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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Pensions Age to ..... 72 !?

2456

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,834 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    So we are inviting in people with a sob story from all over the globe, giving them spending money, healthcare and housing/accommodation .. that all costs, maybe in xx years the country will be so overburdened, overpopulated that a government WILL have to tag on a few years to the pension age.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,392 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Looks like two things are going to happen over time 1) working citizens will pay more into PRSI and private pensions and 2) state pensions will be reduced or allowed to devalue. A mix of a modest private pension and a modest state pension is what we're heading for.

    And of course, the 'gig' economy for retirees where they work a bit at this or that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,042 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    Work til you die.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭I see sheep


    I've been hearing this on Boards for years, and as a previous poster above said, there's zero chance of there being no pension.

    If it is ever suggested/brought in that party would never get into Government again.

    How will it be paid for? Higher tax I'd imagine, or just borrowing make believe money like every country is doing now?

    Either way it'll never happen, I wonder are the people who say this working in the private pension industry?



  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Most people that I know in their 20's/30's haven't even started a pension yet. High rents and saving for houses etc.

    Lots of people think life is better these days because we have technology, foreign holidays, netflix, Spotify etc

    I'd personally prefer if it was just a bit easier to get the basics in life. A place to live, car to get you from A to B etc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    When they hit 40 or 50 they will start thinking about their pensions big time.

    They will be retiring at 72. Let that sink in after 30 years of working and you are only about 50 :)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,938 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    72 is the new 42.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,920 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    Sinn Féin are a professional opposition party. Anyone who thinks they'd swoop in and fix all these issues lickety-split if only they could get into government is living in cloud cuckoo land.

    The reason FF/FG haven't been able to sort this over multiple terms in government is because it's a huge, multi-faceted highly complex issue. Not because they're lazy/incompetent/couldn't be arsed. (Not saying they haven't been all of those things at times over various topics, mind.)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,089 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble



    Private pensions is exactly

    "If they just want time out of the workforce with no obligations, they need to save up and fund it for themselves."

    The PRSI we pay isn't funding our pensions. It's funding the pensions of the current old people.

    Under current rules, it is entitling us to a pension when we're old, paid for by the young people then. But those rules can be changed, just like the age limit can be changed.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,976 ✭✭✭Marty Bird


    Trim the welfare budget and give it to the people that contribute to the pot.

    🌞6.02kWp⚡️3.01kWp South/East⚡️3.01kWp West



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Public sector employees don't get the state pension anyway (Well they do but their own pension is reduced to match)



  • Registered Users Posts: 729 ✭✭✭SupplyandDemandZone


    Another one here voting for SF next time out if the age is increased under this government. I've worked all my life bar a year out fighting cancer and am looking forward to putting my feet up in a few years time.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's almost like politicians are incapable of seeing past the next election cycle. Shocking, I know



  • Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    What covid and broadband availability for working from home has proven is that the market will not provide or meet demand for a lot of people.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    yeah I’m sure all those people who paid prsi all their working lives would just rollover and let someone change that rule without compensating them.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 729 ✭✭✭SupplyandDemandZone


    That will never happen. You'd have old people living on the street homeless starving to death in huge numbers. Half the country hasn't any sort of private pension at all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Ben D Bus


    People are living longer healthier lives. Funding a long pension requires significantly larger contributions during a working life.

    Maybe we should consider raising the pension age while at the same time giving equal consideration to introducing a 4 day working week.

    It might be a better balance to have more free time in ones younger years when raising a family, lead to even better health, less burn out and as a result make a longer working life more attractive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Well, it's not likely to happen for another 7-8 years and then by 3 months a year.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    Worst poster on boards there is. Don't even think it's a wind up. Just not very bright



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,444 ✭✭✭PokeHerKing


    Very naieve of you to believe that could never happen. People all over the world including our island are already homeless and starving and dying on the streets.

    We've had a good run in the west of late but its far from a guarantee it will continue indefinitely.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Well you are talking about full societal collapse there. Might happen. Provided the state survives we aren’t going to get rid, totally, of pensions. It’s not in the interests of workers either - they would have to pay for their parents in old age, as happened before.



