Final salary scheme closing - what to do

cyclonebri1

jamesd wrote: »

At 60 he needs enough to live on for about 30-40 years. .

That unfortunately is not true, the average guy will be dead by 75 ie plus 15 years, you need to factor in the average not the max or the min that you did not mention.

Sorry, but that's life and death. No arguments I'm afraid.:A:A:A

Linton

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

That unfortunately is not true, the average guy will be dead by 75 ie plus 15 years, you need to factor in the average not the max or the min that you did not mention.

Sorry, but that's life and death. No arguments I'm afraid.:A:A:A

Jamesd is right.

Sounds wildly out. My reading of the current estimates from the ONS is that of the men now aged 60 about half will live until their late 80's and about a quarter will live until their mid 90s. When you are planning retirement you dont assume average - you have a 50% chance of living too long. I would go on something like the 10% chance, which makes it late 90s.

rpc

Current cohort life expectancy for a 60 year old male is 25.8 years. By the time I get there (29 years) it will be nearly 30 years. It would make sense to plan for rather longer, as Linton mentioned, because this is an average. Half of people will live longer.

10% of men aged 60 this year are expected to reach age 100 using the principal projection. That increases to 20% of 30 year old men and 30% of newborns boys. (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lifetables/historic-and-projected-mortality-data-from-the-uk-life-tables/2010-based/rpt-surviving-to-100.html?format=print)

Retirement is expensive - mainly because we live so long. Pay more , receive less or work longer are the only solutions unless you like the idea of euthanasia or ritual suicide.

cyclonebri1

Linton wrote: »

Jamesd is right.

I'm sorry but he is not.

Current 60 to 65 year olds are the last of the industrialised classes. They worked the mines , the foundries, and the factories.

They have been exposed to stuff I feel you and **** have no experience of. They will die as a result of there exposure at say 69 to 75 years of age.

The figures are based on a fit 60/65 year old that has not endured a lifetime in industry, ok, it's !!!!!!!!, unfortunately there is a whole lot of us left that do have those scars:cool::cool::cool:

rpc

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

The figures are based on a fit 60/65 year old

Eh, no. They are based on an average 65 year old - median life expectancy. Clearly some people are way under this but others are over it. There are many factors that affect life expectancy. Some will be suffering industrial diseases, but they will be a minority and those who are not will lift the average. That's the point of averages... There are high and low life expectancy variants on the projections.

Planning to die early (with no indication you are likely to) is a bit daft IMHO.

jamesd

For those retiring today, there is considerable variation in life expectancy at age 60. Outside labourers tend to have some of the lower life expectancies, solicitors some of the longest. But about half of people are expected to live to their late eighties. Many of those will not be the ones from tough physical industries, who are likely to die earlier than average.

I was right but do remember that there is considerable variation and you've correctly described some of the areas where certain groups will not live as long as others. It's one of the tougher equality challenges in raising the state pension age - it'll hurt those with some backgrounds more than it hurts others.

LEP is 38. Allowing for expected increases in life expectancy, planning for 30-40 years after reaching 60 is required. Even now many people at 60 need to be planning on 30-40 years to be sure they have a good chance of not running out of money. Not those with major life-shortening industrial injuries, but those who are in normal goodish health need to plan for that. For those being born today, around a third are expected to live to a hundred.

cyclonebri1

rpc wrote: »

Eh, no. They are based on an average 65 year old - median life expectancy. Clearly some people are way under this but others are over it. There are many factors that affect life expectancy. Some will be suffering industrial diseases, but they will be a minority and those who are not will lift the average. That's the point of averages... There are high and low life expectancy variants on the projections.

Planning to die early (with no indication you are likely to) is a bit daft IMHO.

But this is the real reason that this system doesn't work.
They/we are not a minority we are a majority, we have worked in industries that no longer survive, if you are under 50 I don't expect you to even comprehend the situation of folks like me and my generation

PS, I'm not daft, and I do resent that assertion, you could apologise


But I am a realist and I do know that today's 65 year olds are nothing like the projected 65's of the future.
Simple question chap.

How long/or at what age should a brickies labourer, a chap that has humped bricks, mixed gobbo, and toted for every one else be expected to work/live??

I'll give you a clue, they die before they are 70

Linton

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

But this is the real reason that this system doesn't work.
They/we are not a minority we are a majority, we have worked in industries that no longer survive, if you are under 50 I don't expect you to even comprehend the situation of folks like me and my generation

PS, I'm not daft, and I do resent that assertion, you could apologise


But I am a realist and I do know that today's 65 year olds are nothing like the projected 65's of the future.
Simple question chap.

How long/or at what age should a brickies labourer, a chap that has humped bricks, mixed gobbo, and toted for every one else be expected to work/live??

I'll give you a clue, they die before they are 70

People who have been old-style brickies labourers all their lives I can well believe can be expected to die young. But most people havent been brickies labourers or miners or asbestos workers etc etc all their lives. That's the point. Those sorts of jobs have been disappearing for 40 or more years now. Many people now aged 60 who started heavy work perhaps in the late 1960s were sacked during the 1980s/1990s and have been working indoors in good conditions for many years.

You can add in the great decrease in numbers of people who smoke over the past 20-30 years, which is now having a major impact on the death rate.

So I am afraid your views were right perhaps 50 years ago but much has changed in the intervening years which is now feeding through to the age of death.

kidmugsy

Cheer up. Mass medication with statins might reduce life expectancy substantially. Or it might not - nobody knows, it's just an experiment.

jamesd

It's also surprising what numbers show sometimes. You might think that people working maintaining a petrol refinery would [STRIKE]have a shorter life expectancy[/STRIKE] die of some things more than average. And you'd be right... but not because they work at a refinery.

"Among maintenance workers, mortality from cirrhosis of the liver ... and suicide ... were significantly elevated. However, these mortality excesses did not seem to be related to employment at the refinery. No other causes of death showed significant increase among maintenance workers. A similar separate analysis was conducted for process workers, and no significant excess was detected for any cause"

So don't drink to excess or kill yourself and you could live to normal life expectancy at that refinery. Sometimes it's the company you keep and the bad habits you have, not the job, that kills you early.

What do those bricky's labourers do when not working?