Pension at 70? Throw a party.

grizzly1911

Pensions will end up like free prescriptions.

The majority will still be entitled state care and provision through some means tested benefit whether it be through some form of disability or out of work benefit. There simply won't be sufficient doable jobs available to many in their 60s.

Disposable incomes for many just won't be enough to make any meaningful pension provision, sufficient to lift people out of some form of support.

As usual those in the middle ground will continue to lose. The very wealthy will continue not to be impacted.

With growing obesity, diabetes, alcohol and coronary issues who really knows how life expectancy will continue to grow. I know of several clean living individuals who haven't made it to 50.

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

At a country level that is indeed the case but at an individual level investing in overseas assets or in companies that generate income from overseas should provide protection.

Only trouble is they all seem to catch a cold when the sick west sneezes.

Yes, pensions for a small number allow them to outbid the people without pensions:
if everyone makes, in cash terms, 'adequate' provision for themselves then it only ends is massive inflation unless we produce sufficient 'real' goods and services.

I don't share your totally negative view that everything is bad and getting worse: we still live at an amazing time in history and in an amazing part of the world.
Nothing sick about the west.

In the longer term we need to move away from the ridiculous nonsense about the financial burden on the future taxpayers and understand the need to concentrate on being able to produce real goods and services when the population ages.

I have great confidence that lots (most ) people in their 60s and even 70s can make significant contribution to the economy if they were allowed to.
Market forces are a wonderful driver when need arises.

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

I don't share your totally negative view that everything is bad and getting worse: we still live at an amazing time in history and in an amazing part of the world.
Nothing sick about the west.

In the longer term we need to move away from the ridiculous nonsense about the financial burden on the future taxpayers and understand the need to concentrate on being able to produce real goods and services when the population ages.

I have great confidence that lots (most ) people in their 60s and even 70s can make significant contribution to the economy if they were allowed to.
Market forces are a wonderful driver when need arises.

The West is sick otherwise we wouldn't be in the mess we are constantly fudging the books to find a few more noughts all the time. Struggling to find ever more profitability out of thin air - Goldman Sachs, Lehman, UBS - through to no liquidity and QE. Selling off country silver to create a few more noughts from the 80s to the current day Eurostar, Roymail, 3G/4G.

I am sure that those over 60 are able to make significant contributions. Many will have learned valuable lessons from mistakes made through their lifetime. the young have yet to learn and repeat those mistakes. Unfortunately the they aren't valued in our current society. There still remain many young people unemployed that need a chance too..

Necessity will drive people to desperate measures you are right as market forces come into play. Those market forces will also lead to a falling life expectancy for many in due course.

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

The West is sick otherwise we wouldn't be in the mess we are constantly fudging the books to find a few more noughts all the time. Struggling to find ever more profitability out of thin air - Goldman Sachs, Lehman, UBS - through to no liquidity and QE. Selling off country silver to create a few more noughts from the 80s to the current day Eurostar, Roymail, 3G/4G.

I am sure that those over 60 are able to make significant contributions. Many will have learned valuable lessons from mistakes made through their lifetime. the young have yet to learn and repeat those mistakes. Unfortunately the they aren't valued in our current society.

Necessity will drive people to desperate measures you are right as market forces come into play. Those market forces will also lead to a falling life expectancy for many in due course.

I suppose on a sunny day you worry about the lack of rain
on a rainy day you worry about the lack of sun
on a part and part day you just worry anyway

We are all hugely privileged to be living at this time in history and in this wonderful place.


However, if labour become scarce due the aging population then 'elderly' labour will be more highly valued and the demand will increase.
There are millions of jobs that people over 60/70 can do but in the current economic climate there is insufficient demand.

It won't be a crisis or a catastrophe and no-one will die early because of it.

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

I suppose on a sunny day you worry about the lack of rain
on a rainy day you worry about the lack of sun
on a part and part day you just worry anyway

We are all hugely privileged to be living at this time in history and in this wonderful place.