  • Posts: 864 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Do you genuinely think Sinn Fein will reduce it again, or stop the increases happening?



  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    the founding fathers of the US mostly died in their 80s. People could reach that age back then, it was unlikely but not extraordinary.

    I think we are hitting the limit now. Don’t see general life expectancy hitting 90-100 ever.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,766 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    This has happened already.

    For new TDs, their PS pension will be paid out at the same time as their State Pension.

    This does not apply to TDs who have been there for a long time already.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,766 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    For all PS hired since 2013, their PS pension age is the same as the State pension age.

    So if the State Pension age increases, then the PS Pension age also increases.

    https://singlepensionscheme.gov.ie/

    https://singlepensionscheme.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Standard-Accrual-Booklet-EN.pdf



  • Registered Users Posts: 729 ✭✭✭SupplyandDemandZone


    No idea but Im prefer give them the chance. Voted FFFG for years and the country is a mess in general. I'll give SF the chance to prove their worth



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,834 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    If it ends up happening it’s going to be because of the large population spike being endured thanks to immigration...

    so ultimately our thanks for welcoming, housing, financing, allowing and supporting people all over the world to come here is not just..

    • colossal hospital waiting lists
    • less or fûck all money for capital projects
    • overburdened and over crowded public transport

    now we might have to wait 7 years extra for a pension ? Keep working longer to stay alive ? Experience a lower quality of life in the process ?

    Average life expectancy here is 81.2 years... no pension that will plummet.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,636 ✭✭✭dotsman


    This attitude is one of the reasons we are already in the mess that we are in. We cannot keep the pension age at 65/66. We cannot afford it. And the longer we pander to the people retiring now/soon, the worse it will be for the people who are retiring in 20/30/40 years time.

    You cannot simply go "on the dole". Jobseeker's benefit is only for 9 months. After that, it is jobseeker's Allowance which is means tested. So if you have been sensible and have built up life savings, or a private pension, you won't be eligible.

    The don't need to work. They can go on benefits and then claim a pension. As long as you are on benefits, the taxpayer picks up your PRSI contributions. And yes, the numbers of 55-year olds will be low - that is an extreme example they were giving. But the fact is that lots of people receive the same pension that haven't contributed at all, or very little. Be it people who have spent most/all their life on benefits, or older immigrants etc.

    Ironically, when it comes to pensions, (good) immigrants are one of the best tools we have to fund the pension pot. People who only come here for a few years before returning home, pay their tax, but never claim benefits/pension are brilliant! Likewise, young immigrants who come to work and work their entire lives are huge contributors to the welfare pot. Likewise, with Irish people producing less and less (contributing*) next generation adults, it is immigrants who we will need to fill the gap.

    *Contrary to what many left-wing people on boards claim, it is not "we need more children". It is we need "more children who are raised by good parents who will teach those children to be successful and productive adults who contribute to society".



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    It's not whether it's 90 or 95 or 100. The point is whether you consider it to be fair that taxes on working people will need to keep increasing to cover paying pensions for longer and longer periods. If you think that is fair, then fine, keep the retirement age at 65 forever ( or reduce it further if you think 65 is too old to be working)

    Life expectancy in Ireland in 2002 was about 77. Now it is 82. Yeah maybe life expectancy will stop increasing at some point but there is nothing to suggest we are at that stage yet.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    Im with you there.

    30 years voted either FF or FG. This has just tipped over though tbh.

    SF can surely see there are votes in maintaining the current pension age.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,111 ✭✭✭✭listermint




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Triangle


    If youve been voting 30 years, then you should realise SF have been conservative and anti EU for most of that. It was only when they saw an opening they changed thier 'beliefs'


    The true lefts are SDs now and also the more radical smaller ones.

    Voting SF would be like voting trump or boris in. The same arguments of giving them a chance were made to disastrous outcomes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,105 ✭✭✭Trigger Happy


    The Free Money Tree politicians will never really accept the reality that the only way to keep funding a retirement age of 65 is to either start hiking taxes on working people or reducing the state pension payout. Something has to give. Populism cant solve this riddle.

