Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Pension - Social Security
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Not looking for a job? Tell us about your ideal job,
and we'll only contact you when it opens up.
https://www.dwsimpson.com/register


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-06-2009, 03:58 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

More on UK pension politics:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8291835.stm

Quote:
The Conservatives have announced plans to make millions of men now in their fifties work for an extra year before they receive their state pension.

Shadow chancellor George Osborne will raise the state pension age from 65 to 66 from 2016 if the Tories win the next election, to help tackle UK debts.

He has also not ruled out a rise in pension age for women towards 66.

The government has already announced plans to raise the state pension age to 66 but between 2024 and 2026.

Bringing the move forward would mean many more people than previously expected, particularly those aged between 49 and 59, having to work a year longer before qualifying for a state pension.
....
Mr Osborne is expected to say the rise in the retirement age will be "how we can afford increasing the basic state pension for all".

He will go on to describe it as "one of those trade-offs any honest government has to confront".

The government is currently intending to equalise the state pension age for women, so that it rises from 60 to 65 from 2010 to 2020.

The Tories said how this would link into their new policy was "up for review" - but they did not rule out that women could see their pension age rise towards 66 from around 2016.
....
They acknowledged that the decision could prove unpopular with some but they said they were being deliberately upfront about a tough decision that would make credible savings in the long term.

Shadow secretary for work and pensions, Theresa May, told BBC Two's Newsnight that the UK's "ageing population" made it necessary to look "at what point it is appropriate for people to be receiving their state pension".

She added: "I'm afraid there are some tough choices to be made."
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-07-2009, 04:03 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

More on UK:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...e-old-dilemmas

Quote:
Pensions once supported people for two or three years, but now it is more like two to three decades. Mr Osborne sometimes talks about "the fruits of economic growth", and – once recovery arrives – these might have been banked on to cover the costs, were it not for the new cross-party consensus for restoring the link between pensions and earnings. That will give pensioners their fair share of rising prosperity, but will also consume all the available fruits. Extending longevity will therefore entail either new taxes or working for longer. State pension costs are the biggest chunk of the welfare bill, at 63bn a year. Raising the qualifying age by a year might shave 3%-6% from that total, far more than would be got by a full-frontal assault on smaller benefits paid to the poor. In theory, at least, it should also carry a less devastating social cost.

In practice, however, everything depends on the steps taken to protect the vulnerable – detail we heard little about yesterday. Life expectancy has, after all, risen faster in rich communities than in poor ones, as David Cameron pointed out in the days before financial conservatism overshadowed the compassionate strain. Asking dispossessed older people, sometimes with failing health, to scrape by on the weekly 64.30 of jobseeker's allowance is not a tolerable option. It is more objectionable still if coupled with plans to hector claimants into jobs.

The first thing needed is a clear pledge to ensure that pension credit, which is paid to the poorest, will remain available to 65-year-olds. At the same time there is an urgent need to end the continuing scandal of employers shunting staff out simply on grounds of age. Last but not least, there are the implications for women. Their pension age is already rising to match that of men, as is required by European equality laws.

The Tories belatedly recognised yesterday that women would not take kindly to being asked to swallow two age rises at once. But they could not explain how they would target the early increases on men without falling foul of Brussels – instead they responded in Brownian style, by promising a review. Asking us all to work longer is a tough sell. To make it persuasively, the Conservatives must first show they have done their homework.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...ervatives.html

Quote:
Bringing forward the increase in the retirement age will mean about 2.5 million people - aged between 48 and 57 - will have to work at least a year longer than they were expecting.

Under the Tory plans, the retirement age for men will rise from 65 to 66. However, the move will hit women in their late 50s particularly hard as the age at which they can claim their state pension will rise by three years - from 60 currently, to 63.

The Conservative policy, which is also designed to bring the state retirement age for both men and women more closely into line, represents a dramatic acceleration of the Government’s own plans to force people to work longer.

