'Baby-boomers own half of Britain's wealth' telegraph article today.

Really2

marklv wrote: »

LOL! :rotfl:

No, not really any more. Oldies are no longer dying, they are just fading away in old people's homes, paid for by their savings and houses, and when they finally die at 105 there is nothing left.

Interesting fact I worked out on old age figures.

At the moment when you retire at 65 there is only a 17% chance you will see 85.:eek:

They say on average as a man expect to 6-8 years after retirement.:(


Only 5% of people ever see a care home, so its a myth most go in to care homes. 95% die before seeing one.

Old_Slaphead

marklv wrote: »

No, not really any more. Oldies are no longer dying, they are just fading away in old people's homes, paid for by their savings and houses, and when they finally die at 105 there is nothing left.

This government won't allow anyone to die of their own choice - they believe in keeping people alive and in a state of suffering for as long as possible (well until at least 6th May anyway)

Harry_Powell

STOP PRESS!!

Older People have had more time to accrue wealth than younger people!!

Other News:
The pope is catholic.
The older you are, the longer you've lived.
The sky is blue.

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

Harry_Powell wrote: »

STOP PRESS!!

Older People have accrued more wealth than younger people!!

Other News:
The pope is catholic.
The older you are, the longer you've lived.
The sky is blue.

Is that because they've lived longer and had more time to do it then or is there some conspiracy that we don't know about.
Guess they'll be saying the same thing in 20 years time as well.

bendix

What an unbelievably trite article.

So people aged between 45 and 65 who are at the peak of their earning potential and who have managed to accumulate assets for 20-30 years own more than kids, students, early nesters starting out on the road to mortgage, and the elderly who are using living off savings.

What an amazing revelation

And this passes for journalism.

chucky

bendix wrote: »

What an unbelievably trite article.

So people aged between 45 and 65 who are at the peak of their earning potential and who have managed to accumulate assets for 20-30 years own more than kids, students, early nesters starting out on the road to mortgage, and the elderly who are using living off savings.

What an amazing revelation

And this passes for journalism.

it also excites the frothers who consistently feel hard done because the whole world is against them.

at least we'll get 12 pages of posts about pyramid and ponzi schemes, photo copying money and gilt strikes :eek:

Really2

Also they account for 90% of all grey hairs and baldness.

They are also 99.9% more likely to retire in the next 20 years than people under 45.

But are less likely to know how to use a new gadget than a 5 year old.

Pobby

Davesnave wrote: »

I disagree in the sense that the young people I know are better informed than I was at a comparable age, but agree that knowing more does not necessarily lead to action.

In the 60s I went on demos and made speeches denouncing this & that, but I had the luxury of a free Uni education and my 'knowledge' was pretty shallow. Most students I know now are well in debt, and working hard to service it, so they have less time or energy for protest, and this may not be entirely accidental. Also, with a history of past demos and what they achieved behind them, they have some reason to be cynical!

Both our views here are just personal 'snapshots' and not necessarily the 'truth.' Certainly, at my teaching college, 5/6 of the students being women, many of them separated from home -based boyfriends, priorities at the weekend were far from militant, while back home, most of my non-college men friends were preoccupied with things like the diameter of the silencer (sic) on their Cooper S, or the dimensions of the other type of Mini!

We could have been at the same college based on the g/g ratio. Btw, I never completed the course due to illness. Yes I admit that what perhaps we knew was shallow, certainly naive but at least we were in touch with issues.

CND, the Vietnam war were of that time.

I won`t say that all the kids in my family are hedonistic, some are but I think that having pretty materialistic parents it`s a learnt thing. However, I don`t see much interest in anything other than which is in their own sphere. However, by and large, they are pretty good kids!

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

Really2 wrote: »

Also they account for 90% of all grey hairs and baldness.

They are also 99.9% more likely to retire in the next 20 years than people under 45.

But are less likely to know how to use a new gadget than a 5 year old.

but, according to the newspapers we're all so rich our wealth more than makes up for it all.:rotfl:

Old_Slaphead

Really2 wrote: »

But are less likely to know how to use a new gadget than a 5 year old.

Probably why youngsters are so obese and families are in so much debt - can't be a**ed to get up to switch TV on and leave standby on 24/7. Maybe the on/off switch is the only thing we understand.