My view on Pensions

fairleads

zagfles wrote: »

If they're trolls or spammers, then yes. I did a very long and detailed reply to the OP's first post, I get a reply addressing just the first line of it with the rest totally ignored. So what's the point?

Christ, this thread has even got me agreeing with dunstonh !!

But arn't trolls in the eye of the beholder? you know, the ones who use terms like stupid and numpty, and as for post 93, how come it has been on view for so long - am i the only one to report it?

MPD

A point and a question.

AE pensions are DC or better. The public sector schemes are all AE but meet (exceed) the minimum requirements so are compliant.

To OP. Is there anything I or anyone else could say that would change your mind?

zagfles

fairleads wrote: »

But arn't trolls in the eye of the beholder?

Like post #93 you mean?

you know, the ones who use terms like stupid and numpty, and as for post 93, how come it has been on view for so long - am i the only one to report it?

I have. Lets hope the mods' "eye of the beholder" agrees, eh?

Triumph13

Troll sit all alone under bridge with no friends. Troll sad. Troll see friendly people on MSE helping each other. This make troll angry. Troll stamp feet!

Johnny_Doe

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

OP you're right, Pensions are c**p, argument over and good luck for when/if you retire, I suspect you may need it!

davieg11

Before this thread is closed I'd like to say have a nice retirement with your £4K a year deferred police pension and whatever state pension you get. I'll look you up in 20 years time.

BobQ

Rachel_Pierson wrote: »

Thanks for your perspective. You mention AVCs. Am I right in thinking that means you worked in the Public Sector, under a local government pension scheme? The one and only time I had a pension was when I was in that boat myself, when I worked in the Police Service. Overall, though, I could make more money in the private sector. So having a 'gold plated' pension scheme lowered my overall lifetime remuneration quite a bit.

AVCs are used by those lucky enough to have DB pension schemes. However, AVCs are stand alone DC schemes that can be taken out by anyone who is part of an occupational pension scheme. Of course it is becoming less common as more people have individual DC schemes or use SIPPs.

So when you left the Police Service for that well paid job in the private sector, how much more pay did you get? When you made your decision how did you evaluate the value of the DB scheme you were losing. Most experts reckon that you would need to get a pay rise of at least 20% to make up for the loss of the DB pension scheme.

So when you took your pay rise in the private sector you decided not to buy another pension? So what do you plan to live on when you retire?

Have you kept tabs on how much the DB pension is now worth when you retire?

BobQ

Rachel_Pierson wrote: »

I can guarantee that every time I discuss pensions with a group, someone will ask that question. My answer is always the same - "the same as you, but I won't be propping up a Ponzi scheme for 40 years first". The fact, as I see it, is this: we're all going to have a crap retirement, unless we invest wisely ourselves outside of pension provision. Name me one person that wasn't an MP that can live on their pension alone today? Most people rely on a combination of other investments to supplement what amounts to a pretty meagre sum from their pension.

So, my question to you is, what are you going to do when your pension isn't enough to support your retuirement? Same as me probably, except your investments may be worth less because you've had less funds available to invest whilst you were working.

So how much do you want to have when you retire? 10% of your pre-retirement income, 50% of it, 80%?

So many people want to retireat 55 on two thirds of what they were earning but only invest about 5% of their income in order to do it. No wonder they are disappointed.

So how about some hard figures rather than rants?

mgdavid

Rachel_Pierson wrote: »

No, wrong again - there is no substance to your argument.

Malthusian