Gordon Brown is planning to increase the state retirement age for men from 65 to 66 but not until 2026. It will then rise to 67 in 2036 and 68 in 2046. The state retirement age for women will rise from 60 to 65 between 2010 and 2020 under the Government’s proposals.
....
The announcement represents a political gamble by the Conservatives as Mr Osborne will risk alienating important older voters. However, he is thought to believe that the policy is important to demonstrate that the Tories have a serious plan to cut public debts.

Mr Osborne will say today: “This is another one of those trade-offs any honest government has to confront. All parties accept that to afford that with an ageing population, the state pension will have to rise.
....
“No one who is a pensioner today, or approaching retirement soon, will be affected. But this is how we can afford increasing the basic state pension for all.”
....
The peer, who is now the head of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the City regulator, said in July: “If I was redoing my report I would be more radical, arguing for an even faster increase in the state pension age.”

In his review he considered whether the retirement age should rise to 70 by 2030. The Conservatives are now considering whether this could become a reality. Several other European countries are also considering similar increases in the state pension age to tackle their deficits although Labour is not thought to be currently reviewing its plans.
....
.

According to the DWP, 95 per cent of all pensioners, equating to 7.8 million people, receive the state pension. However, because so many women have not worked full-time throughout their adult life, very few receive the basic state pension of 95.25 a week, and 81 per cent of all pensioners rely on some income on top of state benefits to fund their retirement, DWP calculates.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-08-2009, 03:33 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Protests in the Netherlands
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archive...nsion_rise.php

Quote:
Several thousand people took part in some sort of protest against the government's plans to increase the state pension age from 65 to 67 on Wednesday, says news agency ANP.

The FNV and MHP trade unions had called on members to take part in a symbolic 65-minute protest between 11.55 and 13.00. Yesterday a court pulled the plug on a planned public transport strike.
....


Between 500 and 1,000 campaigners turned up in central Utrecht to hear Agnes Jongerius, head of the FNV trade union and emphatic opponent of the planned increase. She reiterated that the unions are prepared to talk about a flexible pension age, so that some people could still retire at 65.

In Tilburg, bus drivers hung posters against the pension increase in their buses and handed out 'pills' to passengers because 'they will need to have nerves of steel when they have to rely on the reactions of a 67-year-old bus driver.'
Yeah! Why do we even let oldsters drive anything? [take a look at the comments on the article. People think that wasn't a good route to go....]
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-08-2009, 05:16 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

op-ed on the UK pensions situation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...he-answer.html

Quote:
The Tories' proposals to raise the state pension age much more quickly than currently planned have caused quite a stir. Certainly, longer working lives are inevitable, especially as people are living much longer and staying healthier, while an increasing number of baby boomers will reach the age of 65 in the next few years.
....


The UK pension system is by far the most complex in the world, and a thorough overhaul is long overdue. The laws of unintended consequences often hamper well-meaning pension changes, and I certainly feel that the proposals just announced require more careful thought.

A major challenge faced by policymakers is the inadequacy of our state pension. In addition, the current system of mass means-testing of pensioners disincentivises private pension savings, as well as making it less worthwhile for poorer older people to keep working. This is not sustainable.

Indeed, if 65-year-olds cannot find work, they may be forced onto means testing while they wait for their state pension to start. This would undermine the cost saving estimates because pension credit (130 a week) is more generous than a full basic state pension (95.30 a week).
....
There are, in fact, far better ways to save money on pensions than simply raising the pension age. For example, ending the system of contracting out the state second pension could save around 6 billion a year immediately - no need to wait until 2016 for the savings. Changing the age allowance and tax reliefs would make significant savings and even allow improvement of state pensions from, say, age 75. Given the costs and inefficiencies of trying to administer complex means tests for millions of pensioners, it would be far better to pay a decent, simpler state pension to all older citizens. Then at least we would be ensuring these pensioners are better looked after, which would be a more positive message than just increasing state pension age to 66.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-16-2009, 05:12 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Continuing with the row over changing UK retirement age
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukp...ViCK64olRm_apw

Quote:
The Work and Pensions Secretary has hit out at Conservative plans to bring forward increases in the state pension age for men.

