits for any elderly who worked and paid taxes by the time you get to that age. Oh and your house should be removed from you as well.

    Reductive ****e


  • Options
    #58
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    TDs especially in FG and FF know the so called grey vote is key to them getting their arses back in the Dail at election time so that's why they will ignore it rather than do anything to reduce the pension.

    Like everything else the can will be kicked down the road for as long as possible and let some future government handle it when it can be no longer ignored.

    Willie o dea is the biggest cheerleader of more largesse for the elderly which is entirely in keeping with that kind of cheap hustler politician


  • Options
    #59
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    TDs especially in FG and FF know the so called grey vote is key to them getting their arses back in the Dail at election time so that's why they will ignore it rather than do anything to reduce the pension.

    Like everything else the can will be kicked down the road for as long as possible and let some future government handle it when it can be no longer ignored.

    Do you really believe falling for all this fostering of hatred for older people is not going to effect you when you are older ?


  • Options
    #60
    wmahcm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 75 ✭✭wmahcm


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    Reductive ****e

    What a devastating and well thought out counter argument.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,376 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    Nijmegen wrote: »
    Unless I’m reading you wrong, that is what occurs? So when you’re in your 20’s you can contribute 15% of your income into a PRSA net of tax. In your 60s you can contribute 40% and there’s a sliding scale in between based on age.

    So, let’s say I’m earning €50,000 per year and I decide to contribute 10% of my income to my pension, that comes out before tax. So in my paycheque I actually only lose about €2,500 of net pay, €208 per month, versus the €416 I’m actually contributing.

    Better than deferred tax then, there are really beneficial tax rules when I decide to start taking out my pension. I can draw down a tax free lump sum at retirement. Yes if my pension is worth a lot I’ll pay income tax on part of what I get month to month thereafter, but my total effective tax bill on the €5,000 I put into my pension this year will be significantly lower than if I paid 52% on it at the top marginal rate today.


    You pay USC and PRSI on pension contributions and a government levy on the pension fund so pension contributions are not free of tax.


Advertisement