    The government needs to do a lot more work to get people contributing to private pensions too. And what they did during 'austerity' by dipping in to private pensions was short termism and very very counterproductive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    FF and FG have changed for the worse though, as have labour. And im at the age where taxes and pension now matters as it doesnt seem as far away as it did 10 years ago to me.

    I never thought id ever vote SF, but here we are. They are now the best of a bad lot for the working person who would like an easy retirement. Who would have thought that?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Triangle


    I see your point in that age group, i feel sorry for the young ones that will be left with the bill after putting their faith in 'change'

    I wouldnt vote FF or FG in a heartbeat either



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,269 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    What they claim they'd do may make them appear to be the best of a bad lot for the working person who would like an easy retirement but what Sinn Fein do in government in Northern Ireland has been almost universally the exact opposite of what they claim they'd do in our country. Their claims are about as credible as Gerry Adams denials that he was ever a member of the IRA.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    They are part of a consociational executive in NI, that doesn’t really have tax raising powers; it just determines how the block grant is spent. It’s really not comparable to the powers the republic’s government enjoys.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,269 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    You're very naieve if you believe a word they say tbh.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    Many Americans work til they are 70 as the welfare payments are low and they have to pay bills and medical expenses. I think they should leave the age at 65. We are entering a new age of inflation many basic goods are rising in price, oil gas etc while we had low inflation for 10 years. Also the birth rate is low as many young people can't afford to buy a house. There could be serious problems in 10 years time as more people reach the age of 65



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,354 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Jaysus. You’ve really out-bumbled yourself with that one. Are you a committee?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Life expectancy is increasing but people's physical ability is not. You can increase the life span all you want but if a tradesman can no longer lift things, or an IT person's hands have arthritis and can no longer do small part work what can you do?


    People's medical health and physical decline are not always linked. Do you really expect a 72 year old to be able to push a pallet truck around, in a full time job?



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,443 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Very unlikely if you look at the demographics, the entire workforce is getting older. I expect Ireland will find itself in the same situate as other Europe countries with an older workforce - efforts will be made to get people to continue working past retirement age, encourage housewives to return to the work force part time etc....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,636 ✭✭✭dotsman


    You know, people who have left wing economic political views.



  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    which means most of the PS won’t be affected for decades.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,821 ✭✭✭Fann Linn




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,821 ✭✭✭Fann Linn




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭knipex


    You want the state to giv eyou a pension for 15 years but you do not want to pay the cost of doing so ??

    We are getting to a stage where there are more and more people looking for a state pension every year and fewfer and fewer peopel workign to pay for the pension..

    Anyone thats prom,isign you that you can retuiire at 65 and pay noe more to support that right is just creatign a bigger problem that you to face later on and fu*kign it up for everyone coming behind you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭knipex


    Who exactly is goign to pay for the pensions fot this "large pensioner class" ??


    The number of people working for each person drawing a pension is falling. Eitehr everyone pays alot more into a pension fund or the pension becomes a gaint ponzi scheme.


    It it completely unsustainable as it stands..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,346 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm



    People seem to be missing a key point when they start saying "I'll switch to SF because they promise to keep retirement at 65", and that point is that the increased pension age is not coming from the government per se, but from the Dept of Finance telling the government. The very same Dept of Finance who will tell an incoming SF government, as they are saying right now, that there won't be money by 2040 to pay for pensions.

    So SF might stick with it as a populist policy in the short term but they can't ultimately get away from the simple numerical facts. The longer they put off increasing it the more painful it will be in the future.

    Life expectancy is rapidly increasing, to ignore that fact is pure folly. Another key point to consider is why is 65 the "correct" age for retirement? The reason was again based on life expectancy initially so pension payments might just average 10 years or maybe less, so logically if people are living longer than 65 it really is just an arbitrary age.

    Already banks have been giving mortgages to people payable until 70 years of age because they know the reality is people will be working until that.



  • Posts: 2,725 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Hope you aren’t trying to make some ham fisted attempt at a comparison, dude.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement