Pensions
#31
(09-06-2021, 10:33 AM)Protheroe Wrote: Can you clarify the "effort" you made to increase the value of your house by 14% ish in the last year? or 8% the year before? This is wholly speculative unearned wealth.

It's not other kids job to underwrite the value of our assets so we can pass them onto our kids, particularly when we've crowded them out of the housing market. I'm as guilty of this as the next person, more so as I have a stake in several other properties.

If the accumulation of wealth over a working lifetime is not for seeing you through your retirement years, then what is it for?

We made efforts and sacrifices simply to hold on to our house , especially in the early years. Then later on we took out more loans to extend the property, again forgoing little luxuries for some years. I made the effort and sacrifice to pay into a private pension and contributed to works schemes when on relatively low wages. I even sacrificed thousands of my disposable income to improve my education. Partly in an “effort” to improve my lot. That’s the effort we made. I can also assure you, using other similar houses in the street as a yard stick, that the value of our home has not risen 14% in one year. (One or more  of yours may have).

As for your last question, my wife and I did “accumulate” an amount of money (NOT WEALTH) precisely to see us “through” our retirement, in a small degree of comfort and worry free. We  have not been able to acquire “several” properties, a portfolio of shares and a stash of gold ingots but you, from your, obviously better off position, want us to now forgo the little bit of comfort we were hoping and strived for. For which we  worked and denied ourselves all our 51 plus years of working life.
Reply
#32
(09-06-2021, 01:40 PM)baggy1 Wrote: So tell me how this theory will work, where will you draw the line for means testing? How will that encourage me to save for my retirement based on what I have said about banks needing to balance the books. Why would I pay into a pension pot that will mean I will lose £8k a year if I do so. Am I to be measured on the amount of money I can release by downsizing or on the whole property, and if the latter how do I get the value out - equity release? That’s worked so far clearly.

It’s a nice sound bite but it is unworkable.

To be honest Baggy1, it depends whether you believe there will be anything like a State Pension worthy of the name when you reach retirement age. By the time I want to retire from full time work I expect the penions age to have been moved up again and the State Pension to be fairly residual sum. 

I see paying into my SIPP and investing in other long term assets as the responsible thing to do for me and my family.

I find it bizarre that anyone to the left of me would defend the prospect of asset poor younger workers underwriting the elderly's unearned housing gains.

(09-07-2021, 06:52 AM)JOK Wrote:
(09-06-2021, 10:33 AM)Protheroe Wrote: If the accumulation of wealth over a working lifetime is not for seeing you through your retirement years, then what is it for?

We made efforts and sacrifices simply to hold on to our house , especially in the early years. Then later on we took out more loans to extend the property, again forgoing little luxuries for some years. I made the effort and sacrifice to pay into a private pension and contributed to works schemes when on relatively low wages. I even sacrificed thousands of my disposable income to improve my education. Partly in an “effort” to improve my lot. That’s the effort we made. I can also assure you, using other similar houses in the street as a yard stick, that the value of our home has not risen 14% in one year. (One or more  of yours may have).

As for your last question, my wife and I did “accumulate” an amount of money (NOT WEALTH) precisely to see us “through” our retirement, in a small degree of comfort and worry free. We  have not been able to acquire “several” properties, a portfolio of shares and a stash of gold ingots but you, from your, obviously better off position, want us to now forgo the little bit of comfort we were hoping and strived for. For which we  worked and denied ourselves all our 51 plus years of working life.

Then it seems we agree, doesn't it?

FWIW I don't want anyone to forgo anything. What I do want is a broad based funding of Social Care, and that either needs to be based on wealth or on income tax - not on NI. 

It's wholly against my own interests to argue this - as a dividend remunerated Director and landlord I pay far less NI than most modestly paid workers - which only illustrates why this is such an insidious policy.
Reply
#33
I'm genuinly glad I'll have my NHS pension, and I may have a small private one, if the high risk strategy doesn't wipe it!

But that's not the norm now, scary talking to friends of my age who have nothing, not even a home. The workplace pension isn't going to be worth much due to the low contributions to it either.

Yet it's us that bear the cost for those who had a lifetime to protect themselves.
Reply
#34
(09-07-2021, 12:45 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I'm genuinly glad I'll have my NHS pension, and I may have a small private one, if the high risk strategy doesn't wipe it!

But that's not the norm now, scary talking to friends of my age who have nothing, not even a home. The workplace pension isn't going to be worth much due to the low contributions to it either.

Yet it's us that bear the cost for those who had a lifetime to protect themselves.

