I don't understand why people can't be bothered!

chuckley

I think it's more a lack of education. I certainly wasn't taught the art or need for saving, however in the same breath I've only cared for it recently, now I know certain thing. But the 80's was the boom, with the 90's spend, spend, spend until the money dried up and now is the aftermath.

atush

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Then you could vote for her.:)
We don't want to deny your vote, do you want to deny ours?
https://republic.org.uk/

Yes, if you are anything like a member of the US republican party. Bunch of loony tunes lol

Loonies should not get a vote

Thrugelmir

gadgetmind wrote: »

Or an alternative diversified collective investment that doesn't suffer from 1% a year "shrinkage" due to high fees.

In years gone by inflation eroded the value of cash savings. No one cared about 1% fees when inflation was much higher. Deflation appears to be getting people to rethink. Nor more illusions where credit growth masks the reality.

bigadaj

Thrugelmir wrote: »

In years gone by inflation eroded the value of cash savings. No one cared about 1% fees when inflation was much higher. Deflation appears to be getting people to rethink. Nor more illusions where credit growth masks the reality.

1% fees would have been a bargain, many plans paid the first two years contributions as commission to the salesman, so early cancellation even several years in meant that most if not all of the money was gone.

gadgetmind

Yes, we've come a long way, and the financial services sector has had to adapt to survive. The mickey was being taken in a big way, and people still need to be very vigilant.

Oddly some still seem to find paying big money to IFAs, platforms, and fund managers "reassuringly expensive" but each to their own.

Glen_Clark

After being ripped off by a commission driven private pension salesman, my way of avoiding excessive fees was to buy and hold a varied selection of shares directly. As funds got cheaper I sold the shares which had made a profit to use up my CGT allowance, and reinvested in funds. So now I am left with the lossmaking shares, and an unbalanced portfolio.

Glen_Clark

atush wrote: »

No, the Queens example to us all is as someone who could afford to retire, but carries on working til the day they die due to a sense of duty?

No shortage of hangers on willing to replace her, but she must feel she has a duty to keep her son from the throne.
When she has gone we will be forced to accept the next in like whatever they are like. Another reason for giving the people a choice.

gadgetmind

Glen_Clark wrote: »

So now I am left with the lossmaking shares, and an unbalanced portfolio.

It can be quite refreshing to sell the lot (report capital losses so you can offset against later gains) and build a new portfolio from scratch.

If you find a balanced portfolio of low-fee trackers too boring, then keep 5% in each pot for "themes". I do this but TBH "It seemed like a good idea at the time" would be better name.

Glen_Clark

gadgetmind wrote: »

TBH "It seemed like a good idea at the time" would be better name.

I'm looking at a few of those. I had narrowed it down to Greggs or BHP. Then Colin Gregg got arrested on child sex charges which decided me. I went for BHP to be 'safe' - the world's biggest and probably most diversified miner which has halved, whilst Greggs has doubled. Then there was the supermarkets - after all people will always buy food and I split that between the 3 middle of the road grocers Sainsburys, Morrisons and Tesco just to be 'safe'

ChesterDog

BHP Biliton did me the enormous favour of convincing me once and for all that individual equities were not the way forward.