Putting it in terms of US figures, since that’s what I’m most familiar with:
That’s about 250 US dollars a week, or a thousand a month, or 12,000 a year.
The Federal Poverty Level is about 15,000 a year for a household of 1, 20,000 a year for a household of 2.
Someone whose income is below those levels might well qualify for SSI (supplemental security incme) or SNAP (“food stamps”).
My inlaws were getting more than the Federal poverty level, from Social Security; I’m making a WAG in guessing that housing help and SNAP might have basically made someone at the FPL equivalent to their income. They were barely making ends meet. They only did as “well” as they did because we were paying their housing expenses; they were in the position of not being “poor” enough to qualify for housing assistance, but not being able to afford to live without it.
Anyway, getting back to the UK figures: given that there is a better social safety net (medical, housing etc.), I could see that someone COULD live on 200 pounds a week, but it would be a very straitened existence, especially anywhere with higher prices.
Presumably the UK, as in the US, intends the scheme to supplement one’s own savings, not to be the sole source of income. But I would guess that, as in the US, far too many people wind up retiring without any other assets, through poor planning or bad luck.
Interestingly, only public pensions have any kind of cost-of-living scheme here in the US, not private company pensions. Social Security’s increases are, I think, ONLY tied to inflation, not wages in general nor any 2.5% floor. And our benefits have basically been cut in recent years (e.g.the increase in minimum retirement age, among others).