Early-retirement wannabe

coastline

gadgetmind wrote: »

Ah yes, Liam Byrne's letter left on desk for incoming minister David Laws.

"there's no money left"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-note-successor

Q: Tax and spend only works for so long, so we do governments keep repeating the same mistake?
A: Because idiots keep voting for idiots.

Thing is the Tories were on the same path as Labour only months before the banking crisis.They announced to the world that spending would continue for the next 3 years 2007-2010.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6975536.stm

They knew Labour had borrowed over £100 billion between 2002-2007 in a growing economy yet they planned to do the same....shown in red below.

http://nickthornsby.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/deficit.png

Since 2010 all we've heard is how Labours reckless spending just about ruined the country...fix the roof while the sun shines etc.
Theres not one mention of excessive spending by the chancellor...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR_hfQU-4r0

gadgetmind

I agree that the conservatives didn't cut fast enough or deep enough. Instead they woffled on about it, and got everyone half convinced that it was happening, but it wasn't.

Marine_life

Ah the great money tree. What happened to that then and what to do about it?

For me there are three fundamental problems:

1. The last 30 years has seen an explosion in assetvalues which have to a large extent benefitted the haves but have doneabsolutely nothing for the have nots.

2. The demographics of Europe and within that theUK are changing meaning that pension and health costs are increasing (and willcontinue to increase and take an increasing portion of government spending).

3. Politics (and more specifically the desire ofgovernments to be popular and get reelected means that taxes have not increasedat the same rate as expenses (and will never do so) so that means there needsto be other ways of meeting higher costs (queue less generous retirementbenefits and increasing retirement age)

So what does that mean for those looking to establish theirown great money tree? Well in my viewthe following:

1. Be one of the haves. As in have parents who have benefitted fromthe growth in asset values and look forward to a nice fat inheritance. Not everyone can elect for this choice.

2. Reduce expenses. Seriously. Some examples:

a. The fact that coffee shop (selling coffee at 3quid a pop have become ubiquitous

b. …but not as ubiquitous as the home capsulecoffee machine. Both are incrediblyexpensive ways of drinking coffee.

c. Don’t go to university. Or if you can’t avoid that, don’t go to universityin the UK. Maastricht University forexample charges fees of €1,900 per year compared to around 9,000 quid in theUK. There are some excellent coursestaught in English.

d.

3. Get a good education and be ruthless about yourcareer choice.

4. Save and start saving early. Take some risks while you’re young (I tipAfrican stocks as a good long term play).

5. Consider where you want to live and moreimportantly where you want to retire. Retire somewhere cheap.

Of course someone could take the choice to live in the sametown their whole life and wait for the state pension. At the end of the day its all about choicesand actions (and luck does not do any harm – but you know the famous saying“the harder I work the luckier I get”)

Broadsword

While many people may be able to work into their 70's there will be many in occupations where this is not possible. Because the Government moves the goalposts on pension payment age and will continue to do so, it does not magically mean people will become healthier, or stronger, to continue to work.

However the movement of pension age is purely for economic reasons, it is not an indicator of an age of good health. For some people and an increasing number, it will not be possible to work until the date when pension is payable. As hard as it is, this does suggest that those in their 40s and 50s need to ensure they have sufficient invested for an age when there is a gap in income, between ceasing work and drawing State Pension.

kidmugsy

That's about the size of it, Broadsword.

gfplux

With the decline of heavy industry, mining etc what are the occupations that will not be possible up to the age of 70?
Perhaps the issue is that the population is less healthy than it once was?

atush

they are getting fat is the problem.

And I would say many/most occupations, if the individual is of normal good health are doable to 70. As people who are/will become 70 soon are far healthier and due to live longer than 70 yr olds from decades ago.

People just need to learn to save again, like they used to. Hearing too many people here just now, aged 50 and a bit, planning on spending their pensions instead of saving more.

Dont want to work to 70? Save more.

Thrugelmir

bigadaj wrote: »

Also were all different and as you say very few people do heavy manual labour anymore.

As much about the quality of healthcare as what they did.

Financial_Saddler

atush wrote: »

they are getting fat is the problem.

And I would say many/most occupations, if the individual is of normal good health are doable to 70. As people who are/will become 70 soon are far healthier and due to live longer than 70 yr olds from decades ago.

People just need to learn to save again, like they used to. Hearing too many people here just now, aged 50 and a bit, planning on spending their pensions instead of saving more.

Dont want to work to 70? Save more.

I can only speak as I find, but the cohort of senior managers/directors that I have worked with must be an unlucky bunch - heart attack; heart attack; stroke; triple heart bypass; stress - all early 50s at most. Nothing at all to do with being fat.
The culture of some businesses is absurd, and is virtually guaranteed to lead to health issues ( physical or mental ) at some stage. My son applied for an internship with EY. He was given a multiple choice questionaire asking for his reaction to certain work situations - almost without exception, the scenario involved "urgent" deadline requirements with a notable absence of appropriate resources. My son's reaction was : is this company really so badly managed? Smart guy!

kangoora

gfplux wrote: »

With the decline of heavy industry, mining etc what are the occupations that will not be possible up to the age of 70?
Perhaps the issue is that the population is less healthy than it once was?

I can think of a lot without too many problems, of course there will be a lot of people who will be able to continue to 70 even in the list below but I think there will be tens, if not hundred's of thousands who end up on some form of disability benefit or government sponsored early retirement between 60-70 years of age

• Heavy industry as mentioned
• Agriculture/farming
• Building trades
• Anything that involves manual dexterity, arthritis setting in so tailors, hairdressers, even possibly keyboard work could become actively painful with arthritis.
• Anything involving a lot of walking/standing up - again, arthritis, bad backs/legs - this could affect shop assistants etc.
• Security guards - how is a 68 year old security guard going to be any deterrent?
• Garbage disposal technicians

The list goes on and on, whilst a lot of 60 - 70 years olds now are much fitter and able than they were 40 years ago there are a lot of health issues that could affect a lot of professions.


Jobs requiring fast, accurate decisions as it is generally accepted that post 60 you are most likely to be slower in both your mental as well as physical reactions so potentially affecting a lot of driving jobs such as cabbies, truckers, delivery people etc.


That isn't counting early onset dementia or mental issues