Yvette Cooper accused the opposition of asking people in their fifties to "rip up their retirement plans".

Speaking at the National Association of Pension Funds' annual conference in Manchester, she said: "People are living longer and that means people may need to work longer.

"It is right to have a political debate about the fact that people in their twenties, thirties and forties will need to work longer and claim their state pension later, as we have already said.

"But I do not think it is fair to ask people in their fifties to rip up their retirement plans and increase the state pension age for them."

Her comments are in response to an announcement by Shadow Chancellor George Osborne last week that the Conservatives would raise the state pension age for men from 65 to 66 in 2016.
I humbly submit that having to postpone one's retirement by one year is no great burden [except when combined with policies that automatically boot a person out of a job at age 65 - that's a problem, I agree].

Many people have had to postpone retirements for far longer than one year due to economic setbacks lately. Some people never retire until they become too disabled to work.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-17-2009, 04:03 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Fallout in the Netherlands
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archive...rious_at_p.php

Quote:
Regional and local Labour party branches are furious at the government's plans to increase the state pension age and see it as a reason to let the cabinet fall, the Telegraaf says on Friday, quoting BNR radio.

The paper says various local branches of the PvdA think Labour ministers' agreement with the increase is a good reason to call early elections. Labour is part of the three-party coalition.

No party included a commitment to increase the state pension age in their 2006 election campaign and, according to opinion polls, more people oppose than support the idea.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile

Last edited by campbell; 10-17-2009 at 04:12 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-19-2009, 06:39 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Followthrough in the Netherlands
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldN...59F3MY20091016

Quote:
AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - The Dutch government agreed on Friday to raise the pension retirement age by two years to 67 in an effort to improve state finances and cope with a shortage of workers in a widely-expected move that has angered trade unions.

A government economic think-tank has estimated that raising the retirement age will save the state 4 billion euros annually. Social Affairs Minister Piet Hein Donner has said the economy will be short of 800,000 workers by 2040 unless the retirement age is hiked.
....
According to the proposal, which now has to be ratified by the Dutch parliament, those aged 55 or older as of January1, 2010 will still be able to retire at 65, while those younger will have to work two extra years to collect pension benefits.

The new policy will introduce in two phases. From 2020 the people will have to work until 66 and from 2025 until to 67.

A recent poll by TNS NIPO showed 39 percent of Dutch people think raising the retirement age is acceptable, down from 45 percent in March, while 57 percent think it is unacceptable. A total of 38 percent are prepared to participate in industrial action.
Azerbaijan gets in on the action
http://abc.az/eng/news/main/39346.html
Quote:
The Azerbaijani Parliamentary Committee for Social Policy recommended to discuss the bill on amendments into the law On Labor Pension at the plenary meeting yesterday.

In accordance with the bill, labor pension right for age is given to men at the age of 62 years and women at the age of 57 years in case if they have 12 years of pensionable service (except for those, to whom the pension was fixed before the law comes into force).

Retirement age for men will increase by 6 months from January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2012 every year up to 63 years and for women it will grow from January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2016 up to 60 years.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-20-2009, 04:54 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Advocacy piece from UK to raise retirement age to 70
http://www.freshbusinessthinking.com/news.php?NID=2290

Quote:
The paper proposes 4 fundamental changes:

- In the face of greatly increased longevity, the state pension age should rise to 70 as soon as reasonably practical
- The State second pension should be abolished, together with most means tested state retirement benefits
- The savings made should be diverted to the provision of a universal Basic State Pension probably above the level we see today topped up by Pension Credit
- The current private pension saving regime does not meet 21st Century needs and should be replaced.

