Boomers Pension Gravy Train Finally To Be Derailed

[Deleted User]

My only observation (I confess to not reading all the posts), is that the 'Boomers' won't take any wealth with them when they go. At that point, their children & future generations should somehow realise some benefits even if they feel they've missed out earlier.

Unfortunately I have four siblings, and my surviving parent isn't that rich, so 20% of not much still equals very little. That's life, I'm afraid.

ruggedtoast

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3818803/The-baby-boomers-spending-kids-inheritance-One-six-50-70-year-olds-say-plan-use-money-die.html

They have been dubbed the selfish generation – and it seems many baby boomers are planning on spending their money on themselves, rather than setting it aside for their children and grandchildren.

The generation born between about 1947 and 1964 struck it lucky, benefiting from good wages and rising property values before retiring on gold-plated pensions.

By contrast their children will face the threat of poverty in old age, yet it seems their hopes of being able to rely on an inheritance may be dashed

merrydance

"The generation born between about 1947 and 1964 struck it lucky, benefiting from good wages and rising property values before retiring on gold-plated pensions."

I beg to differ, women like me now have to wait until they are 66 before they qualify for the state pension. I was born in 1956.

[Deleted User]

So I have a 16.7% chance of not getting left very little - I feel devastated.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3818803/The-baby-boomers-spending-kids-inheritance-One-six-50-70-year-olds-say-plan-use-money-die.html

gosh how liFe is changing : toastie has been praising white, boomer, tory judges and now thinks that the daily mail is an authority of modern britain
I guess its just growing pains

mystic_trev

I bet the conversation with Mum and Dad, over Sunday lunch, was a bit stilted today, RT?

westernpromise

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The thing you appear to have missed is that most people don't see young people being poorer than old people as a job well done on the part of the old people.

I don't know why I am bothering to continue pointing this out because its like slamming ones head into a brick wall but here goes, again.

Boomers are not sharing the wealth out, young people will live through their working lives being poorer than boomers and paying for all the blank cheque promises the Thatcher, Major, Blair, Cameron and May governments have made to boomers to get votes from boomers.

Who is paying for older people's triple locked pensions, free tv licenses, bus travel, unlimited NHS care, housing that is now so unaffordable that if a supermarket chicken had followed the same trajectory since the 70s it would now cost £500? Younger people.

Who is not going to get any of those things when they retire themselves? Younger people.

There is nothing sustainable about the economy British boomers have created. Its like an entire generation of people who have had an enormous restaurant meal, ordered bottles of the most expensive wine and then skipped out the back leaving the last person there to pick up the check, even though that person only arrived at the dessert course and barely had anything.

In a packed field, this may be the stupidest and nastiest steaming pile of bilious envy toastie has ever excreted.

Why don't you just form an "Expropriate and Gas the Old Filth" party?

ruggedtoast

mystic_trev wrote: »

I bet the conversation with Mum and Dad, over Sunday lunch, was a bit stilted today, RT?

I prefer to lunch alone. Thank you.

[Deleted User]

westernpromise wrote: »

In a packed field, this may be the stupidest and nastiest steaming pile of bilious envy toastie has ever excreted.

Why don't you just form an "Expropriate and Gas the Old Filth" party?

Wasn't there one of those in the 1930's?

westernpromise

merrydance wrote: »

"The generation born between about 1947 and 1964 struck it lucky, benefiting from good wages and rising property values before retiring on gold-plated pensions."

I beg to differ, women like me now have to wait until they are 66 before they qualify for the state pension. I was born in 1956.

Indeed. How many people born since 1956 have "retired on gold plated pensions" so far?

I'm sure there are just lots of 52-year-olds born in 1964 fatly spending their "gold plated pensions" even as we speak.