Post

Conversation

I don’t get how this isn’t obvious to all concerned. When you require by law that pensions sometimes grow faster than the economy but never slower, what direction do you think pension spending as a % of the economy can go??

Quote

Basil

@LinkofSunshine

16h

I feel like no one comprehends how insane the triple lock system is The cost of the triple lock of the British pension system may very well surpass British GDP during the time that I’m alive x.com/alecshelbrooke…

8:01 AM · Jul 21, 2025

103.2K

Views

Post your reply

Country Club Conservative

@alt_ccc

15h

Another way to look at it: When you say pensions must go up at LEAST 2.5% a year but the economy almost never grows by that much…you see where this is heading

Growing faster than the economy was the explicit goal—the reasoning was that retirees in 2007 were (genuinely) relatively poor, so we should gradually ratchet up their welfare payments and stop once they were less destitute. But, of course, it's impossible to cut welfare.

2.7K

Country Club Conservative

@alt_ccc

Why on earth would you do this by setting up a formula like this instead of just raising year by year though? You obviously can’t keep the formula permanently and it should not be hard to see how hard it would be to undo it.

1.7K

Kresimir: Rielist-Leninist

@punished_kres

It's all very strange to watch from the perspective of Canada, which isn't without it's problems but our public pension is financially sustainable at least.

881

Country Club Conservative

@alt_ccc

I think Trudeau lowering the retirement age back was a demagogic waste of money but that’s the worst I can say of the Canadian pension system. Spending is low (full two points of GDP lower than America) and afaik Canada doesn’t have the sustainability issues others have.

677

Dr Sindri Ragnvaldsson, Thegn of Jorvik

@SindriOfJorvik

12h

My view is the lock needs inverting; rise by the lowest of the three metrics.

3.4K

Country Club Conservative

That would be fine

Like everything it was ment to be a short term policy to bring pensions into alinement with wages. Once it achieved that politicians got too scared to remove it.

1.1K

Country Club Conservative

@alt_ccc

The government should have had the foresight to know that’s what would happen once they implemented it

Most developed countries are facing similar types of problems if only due to an aging population. But retirees vote and will absolutely massacre anyone who runs on cutting benefits. So the train has no brakes

2.8K

Schizo Advisors

@SchizoLLC

A good way to pay for this is property and income taxes on those same seniors. Sure you can have a £100k pension but you are going to pay for the imputed rent on your house and pension recapture taxes.

The British economic tradition of walking into rakes at every opportunity.

Those who benefit do not care if it is sustainable

720

joshallenfan2003

@ja17fan2003

Pensions should have been a private affair everywhere. And the primary responsibility of taking care of the elderly should have been a family business, enforced by law.

Nick, 30 ans has nothing to lose but his chains

This is entirely by design since the UK is essentially a glorified pension fund with a malfunctioning health system tacked on the end. Every government decision must benefit boomers

1.9K

Kieran

@YIMBYKieran

Most politicians know it’s unaffordable but are too scared to say it

At the same time that the number / % of population receiving is also drastically increasing it is especially toxic. Increasing the state pension in real terms should be a political decision - not an annual ‘roll of the dice’