Also the BBs funded more generous pensions...HiI would just challenge the historical accuracy of that statement. If my history is correct, the state pension was introduced in 1909 (following the passage of the Old Age Pensions Act 1908) followed by the National Insurance Act 1911 which introduced health and unemployment benefits. Assuming that the baby boom kicked off from 1946, it is therefore the parents of the BBs (the pre-BB generation) who funded more generous pensions for the previous generation (the pre-pre-BB generation).True, free health care is introduced from 1948 which the BBs fund for the benefit of the pre-BB generation. However, the pre-BB generation ensure that the cost is kept proportionately low for the BBs by ensuring enough BBs are born.Er - what have the BBs done for the post-BB generation? The BBs stopped having babies with the consequence that the costs can no longer be kept as proportionately low for the post-BBs. Yet, the BBs demand the same level of post-retirement benefits as the pre-BBs - so, something has to give. Either: taxes go up for the BBs to pay for their perceived entitlement, or the Government can borrow (not a viable option given the general financial crisis), or you off-load the cost on to the next generation via the current system introduced, as I understand it, by the Old Age Pension Act 1908 where the working generations pay the current costs of the retired generations.Guess what? The BBs have chosen the latter not the former.On your point about increasing life-expectancy rates, I take your point that, if the retirement age remains as it is, the cost of supporting retirees becomes unsustainably expensive. But why is the default position that this cost has to be off-loaded on to the next generation through them working longer? As I say, why not raise taxes on existing pension income to share the pain? For example, a token gesture could be to abolish the current 65-74 personal allowance rate, and instead apply the basic personal allowance rate to people in this age bracket, whilst year-on-year raising the age level of the 75+ personal allowance until the last of the pre-BB generation has died off.Vindictive? Perhaps. But it would also send a clear message that we're all in this mess together!Best wishesChris
© Copyright 1998-2013, The Motley Fool Limited. All rights reserved. This material is for personal use only.The Motley Fool, Fool, and the "Fool" logo are registered trademarks of The Motley Fool, Inc.Place of Reg: England & Wales. Company Reg No: 3736872. VAT Reg No: 945 6990 68. Registered Office: 5th Floor, 60 Charlotte Street London W1T 2NU.
Page load time and server: