chris197337

I thought you didn't understand why it was so high, but you know it is based on her and her late husband's contributions. Mystery solved.

Sally Redux

I think this kind of generosity is what is being phased out.

chris197337

It isn't generous, it's based on what she and her late husband paid. It's a pension, not benefits.

Sally Redux

Actually on checking it, married women paid a reduced rate (not nothing). However, it's certainly a good deal in my view.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ch/1981697.stm

Perth

Oh yea, I know about the council tax I do love the flat. Can we afford it? Probably not, but I must be comfortable

Honestly, we may only live 6-12 months like this and find we have to lower our expectations. I figure we can cross that bridge when we get to it.

dunroving

Alternatively, why shouldn't people who have saved instead of squandered get the same benefits as those who squandered instead of saved?

Or put another way, why shouldn't people who paid into the syatem their whole lives get some benefit in retirement, rather than favouring those who have never contributed to the system?

I get a bit sick of the assumption that retirees who have a little money put away are the "undeserving rich" rather than responsible savers.

Anyway, how the heck did this thread get derailed onto this topic?

Sally Redux

I think it was me

I do actually agree with you on that as well, why penalize prudent pensioners.

I think it's just a feeling that the current generation of pensioners are going to be much better off than the next will be, yet they never seem to be happy about it, at least the ones I know.

However it's not on-topic and I am not trying to offend anyone.

dunroving

I think this thread has been derailed for a while (if you consider how/why it started).

But regards my rant, I think it's somewhat analogous to the off-hand mixing up of "real" scroungers with the working poor, disadvantaged, people with disabilities, etc.

Just as we shouldn't demonize everyone who receives benefits, we should also be careful not to confuse the "real" undeserving rich with people who simply dragged themseves up by the bootstraps, worked to get a good education and a decent job, and saved.

I call these respectively the "Daily Mail mentality" and the "reverse Daily Mail mentality".

I plough about half my monthly wage into savings and additional voluntary contributions to pension just so I will have a little security in my retirement and it bugs me that I might then be told I don't qualify for a bus pass despite the fact I have paid into the syystem my whole life, not one day excepted ... Grrr.

I hear what you say though - there is a golden generation who have retired very comfortably, thank you, due to being on the housing bandwagon at the right time, being in the endowment policy golden era, being in the high annuity rate era, having gold-plated final salary pensions that kick in at 55 or 60, etc., etc. As you say, when they whinge it does grate more than a little.

I went hiking with a small bunch of such retirees last year and all they could do was whinge about how the money kept piling up and they were struggling to kknow how to spend it! One of them had just bought a competely tricked out VW camper van with real leather upholstery (red, of course), every additional option going, for about £50,000. I'm happy for her but I thought she and the rest were being pretty insensitive whingeng on about having too much money, considering not everyone is so "lucky" (and yes, I mean luck).

Sally Redux

Indeed.

sallysimmons

I've also worked hard and saved and done all the right things but I look at it a little differently - probably because I've become too American

I don't feel penalized if I don't get freebies - I feel like the freebies should be there as a hand-up for people who need them, not as a gift to everyone.

Seeing other people get help doesn't upset me because, quite honestly, I'd far rather be a self-reliant person and have the independence that comes with it, and I consider myself very lucky to have had opportunities in life. My family was far from wealthy, but they were kind and loving and attentive and they taught me how to live. I'm relatively intelligent through no effort of my own, and I have decent social skills, and can easily get along in the world. (I expect that's true of most of us here). Many people weren't given those advantages and If I'm resentful of those less fortunate people for getting some benefit or other, I think that means I'm saying "I wish I hadn't had all the advantages I had," and I just don't/can't wish that.

And I really don't think there are many people who were born into good homes, and given good intelligence and decent social skills, who then go on to become profligate and irresponsible.

I figure I should get help if I need it, but not if I don't. I realize mine isn't a popular view in the UK, but I think means testing all benefits is a good idea.

cheers

I get one pair of free shoes each year under Medicare. I should feel guilty because I don't need them because I have shoes. I qualify for them because I have diabetes.
Which way to go??

ldollard

I completely agree. 100%

dunroving

Even though the cost of implementing means testing would essentially balance out the money saved? I think the problem with that is it would be perceived as pure spite. There has to be a financial rationale. I think tinkering with the tax brackets slightly would have the same effect of clawing back the money, would be much simpler to implement and more acceptable to people, as taxes are always being tinkered with.

sile

Hello again. I am just reading through these posts again, trying to narrow my choices down. There has certainly been a lot of good advice and ideas given here. I also read through many other threads daily and there are certain things that I find very interesting. I see that many if not most expats themselves find some difficulty in choosing where to move upon their return. So, if even they have a hard time, imagine how difficult this is for me who has never been there. I realize that all I can do is make an educated guess based on many things, not the least of which is where I can afford to live initially.

But I'll tell you, now that I am getting very close to doing this, the biggest obstacle is very simply FEAR. I am scared witless, yet I know all the reasons why I want to do this. And I honestly cannot imagine moving anywhere here in the US. As I said in my first post on this thread, I am at a crossroads in my life, and there is no more putting off this move. If I don't do it, I will hate myself for letting fear get in the way of my living the life I have imagined for so long. But holy crap, I am scared.
There is no solution. All I can do is be bold, be as prepared as possible and go for it, keeping in mind that I truly believe this will make me happy. And the truth is, although I know a lot of people here, there is absolutely no one I will miss, and if I moved anywhere here, to another state, (California would be the only place I would even consider), I would know many people but no one I would necessarily want to hang around with. My point here is that anywhere I go I will be starting over alone.

So, again, all I can do is be as prepared as possible and pick a place and get on a plane with my little dog, who just got his international microchip and rabies vaccine last week, and go for it.

Any thoughts are welcome.....

chris197337

There isn't any need to live in the South if you don't need to for work. It's more expensive and everywhere outside of London has the same kind of set up. Like I and others have said, try somewhere like York, Leeds, Newcastle, Liverpool or even Glasgow.