Huge cuts or tax rises needed to pay for ageing population

grizzly1911

Whats happened to the idea of all this pent up wealth cascading down from the boomers?

The real problem isn't those who have worked,saved and been prudent/provident for decades it is those that have always been spendthrift along with those supported in part, by the state, from cradle to grave.

Who are the most likely candidates to have suffered post the GFC, savers or those in debt.

Many youngsters simply will not be able to provide anything like a living pension, in old age, as incomes and disposable incomes have been forced down a trend that will continue even if at a lesser pace.

The 10/20% fall in incomes since the GFC will never be recovered, in the same way that those that take industrial action, of late are unlikely to make up ground.

Once the boomer pot has been drained it will be interesting to see who the next suckers are in subsequent GFCs.

the_flying_pig

lostinrates wrote: »

There is a current thread on marriages forum where some one is essentially asking for advice on how to deprive himself of assets for the future.


These crop up fairly regularly. People are brave and see what they are doing as justifiable. No one wants to accept what they are doing is not right......its all something to do with it being the fault of some posh geezers duck house or moat.

i read that thread.

the thread starter hilariously describes the taxman as a "money grabbing so-and-so" or some such.

breathtaking cluelessness from someone who based on the information provided is almost certainly already a net beneficiary of the state & who now thinks that the taxpayer not paying for his old age care on top [so that all of his home value - incidentally a large slice of that value itself being entirely down to various government policies over the years - can be left to his kids] would be some kind of theft.