When auto enrolment was set up one of my actuary mates suggested that it would simply be a benefits avoidance tool for the government. That is exactly how it's turning out.
Reply
#35
(09-07-2021, 12:45 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I'm genuinly glad I'll have my NHS pension, and I may have a small private one, if the high risk strategy doesn't wipe it!

But that's not the norm now, scary talking to friends of my age who have nothing, not even a home. The workplace pension isn't going to be worth much due to the low contributions to it either.

Yet it's us that bear the cost for those who had a lifetime to protect themselves.

Not everyone has had a lifetime to protect themselves though. Many I grew up with have worked (and paid contributions they were told would provide a state pension). Did they complain they were 'bearing the costs of the elderly? Many had learned trades rendered void by 'progress'.  Not one person I knew at 18 went to university. They came through the most serious depression and highest unemployment rate since the 1930s. They may have bought houses at 13% interest rates or they may have rented and now find their pension covers the rent and nowt else. They would also have paid a much higher percentage of wages in tax than has been the norm in recent times.
I think this young vs old row is a total red herring and is missing the point. People that have worked for 50 years in a wealthy country have earned a decent retirement. Maybe if the many tax dodging companies everyone is happy to patronise paid a few quid in the pot we needn't be having these discussions?
Reply
#36
(09-07-2021, 06:20 PM)Tom Joad Wrote:
(09-07-2021, 12:45 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I'm genuinly glad I'll have my NHS pension, and I may have a small private one, if the high risk strategy doesn't wipe it!

But that's not the norm now, scary talking to friends of my age who have nothing, not even a home. The workplace pension isn't going to be worth much due to the low contributions to it either.

Yet it's us that bear the cost for those who had a lifetime to protect themselves.

Not everyone has had a lifetime to protect themselves though. Many I grew up with have worked (and paid contributions they were told would provide a state pension). Did they complain they were 'bearing the costs of the elderly? Many had learned trades rendered void by 'progress'.  Not one person I knew at 18 went to university. They came through the most serious depression and highest unemployment rate since the 1930s. They may have bought houses at 13% interest rates or they may have rented and now find their pension covers the rent and nowt else. They would also have paid a much higher percentage of wages in tax than has been the norm in recent times.
I think this young vs old row is a total red herring and is missing the point. People that have worked for 50 years in a wealthy country have earned a decent retirement. Maybe if the many tax dodging companies everyone is happy to patronise paid a few quid in the pot we needn't be having these discussions?

That generation repeatedly voted for political parties that lead to this. They are the generation that have pulled ladders up behind them, then dared to slag off the younger generation for being lazy, work shy etc. 

I come from a comfortable, not wealthy background. But everyone I know over 60 is pretty much set for retirement now. I guess there is a different story in areas of long term poverty as you describe.

I have had to retrain in my life, including taking the massive risk of uni in my 30's to get where I am, I never assumed what I learned at 18 would carry through for the rest of my life, due to my industry, I'm having to learn constantly, what I learnt at uni is already starting to go out of date, I know I'll need to do this until the day I finally retire, whenever the fuck that'll be, I'd have certainly worked longer than 50 years to get there.

It's the previous generations that have built this world, my sympathy is rather low because of that. Living in Cornwall until recently, watching so many coming up to retirement age buy up all the homes, and barely live in them also skews my perception somewhat, most of my generation can't afford one house. Ones after me can't even afford to rent it seems! Yet it's these getting hit for the pensions they'll probably never receive themselves.

You are right, the old vs young argument is a red herring in some ways, too many don't pay what would be considered a fair share due to our broken tax system. 

It's very hard to have sympathy for a generation that broke the game for us, then constantly judges us for not being able to play the game like they did. " could afford a house if you didn't have takeaways" "in my day we bought a house in our 20's before having kids or getting married." "In my day we stayed in one company for years and only the husband worked." All sound familiar, it's what the younger generations hear and get told constantly by a generation now wanting us to pay more for them to retire.

That was a much longer rant than I intended, and maybe not all too relevant, but that's an idea as to the anger at this many have.
Reply
#37
(09-07-2021, 09:03 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: That generation repeatedly voted for political parties that lead to this. They are the generation that have pulled ladders up behind them, then dared to slag off the younger generation for being lazy, work shy etc. 

I come from a comfortable, not wealthy background. But everyone I know over 60 is pretty much set for retirement now. I guess there is a different story in areas of long term poverty as you describe.

I have had to retrain in my life, including taking the massive risk of uni in my 30's to get where I am, I never assumed what I learned at 18 would carry through for the rest of my life, due to my industry, I'm having to learn constantly, what I learnt at uni is already starting to go out of date, I know I'll need to do this until the day I finally retire, whenever the fuck that'll be, I'd have certainly worked longer than 50 years to get there.

