ISAs v Pensions: The Official Retirement Debate

dunstonh

fairleads wrote: »

No connection. And your contribution to this aspect of the never ending cost debate is.............

... a lot better than yours. You just post to be argumentative and aggressive to others. I, like the others, have posted the pros and cons and given examples. One of my posts on this thread was nominated as post of the week for the board and has dozens of thanks for it.

A debate is where people debate and discuss. Let us know when you start doing that.

fairleads

EternallyGrateful wrote: »

1) From an impartial viewpoint I do find your attitude to be unecessarily confrontational.

2) Also: if I was asked, say, where best to get paracetamol, I would probably suggest a pharmacist. I would not expect to have to remind the asker that the pharmacist would require payment in return.

1) I prefer the word robust. A method to get to the heart of the matter.
2) A poor analogy, the cost is on the packet, visible for all to see. However, why do advisers get so tetchy when costs are mentioned? And thats all i did, remind all and sundry there could be a cost implication to the advice proffered by Aegis. If thats confrontational well may be its all in the eye.............

fairleads

jem16 wrote: »

That would describe almost anything, including an IFA.

Perhaps you could answer the question with a straightforward answer.

It has no bearing on the subject matter.

jem16

fairleads wrote: »

It has no bearing on the subject matter.

It has a very big bearing on the subject matter than you keep bringing up. Very clear that you do have a vested interest.

fairleads

jem16 wrote: »

It has a very big bearing on the subject matter than you keep bringing up. Very clear that you do have a vested interest.

My vested interest is in clarity and fairness.

jem16

fairleads wrote: »

My vested interest is in clarity and fairness.

So you were just helping a client challenge a pension calculation all in the name of clarity and fairness and took no fee for this wonderful act of kindness.

Full marks for obfuscation though.

fairleads

dunstonh wrote: »

... a lot better than yours. You just post to be argumentative and aggressive to others. I, like the others, have posted the pros and cons and given examples. One of my posts on this thread was nominated as post of the week for the board and has dozens of thanks for it. Well done, which one was it?

debate is where people debate and discuss. Let us know when you start doing that.

At least i haven't stooped so low as to tell a lie about another poster. I have never posted under another name thus i have never been banned.

atush

fairleads wrote: »

1) I prefer the word robust. A method to get to the heart of the matter.
2) A poor analogy, the cost is on the packet, visible for all to see. However, why do advisers get so tetchy when costs are mentioned? And thats all i did, remind all and sundry there could be a cost implication to the advice proffered by Aegis. If thats confrontational well may be its all in the eye.............

In this fluent marketplace, it has been a decade since I have seen the cost of drugs on the packet. It is on the shelf (as every store sells it at a diffent price and even in on store the prices are fluid).

And suggests you have no interaction with the marketplace. Perhaps we should invite Mrs Fairleads (if she is still with you ) to join the discussion:D

atush

fairleads wrote: »

You did once say that you won't read anymore of my comments, so don't.
Trolls use inflamatory comments such as stupid, idiot, crap, twaddle etc when criticising another's comment. Sound familiar? And its all because they can't contribute a rational counter argument. Let alone back them up with basic calcs even.

Trolls pick fights.

you do, I don't. and i have far better things to do than calculate your sums for you, sorry.;)

fairleads

atush wrote: »

Trolls pick fights.

you do, I don't. and i have far better things to do than calculate your sums for you, sorry.;)

I'm not asking you to calculate my sums, i'm asking you, and others who are in dispute with my statements and figures to provide the calculations and or proof that disprove my arguments. Thats all. After all, isn't one purpose of this forum to provide accurate info. Or is it?