Commenting on the report, Graeme Leach, Chief Economist at the IoD, said:

"Radical simplification is needed. Startling increases in longevity in recent decades also mean that it is unrealistic to expect to be able to fund a potential 25 to 30 year retirement from an effective 30 to 35 year working life. New approaches are needed to recognise this reality. The whole area of retirement needs to be looked at holistically, including how we fund the care needs which will come with increasing longevity. We need a state and private retirement system fit for the 21st Century. This is a policy journey which needs to begin now."
Another link on same story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8314621.stm
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile

Last edited by campbell; 10-20-2009 at 05:00 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-02-2009, 05:33 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

UK govt seeking comment on changing default retirement age
http://www.out-law.com/page-10490

Quote:
The High Court ruled in September that the UK's retirement age was not a breach of European discrimination law, but it said that it was influenced by the knowledge that the Government was considering raising the age.

Consultation on that process has now begun. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) is asking businesses to describe their retirement policies and explain what the costs and benefits would be to them if the age were raised or abolished altogether.

"The Government is asking for evidence including [information on] the operation of the default retirement age [DRA] in practice; the reasons that businesses use mandatory retirement ages; the impacts on businesses, individuals and the economy of raising or removing the default retirement age; the experience of businesses operating without a default retirement age; how could any costs of raising or removing the DRA be mitigated and benefits realised," said a statement from BIS.

"The laws around employment and retirement need to reflect changes in economic and social circumstances," said minister for pensions and the ageing society Angela Eagle. "As people live and work for longer, it is sensible that we have the debate on what works for business and individuals."

BIS has asked for submissions by 1 February 2010.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-09-2009, 05:47 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 83,261
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Denmark [vs UK]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8338950.stm

Quote:
In Denmark, the question of when people can stop working will soon be determined not by politicians but by a mathematical formula.
....
Denmark is the only country in the world to have index-linked its statutory retirement age to life expectancy.
The move came with all-party support in 2006, after years of political wrangling. As recently as 10 years ago the retirement age was even reduced.

"We have seen in Denmark for quite a while that there's been an understanding that something has to be done, but there was no action," says Torben Andersen, an economics professor who came up with the idea of applying an index-link.

"There was always this game of let's wait, let's maybe do something tomorrow but never today. So by having the link, it will come automatically."
....
Under the reform, the retirement age will rise gradually from 65 to 67 from 2019. The index-link only comes in from 2027 - much later than Prof Andersen proposed.
"Politicians did not have the courage to do it sooner. They said: we'll do it, but we'll have a long waiting period before it kicks in," he says.

"This is very costly, because in this waiting period very many from the baby-boom generation are retiring. The labour force will shrink and there will be more pensioners. So the public finances will be under pressure.

"But I'm not really surprised because I know how delicate and difficult this is politically."
....
The Tories have also been flirting with the idea. Nigel Waterson, an MP with a strong interest in pensions policy, said they had discussed it and it would be part of a review the party has promised.
'Keep healthy'
However, he said personally he was lukewarm about it. "It's very mechanistic. Male life expectancy in Glasgow, for instance, is extremely low," he says, "and there are huge variations around the country."

Back in Copenhagen, the most tranquil baby, Clara, ignores the wails of the others as they are weighed and measured.

She is five months old - according to Torben Andersen, under the new system she will retire at 72 or 73.
....
Mr Andersen also cautions against being too bleak about Klara's future.

"There's a 50% chance she'll live to be 100, so she'll still have a long retirement. We shouldn't see this as a problem. It's a huge welfare improvement that longevity is going up. It's a very good thing."
Been trying to find a paper on the formula/indexing used. Haven't found one yet.

Did find this paper on longevity increase vs. retirement age not decreasing, and has survey of retirement ages across OECD countries
http://www.etk.fi/Page.aspx?Section=41260&Item=18581

Ah, I found a formula in here, but for Finland [looks like an update of that previous paper]
http://www.issa.int/aiss/content/dow...e/2Lindell.pdf
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
pension, retirement, retirement age

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.18102 seconds with 10 queries