It's the previous generations that have built this world, my sympathy is rather low because of that. Living in Cornwall until recently, watching so many coming up to retirement age buy up all the homes, and barely live in them also skews my perception somewhat, most of my generation can't afford one house. Ones after me can't even afford to rent it seems! Yet it's these getting hit for the pensions they'll probably never receive themselves.

You are right, the old vs young argument is a red herring in some ways, too many don't pay what would be considered a fair share due to our broken tax system. 

It's very hard to have sympathy for a generation that broke the game for us, then constantly judges us for not being able to play the game like they did. " could afford a house if you didn't have takeaways" "in my day we bought a house in our 20's before having kids or getting married." "In my day we stayed in one company for years and only the husband worked." All sound familiar, it's what the younger generations hear and get told constantly by a generation now wanting us to pay more for them to retire.

That was a much longer rant than I intended, and maybe not all too relevant, but that's an idea as to the anger at this many have.

Cornwall is not quite that black and white. Approximately  one quarter of the South West’s economy is based on tourism. One third of its workforce is reliant on the tourist industry. (Directly or indirectly.)


You appear to be suggesting that all the housing is being bought up by retirees from all over. I would suggest that is ridiculous. I believe that, if a retiree buys a house in the South West, it is to move there, not as a second home. Second homes, generally are bought by those still working. A good many of those ‘second’ homes are rented out as holiday lets. Remember, that industry that is currently so important to the area.  If my experience, over the last 40 years is anything to go by, many of those holiday lets are owned by locals themselves.

It is an area I neve hear mentioned in the ‘Levelling Up’ debate but the government should be encouraging industry and therefore, better paid jobs, there

I don’t know at what age you started work but you say you took time out to go to uni. I and my three siblings all started work at 15. (Not the 18 or 21 (22 with the, almost obligatory, gap year nowadays) I obtained my degrees whilst working full time. My wife also started work at 15 and other than 3 years with our little un, worked until she was 69.

I know very few of my age where “only the man worked” In fact my studies prove that very, very few working class women were full time housewives.  When we had our child, women were entitled to take 18 weeks, partly paid, and 3 months unpaid maternity leave, not a full year, all remunerated (to a degree), as now and only about half new working mothers qualified for that due to ‘Length of Service’ rules. Until 1975 pregnant women could be dismissed from their jobs. I fail to see the relevance of the “Stayed in one company” remark and again, I know very many of my age group who moved jobs to obtain the best terms and conditions they could, whenever they could.        Similarly, re. the retraining comment but I can assure you, those born in the 50s and 60s have gone through a far greater learning curve.   
 
So no, none of it “sounds familiar” to me.

My mother never had any assets. What, very little, savings she had and virtually all her pension income is now taken off her to help pay for her social care. The “old vs young argument” is not so much a  “red herring” as a vastly inaccurate sweeping generalisation.

Where are these hordes of pensioners with two, 6 bedroomed, homes, driving around in his and hers Mercs and jetting off for the winter to Saint-Tropez?
Yes, working class people of retiring age today really had it easy.  Dodgy
Reply
#38
(09-07-2021, 09:03 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: It's very hard to have sympathy for a generation that broke the game for us, then constantly judges us for not being able to play the game like they did.

This is why no-one under 40 should ever vote for any of the established parties ever again. Not even a hint of this in Parliament yesterday. A plague on all their houses.
Reply
#39
(09-08-2021, 08:47 AM)JOK Wrote:
(09-07-2021, 09:03 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: That generation repeatedly voted for political parties that lead to this. They are the generation that have pulled ladders up behind them, then dared to slag off the younger generation for being lazy, work shy etc. 

I come from a comfortable, not wealthy background. But everyone I know over 60 is pretty much set for retirement now. I guess there is a different story in areas of long term poverty as you describe.

I have had to retrain in my life, including taking the massive risk of uni in my 30's to get where I am, I never assumed what I learned at 18 would carry through for the rest of my life, due to my industry, I'm having to learn constantly, what I learnt at uni is already starting to go out of date, I know I'll need to do this until the day I finally retire, whenever the fuck that'll be, I'd have certainly worked longer than 50 years to get there.

It's the previous generations that have built this world, my sympathy is rather low because of that. Living in Cornwall until recently, watching so many coming up to retirement age buy up all the homes, and barely live in them also skews my perception somewhat, most of my generation can't afford one house. Ones after me can't even afford to rent it seems! Yet it's these getting hit for the pensions they'll probably never receive themselves.

You are right, the old vs young argument is a red herring in some ways, too many don't pay what would be considered a fair share due to our broken tax system. 

