Over 55s hoping to enjoy a 'golden retirement' are facing poverty

silvercar

carolt wrote: »

You sound ever so slightly like you tacitly approve of that.

Is that a correct supposition?

The world has changed, there will always be a private rental sector because there will always be people who don't want, or can't afford, to buy. Therefore there will always be competition for FTBs from investors.

Personally, I have two teenagers, they may find it difficult to get on the property ladder themselves and I may decide to help them out. It may even be that I decide to buy a property and rent it out for a few years before they are ready to live independently. So yes I could be competing against a FTB.

It's my money and if I want to use it to help my children, rather than drive round in a brand new 4x4 and have flash jewellery and fancy holidays that is my choice.

carolt

Well, there always has been a private rented sector - that's not new.

Whilst I applaud your generosity in wanting and being prepared to help your children out when the time comes, do you think it's possible that they might actually prefer to be in a position to stand on their own two feet?

I'd much rather prices were lower and I could afford to buy easily; the thought of relying on family is not something I would wish to do.

Harry_Powell

carolt wrote: »

Well, there always has been a private rented sector - that's not new.

Whilst I applaud your generosity in wanting and being prepared to help your children out when the time comes, do you think it's possible that they might actually prefer to be in a position to stand on their own two feet?

I'd much rather prices were lower and I could afford to buy easily; the thought of relying on family is not something I would wish to do.

How low? Low enough for you to afford to buy comfortably or low enough for everyone, no matter their income to buy? Would you be happy if prices in the SE were so low that everyone from the deprived areas in the North, Wales, Scotland and NI could afford to move here for jobs? Would you be happy to live in such an overpopulated area?

I know you're looking to buy a house based on your kid's schooling. Often you have to pay a premuim in house prices to live in a nice area with good schools. Would you be happy for everyone to afford to move into these areas so that they could get their kids into the better school? Would it still be a better school and would you be able to get your kids into it with such demand?

It's too simplistic to state "everyone should be able to afford to buy a house". They already can if they want to live in depressed areas up north, but no one wants too. How do you lower prices so that everyone who is currently based in the South East can buy, without then having a flood of people from all over the UK (and Europe) moving there for better job opportunities?

When all the green areas of the SE are filled with flats and houses, you'll be the first to moan that your kids have nowhere to play.

2010

silvercar wrote: »

What do you want people to do? Bail out of their 5% fixed rate saving because that means they are being subsidised by the bank? Offer to pay more on their mortgage to return the tax payer subsidy?

What I want people to do is take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming everyone and everything for the predicament that they`ve got themselves into.

They reach 60/65 and haven`t got this,haven`t paid that off etc., so who`s fault is that.
If people haven`t got enough to retire on,they`ll just have to keep working.

lostinrates

Retirement planning terrifies me.

My dad put a lot away, his whole life it was save now, because when I retire we'll be able to enjoy it. Everything spare (and not spare) for a long time went into his future planes. They took an endowment (as well as a repayment mortgage) to further this. Like by far the majority of people I guess, my dad is not, and never has been, a sophisticated investor, but he's worked hard, earned reasonably well, particularly as his career progressed, and put lots away. As he approaches retirement (actually he retired recently, and took another jobb immeadiately) he finds the endowment next to worth less, his pensions (Equitable life, then another dodgy somehow) depleted and the rosy retirement repaying his prudent years just ...not really here. He'll be ok, he's not devoid of pension, the last third of his carrer was significant and they will be comfortable....but not what they thought they were ''buying'' for their future.

It scares me that people can try so hard to provide and get it so wrong. Its he unsophisticated unvestor trying hard who has most to lose: sophisticated investors understand it, those who don't bother ...at least now...are still provided for to a degree.

C_Mababejive

lostinrates wrote: »

Retirement planning terrifies me.

My dad put a lot away, his whole life it was save now, because when I retire we'll be able to enjoy it. Everything spare (and not spare) for a long time went into his future planes. They took an endowment (as well as a repayment mortgage) to further this. Like by far the majority of people I guess, my dad is not, and never has been, a sophisticated investor, but he's worked hard, earned reasonably well, particularly as his career progressed, and put lots away. As he approaches retirement (actually he retired recently, and took another jobb immeadiately) he finds the endowment next to worth less, his pensions (Equitable life, then another dodgy somehow) depleted and the rosy retirement repaying his prudent years just ...not really here. He'll be ok, he's not devoid of pension, the last third of his carrer was significant and they will be comfortable....but not what they thought they were ''buying'' for their future.

It scares me that people can try so hard to provide and get it so wrong. Its he unsophisticated unvestor trying hard who has most to lose: sophisticated investors understand it, those who don't bother ...at least now...are still provided for to a degree.

This story could be retold so many times across our fair land.

Behind every scheme there is a schemer.

The answer is,live today..worry about tomorrow when it comes.
Thats what i need to do otherwise i will end up in a similar boat to your dad ...or worse.

2010

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/7200751/Over-55s-hoping-to-enjoy-a-golden-retirement-are-facing-poverty.html

Interesting to see that these findings come from of all people a pension/insurance company.
I don`t think they would have a vested interest here

---

would they?

Lostinrates I can well sympathise with your father,who seems to have tried to do the right thing and provide for a comfortable retirement,only to be let down by grubby financial institutions,whose only concern was to make a fast buck,usually through a fat ongoing commission.

People consult "financial advisors" thinking they are doing the right thing and end up with a product more linked to the FA`s commission than their own needs.

C Mababejive
The answer is,live today..worry about tomorrow when it comes.

This is what a lot of people have done and now find themselves unable to retire at 65.

Kohoutek

C_Mababejive wrote: »

The answer is,live today..worry about tomorrow when it comes.

If you do that, don't expect the state to help you when you retire. This country has £2 trillion in debt and unfunded liabilities.

C_Mababejive

Kohoutek wrote: »

If you do that, don't expect the state to help you when you retire. This country has £2 trillion in debt and unfunded liabilities.

But why shouldnt they help me? They help plenty of others....whats different about me?

Old_Slaphead

C_Mababejive wrote: »

But why shouldnt they help me? They help plenty of others....whats different about me?

Because the cupboard is bare. This government has been handing out goodies like there's no tomorrow - which in their case is probably true.

nb - don't you make enough from the royalties anyway?