It could be argued with some conviction the forthcoming changes in pension legislation are indeed revolutionary.
This is not to regurgitate old news which has increasingly occupied the minds of IFAs, fund managers, wealth managers, travel operators, retailers, new car dealers and a host of others ever since George Osborne announced 12 months ago people over 55 would be granted access to their own money.
How revolutionary is that? Sufficient enough to win a General Election perhaps? I digress.
Of course, what the Chancellor did last year was sorely needed and has, as a result, been widely welcomed by people who would previously have been forced to buy an annuity once they retired.
But April's concessions are, I believe, part of a much broader revolution, the chief beneficiaries of which will be people aged between 18-40, considerably fewer than a quarter of whom will find themselves in receipt of a state pension once they reach the official retirement age.
Bear in mind that, for someone aged 18 today, this is probably around 60-odd years away.
The Treasury has had to initiate the forthcoming 'pensions revolution' because the problem, from the state's perspective, is our longevity.
According to Hymans Robinson, a firm of actuaries well versed in studying life expectancy, in 1909, only nine per cent of adult life was spent in receipt of a state pension. By the start of 2014, that figure had more than tripled, to 31 percent.
Having established this, the firm applied the science fiction-sounding "high life expectancy variant", a statistical tool employed by the Office for National Statistics, to its findings before calculating that today anyone aged 30 can expect to work until they're at least 72.
Already, people aged under 52 know they are unlikely to retire for at least another 15 years while those in their mid-40s can officially expect to have their noses to the grindstone for a minimum of another quarter century.
Already, people aged under 52 know they are unlikely to retire for at least another 15 years while those in their mid-40s can officially expect to have their noses to the grindstone for a minimum of another quarter century.
People are increasingly aware of the fact that, while they're much more likely to live longer, they cannot rely upon the state to provide for them in old age and must start making their own provision for retirement.
Life expectancy has been rising for more than three centuries, thanks to a combination of improved public health, legislation, rapid economic growth (for most of the period) and advances in medical science.
Between 1800 and 2000, life expectancy at birth rose from approximately 30 years to a global average of 67. In westernised countries, the average was nearer to 75.
A 45-year increase in life expectancy spread over just 200 years is nothing short of revolutionary.
Scientists call it 'the health transition', a process characterised by a perceptible change in how long people expect to live and how they expect to die.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, most people died from infectious diseases following a very short illness. Today, chronic disease, often with a protracted course, accounts for the majority of deaths.
As this health transition continued, the numbers of people living comfortably into their most economically productive years has filled out and those deemed to be 'old' have become commonplace.
Yet, as a consequence of more people living longer, earlier, well-intentioned social provisions, particularly state pensions, are clearly inadequate to cope with the demands made upon them.
Indeed, it could be argued that we're faced with an economic version of Archimedes' Principle.
For every retired person claiming state pension, there's a displacement of cash, equal to the sum claimed as pension, occurring within the state's budget. The situation cannot continue indefinitely.
While enjoying great longevity beyond our ancestor's wildest dreams might be considered an enormous privilege, the harsh fact is it will only become so if we, not the state, can afford to fund our old age.
The Treasury recognises this. Accordingly, April's 'revolution' is only one part of a much wider plan designed to wean us off our reliance upon the state.
A similar tactic, festooned with tax breaks and an element of compulsion, was employed by Australia more than 20 years ago.
Today, fewer than half of Australia's retired population receives a state pension and the figure is falling.
People in their 20s, 30s and 40s may wonder what the fuss regarding 'Pension Freedom Day' is all about. The fact is, it's the start of a revolution which they should be encouraged to join sooner rather than later.
The Birmingham Post will publish its first Quarterly Personal Finance Report, in which it will look specifically at pension provision and retirement options for all age groups this month.
To advertise in this supplement, please contact Tony Williams via email on tony.williams@trinitymirror.com or call 0121 234 5262.