It's very hard to have sympathy for a generation that broke the game for us, then constantly judges us for not being able to play the game like they did. " could afford a house if you didn't have takeaways" "in my day we bought a house in our 20's before having kids or getting married." "In my day we stayed in one company for years and only the husband worked." All sound familiar, it's what the younger generations hear and get told constantly by a generation now wanting us to pay more for them to retire.

That was a much longer rant than I intended, and maybe not all too relevant, but that's an idea as to the anger at this many have.

Cornwall is not quite that black and white. Approximately  one quarter of the South West’s economy is based on tourism. One third of its workforce is reliant on the tourist industry. (Directly or indirectly.)


You appear to be suggesting that all the housing is being bought up by retirees from all over. I would suggest that is ridiculous. I believe that, if a retiree buys a house in the South West, it is to move there, not as a second home. Second homes, generally are bought by those still working. A good many of those ‘second’ homes are rented out as holiday lets. Remember, that industry that is currently so important to the area.  If my experience, over the last 40 years is anything to go by, many of those holiday lets are owned by locals themselves.

It is an area I neve hear mentioned in the ‘Levelling Up’ debate but the government should be encouraging industry and therefore, better paid jobs, there

I don’t know at what age you started work but you say you took time out to go to uni. I and my three siblings all started work at 15. (Not the 18 or 21 (22 with the, almost obligatory, gap year nowadays) I obtained my degrees whilst working full time. My wife also started work at 15 and other than 3 years with our little un, worked until she was 69.

I know very few of my age where “only the man worked” In fact my studies prove that very, very few working class women were full time housewives.  When we had our child, women were entitled to take 18 weeks, partly paid, and 3 months unpaid maternity leave, not a full year, all remunerated (to a degree), as now and only about half new working mothers qualified for that due to ‘Length of Service’ rules. Until 1975 pregnant women could be dismissed from their jobs. I fail to see the relevance of the “Stayed in one company” remark and again, I know very many of my age group who moved jobs to obtain the best terms and conditions they could, whenever they could.        Similarly, re. the retraining comment but I can assure you, those born in the 50s and 60s have gone through a far greater learning curve.   
 
So no, none of it “sounds familiar” to me.

My mother never had any assets. What, very little, savings she had and virtually all her pension income is now taken off her to help pay for her social care. The “old vs young argument” is not so much a  “red herring” as a vastly inaccurate sweeping generalisation.

Where are these hordes of pensioners with two, 6 bedroomed, homes, driving around in his and hers Mercs and jetting off for the winter to Saint-Tropez?
Yes, working class people of retiring age today really had it easy.  Dodgy

All my landlords in Cornwall were out of county people using it to fund their retirement, amd all were close to it. Many friends have the same experience.

Sadly these are all comments the younger generations get given whenever we say the game is now broken amd there is little chance for us. Maybe you don't say these things, fair play to you, like my parents, they realise the shit their generations have left for us to sort. And now we have to pay more for you to retire.

I started working at 14, for my Dad, got my first job outside family at 16 at weekends, moving to any day I wasn't at college. Started full time at 19. I worked 30 hours at nights while studying at uni and being the main parent for our son while the wife worked 60 hours a week. Even with all that, still struggled to pay bills in Cornwall. My health was shattered doing that, understandably and it will mean I will die earlier. That was to give me at least a chance I'm taking now.

Yes I do have sympathy for those that never had the chance to save for their retirement, and are now reliant on the state providing them one, and there is little there to provide it. And tbh, the 1.5% doesn't really hurt me, but friends of mine on min wage, it's a killer for them, meaning they can't save as much for their retirement, so just kicks the can down the road.

Make the likes of Amazon pay their share, not let Vodafone off a 4 billion tax bill, and never, ever vote Tory or Labour again.
Reply
#40
Of course there are exceptions at either end of the financial scale but to argue that those retiring now or recently haven’t had it far easier than the generations after them is defensive nonsense. Relatively secure jobs, clearer career ladders, decent work pensions, affordable housing, decent jobs not dependant on gaining a degree. What have those younger than them have now? Insecure jobs in many sectors, no real career ladders in many sectors, non existent pension schemes offered by many employers, affordable housing paha! Saddled with debt for gaining a degree and working hard at school. You can now add the idiotic decision to leave the EU to the list of the older generations saddling the younger generations with a decisions they don’t support and are not to their advantage.

As a generation(s) those now retiring or have recently have been selfish and myopic only thinking about what is best for them rather than seeing the bigger picture and thinking what was best for the generations after them. I imagine this will upset a few on here but the point is generational not on a personal / individual. Try and remember that when potentially replying.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
{myadvertisements[zone_2]}