However, if labour become scarce due the aging population then 'elderly' labour will be more highly valued and the demand will increase.
There are millions of jobs that people over 60/70 can do but in the current economic climate there is insufficient demand.

It won't be a crisis or a catastrophe and no-one will die early because of it.

In Claptonville that may well be the case.

Unless you hadn't noticed we have a virtual open door immigration policy and over a million young people unemployed, we also have several million people under employed many of whom are on NMW, part time or limited contracts. There is abundant capacity just little really well paid opportunities.

Id did find a stimulating walk on the fells in yesterdays inclement weather most invigorating.

There is little point worrying about stuff you can do jack about. Three little birds and all that.

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

In Claptonville that may well be the case.

Unless you hadn't noticed we have a virtual open door immigration policy and over a million young people unemployed, we also have several million people under employed many of whom are on NMW, part time or limited contracts. There is abundant capacity just little really well paid opportunities.

Id did find a stimulating walk on the fells in yesterdays inclement weather most invigorating.

There is little point worrying about stuff you can do jack about. Three little birds and all that.

The topic is about 2030 onwards when it is perceived that there will be a shortage of labour (incorrectly perceived to be about financial burden on the taxpayer).

However you seem very confident that there will be no such shortage so you can rejoice and look forward to a prosperous future and happy and rich old age.
You can join me in celebrating our mutual good fortune to be living in this wonderful country and fantastic era.

MFW_ASAP

CLAPTON wrote: »

The topic is about 2030 onwards when it is perceived that there will be a shortage of labour (incorrectly perceived to be about financial burden on the taxpayer).

I've only ever heard you express the concern about shortage of labour, everyone else in the country (and other countries with the same demographics) seems to be worried about the burden of unfunded state and public sector pensions and the health service on a reduced number of future taxpayers.

Thrugelmir

CLAPTON wrote: »

if fact the exact opposite is happening; we [STRIKE]are selling[/STRIKE] have sold most of the UK to foreign investors

Minor correction. The infatuation with property means we own relatively little. Another contributory factor to the balance of trade deficit. As profits made within the UK are exported.

CLAPTON

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

I've only ever heard you express the concern about shortage of labour, everyone else in the country (and other countries with the same demographics) seems to be worried about the burden of unfunded state and public sector pensions and the health service on a reduced number of future taxpayers.

Many thoughtful people (and all economists ) are concerned about the demographic changes and their effect on the per capita GDP due to the lack of working age people. This is why OBR and Hamish say we need massive more immigration.

If you really don't think there will be a shortage of goods and services (per capita GDP) then that's fine: there will not be a problem with taxation because per capita GDP will be high and we will easily be able to afford it.

If per capita GDP is high, how will there be a problem paying for the e.g. health service?

The fewer number of taxpayers will obviously be producing a very high level of output per person won't they?

It's the production of goods and services that create wealth not money in a pension scheme (which will become worth less and less if there is a shortage of goods and services as prices will rise.)

MFW_ASAP

CLAPTON wrote: »

Many thoughtful people (and all economists ) are concerned about the demographic changes and their effect on the per capita GDP due to the lack of working age people. This is why OBR and Hamish say we need massive more immigration.

If you really don't think there will be a shortage of goods and services (per capita GDP) then that's fine: there will not be a problem with taxation because per capita GDP will be high and we will easily be able to afford it.

If per capita GDP is high, how will there be a problem paying for the e.g. health service?

The fewer number of taxpayers will obviously be producing a very high level of output per person won't they?

It's the production of goods and services that create wealth not money in a pension scheme (which will become worth less and less if there is a shortage of goods and services as prices will rise.)

I've never seen any thoughtful (or unthoughtful) people worry about the shortage of goods and services, and the competition between workers and pensioners therein.

You're moving in the right direction at last though when you discuss GDP, you just need to make the leap of logic of whether it's better to have a large proportion of that GDP funding pensions, or whether it's worse.

Eventually you might even figure out the link between investment and job creation.

Keep going, you'll get there in the end.