The Death of Retirement

fc123

dunstonh wrote: »

It is the reality of a consumer spending generation that prefers to spend little on the future but more on bling today.

That's an unfair generalisation. I know / have known many people who don't have anything spare left each month to put away for a pension especially when raising a young family, trying to pay down a mortgage etc. People today also don't have the job security of 2 or 3 decades ago.

Govt. just changed the goal posts for people our age (52/53) who have made provision but not the 100% we require. For us the extra SP that we would have received age 66 (according to the .gov website) made the difference of being able to fully retire and not fret about having insufficient income.

Do we have the earning capacity + enough time to plug the gap?
I don't know. Kids are grown and educated, there's still some mortgage to get shot of.
We have our own business so no stable safe income to plan from so it's harder still.

To be honest I am absolutely furious that we have worked day in day out since we were both 16 and never claimed a penny, but funded our own lifestyles and choices, paid in and in and in and now may not live long enough to get anything out?

greenglide

Not necessarily, I get my state pension in July and I will keep on working because I enjoy it.

and there will be plenty of people who suddenly wake up (whether they smell the coffee or not) and realise that the state pension will not be enough to live on (interest only mortgages and other things) and have little choice but to keep on working.

bigfreddiel

dunstonh wrote: »

It is the reality of a consumer spending generation that prefers to spend little on the future but more on bling today.

Couldn't put it better myself! fj

mgdavid

fc123 wrote: »

...............

To be honest I am absolutely furious that we have worked day in day out since we were both 16 and never claimed a penny, but funded our own lifestyles and choices, paid in and in and in and now may not live long enough to get anything out?

What an extraordinary statement!
Do you not think 'funding our own lifestyle and choices' includes making provision for retirement, with full risk analysis (ie discounting the level of SP). With suitable planning you can retire whenever you like...
Why do you say 'may not live long enough to get anything out'? Did I miss the government's green paper on state euthanasia at 70?

dunstonh

That's an unfair generalisation. I know / have known many people who don't have anything spare left each month to put away for a pension especially when raising a young family, trying to pay down a mortgage etc. People today also don't have the job security of 2 or 3 decades ago.

Yes it is a generalisation but a fair one.

Sorry to burst your bubble but living standards 3 decades ago were lower than today. Don't think that the same family pressures that exist now did not exist back then. Mortgage repayments were more expensive relative to real terms money and whilst the amount borrowed today is a little higher in real terms, it is not that far off. Utilities were a bit cheaper but consumer goods were more expensive. You didnt have so many consumer items to spend money on so easily. Make do and mend. Family hand downs etc were far more common. Buying your first house meant living in house with virtually no furniture other than the things gifted by parents and you gradually improved.

Govt. just changed the goal posts for people our age (52/53) who have made provision but not the 100% we require.

The Govt has made no significant changes to people aged 52/53 and the state pension has only ever been there to bring you to a minimal standard of living. Nothing has changed in that respect.

To be honest I am absolutely furious that we have worked day in day out since we were both 16 and never claimed a penny, but funded our own lifestyles and choices, paid in and in and in and now may not live long enough to get anything out?

If you choose to fund your lifestyle instead of your retirement then that is your choice.

bigfreddiel

mgdavid wrote: »

What an extraordinary statement!
Do you not think 'funding our own lifestyle and choices' includes making provision for retirement, with full risk analysis (ie discounting the level of SP). With suitable planning you can retire whenever you like...
Why do you say 'may not live long enough to get anything out'? Did I miss the government's green paper on state euthanasia at 70?

Like the euthanasia bit - brilliant!

fj

bigfreddiel

dunstonh wrote: »

Yes it is a generalisation but a fair one.

Sorry to burst your bubble but living standards 3 decades ago were lower than today. Don't think that the same family pressures that exist now did not exist back then. Mortgage repayments were more expensive relative to the real terms of money and the amount borrowed today is a little higher in real terms, it is not that far off. Utilities were a bit cheaper but consumer goods were more expensive. You didnt have so many consumer items to spend money on so easily. Make do and mend. Family hand downs etc were far more common. Buying your first house meant living in house with virtually no furniture other than the things gifted by parents and you gradually improved.



The Govt has made no significant changes to people aged 52/53 and the state pension has only ever been there to bring you to a minimal standard of living. Nothing has changed in that respect.



If you choose to fund your lifestyle instead of your retirement then that is your choice.

Must agree again, I remember 15% mortgage rate, and having nothing left by the end of the month, not to mention inflation at 15% wasn't it! We got an interim pay rise of 18% that year.

Then there was the three day week, power cuts, coal shortages, refuse piling up on the streets and so on.

Every generation thinks they're hard done by and that the previous one had it easy. Nothing changes!

fj

EdSwippet

I worked 40 hour five-day weeks for over three and a half decades, saving assiduously for a comfortable retirement. I now have reasonably secure pension savings that should see me through, barring perhaps a horrible 'black swan' event.

But here's the thing -- if I had my time over again, starting today, I am reasonably certain I would choose to live more and work and save less now, in exchange for doing that over five decades.

The lifetime tax and national insurance bite is significantly less. Up to a point you can control your own time. You can travel, learn, kick back, and do other stuff while you are still young enough to make it count. And most importantly, once you've done it nobody can take a travel or other life experience from you, whereas retirement plans and savings are constantly chipped away by successive governments, and remain permanently one grasping and ambitious chancellor's decision away from decimation or entire destruction.

woolly_wombat

PensionTech wrote: »

Whilst it's laudable to highlight the fact that people need to save more than they might think for retirement, over-egging the pudding is not helpful to anyone. A recent FT article proved this when it attracted the ire of young adults, after appearing to claim that they should save £800 a month into a pension but would rather spend it on holidays. This was met with some brilliant sarcasm, but more tellingly, also some despair. One comment was "Literally no point me contributing £100 a month if the base level I need to contribute is £800. May as well enjoy my youth."

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Article.

Follow up.

Thanks for posting the links.

Very interesting original article and follow up.

PensionTech wrote: »

I would rather see the hyperbole toned down and replaced with some well-publicised, constructive and above all, realistic advice about a) how to save a little more and b) manage your expectations.

I suspect the real purpose of the paper is to highlight inter-generational inequality.

It's unfortunate that it's "sparked the ire of young adults" who, rightly in my view, feel hard done by.

Politicians ignore millenials at their peril.

bigadaj

bigfreddiel wrote: »

Like the eutenasia bit - brilliant!

fj

Apparently youngsters can't spell fj?