The cost of living

saver861

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Considering I got rid of my 28 year old freezer in 2009, it's water under the bridge now, and I'm not going to lose sleep over a few £60's from years ago!

I think you misunderstand. The difference of £60+ in yearly running costs is referring to todays models and the different efficiency ratings of todays models. So buying a less efficient fridge v higher efficient model might mean additional costs of £60+.

Your pre 1999 freezer is likely to have been costing considerably more than the £60 difference in todays models.

They say that white goods account for 20% of a households electric costs so that is one fifth of the annual electric bill.

The salient point is that it might not be a bad thing for peeps to checkout their 'old reliable' fridge, washing machine, dishwasher, etc etc. The 'old reliable' thing in the kitchen might be costing them much more than they realise!!

greenglide

..... all of this shows how difficult / risky it is to try to estimate how much income will be required simply by adding up a random series of costs.

We can add the gas, electricity, council tax etc for our current property but the "hidden" costs not part of normal monthly expenditure and the distressed purchases that are the risk.

Goldiegirl

saver861 wrote: »

I think you misunderstand. The difference of £60+ in yearly running costs is referring to todays models and the different efficiency ratings of todays models. So buying a less efficient fridge v higher efficient model might mean additional costs of £60+.

Your pre 1999 freezer is likely to have been costing considerably more than the £60 difference in todays models.

They say that white goods account for 20% of a households electric costs so that is one fifth of the annual electric bill.

The salient point is that it might not be a bad thing for peeps to checkout their 'old reliable' fridge, washing machine, dishwasher, etc etc. The 'old reliable' thing in the kitchen might be costing them much more than they realise!!

Blimey, you are like a dog with a bone! But, in the absence of an active WASPI thread, I suppose you need something to get your teeth into:rotfl:


I've already acknowledged, in a previous post, your salient point that the old reliable appliances might not be as efficient as new ones. I mentioned my ten year old washing machine, which I've been waiting to go wrong, and then replace it - but I also said I might replace it anyway, as it'll be more efficient.


With regard to the 28 year old freezer. Yes, it probably wasn't running as efficiently as it could be - but, in your world, I'd need a new freezer every 5 - 7 years, so I may have ended up spending more on new appliances!!:rotfl:



Anyway, as with the WASPI thread, I'm going to leave it there, because I can't be bothered to argue the toss on tiny points of order

Goldiegirl

greenglide wrote: »

..... all of this shows how difficult / risky it is to try to estimate how much income will be required simply by adding up a random series of costs.

We can add the gas, electricity, council tax etc for our current property but the "hidden" costs not part of normal monthly expenditure and the distressed purchases that are the risk.

Even with spreadsheets projecting every possible scenario, none of us can predict the future.


All we can do is prepare in line with our own individual comfort levels

greenglide

Which is why I use current income levels at which we do save / invest reasonable sums so we know this will work.

A quick sanity check of estimated spending is also useful as well but I much prefer the former.

Ganga

No body has included funeral costs :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

HappyMJ

Ganga wrote: »

No body has included funeral costs :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I'll be dead then...so...I'm not bothered.

I'm sure there'll be plenty of cash in my savings/current account to pay for it. I don't intend for every last penny of my cash savings to be used except in case of emergency. I would like to keep a balance of around £10,000 throughout retirement and only call on that in the last year of my life or in case of emergency.

saver861

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Blimey, you are like a dog with a bone! But, in the absence of an active WASPI thread, I suppose you need something to get your teeth into:rotfl:

Nope ... just answering with my thoughts ......

Goldiegirl wrote: »

With regard to the 28 year old freezer. Yes, it probably wasn't running as efficiently as it could be - but, in your world, I'd need a new freezer every 5 - 7 years, so I may have ended up spending more on new appliances!!:rotfl:

But it is not 'my world' it is what the experts say. They say average lifespan is now less than 7 years ... so lets say 6. Thus my suggestion 5 - 7 years.

When replacing goods, its not just the efficiency costs that is the difference. We replaced our washing machine just recently and Mrs Saver tells me that the new machine is much quieter and has some additional useful features. The model is just a mid range model - as was the old machine. So when replacing goods you usually have some additional benefits along with reduced costs.

Thus my point that retaining old machines may be counter productive in a few different ways.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Anyway, as with the WASPI thread, I'm going to leave it there, because I can't be bothered to argue the toss on tiny points of order

Well as the point of the forum is to discuss different views along with ways of benefiting the current status, these are just such points. Many people read these posts so some may take something from it.

Those that don't agree are perfectly welcome to put their point across ....

fatbeetle

greenglide wrote: »

..... all of this shows how difficult / risky it is to try to estimate how much income will be required simply by adding up a random series of costs.

Indeed, but it was a "ballpark" figure I was after, not a definitive answer.

saver861

greenglide wrote: »

..... all of this shows how difficult / risky it is to try to estimate how much income will be required simply by adding up a random series of costs.

Not sure why you would be adding up a 'random' series of costs?