Age related spending reduction

Bimbly

In my plans, my house will pay for care if needed. At the moment, I am saving into my house (mortgage) which I am using as insurance. No other insurance policy has the advantage that you live in it!

I don't have children so don't feel the need to leave an inheritance.

System

coyrls wrote: »

That is stretching the definition of spending. So would spending also include spending on investments and spending on savings?

I'm using "spending" to mean disposing of some of your income in order to purchase or consume something you want.


That might be cruise, it might be an investment. Either way, you get something you want at the price of having less income available to spend on something else.


It is pointless planning to spend more money than you have, because you ain't got it. So other people's U-curves are not much help.

AndyAdams

Interesting that people think you can't go into decent care homes if funded by the state. From my experience this is not necessarily the case. I had two grandparents in care homes, one was self funded and one was funded by the state. The interesting part is they were in the same care home, at the same time!


I have no intention to save to self fund my care home. I would prefer to enjoy the money I have accumulated.

drumtochty

[FONT=&quot]On the other hand, I took a friend into a care home he had agreed to go into with social services and he could have paid for better.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It was terrible, he could no longer get out of bed and we asked for a table that went across the bed to put his water on so he could drink it as it was in the summer and warm.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A typical hospital / nursing home piece of kit for invalids, we were told the "table" (singular) was in use. Yes, in a 25-bed unit.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The problems was there was not another nursing home within 25 miles with any empty rooms. He only lived a few days longer which was a relief as it was a horrid place.[/FONT]

Linton

But it is not just care in care homes. For me it is far more important to be able to pay for sufficient care at home so that it is not necessary to go into a care home. Council funded care in ones own home is limited, If you can pay for it yourself you can get the amount and type of care you want. A relative of mine was happy to pay for a career to take him for a walk each day. I doubt whether the council would pay for that.

badmemory

In my future is the need for a cleaner. I do not like that fact - but it is here to stay. Skirting boards have become an "optional extra" for hopefully a good day. I am normally fit but bending (I can still touch my toes flat handed) & turning whilst bent has become an issue. The back of bottom cupboards are inaccessible.


So within 5 years I will face a choice. Live with a degree of squalor or start coughing up for a cleaner. There really is no choice because I already know it will encroach... Maybe when there are 2 of you the choices may not turn out to be so bleak/black & white as your abilities or lack thereof may complement one another. But for a singleton reality is what it is.


So for me getting older will not reduce my expenditure & may more likely increase it. But my last long haul holiday landed up with me still bearing the scars it sort of put me off so that's one expense I don't have.

DairyQueen

badmemory wrote: »

... Maybe when there are 2 of you the choices may not turn out to be so bleak...

So for me getting older will not reduce my expenditure & may more likely increase it.

Ultimately 2 becomes 1 and the options are as bleak for the survivor of a couple as for those who enter retirement single.

Five years ago I remained blissfully divorced from the reality of living beyond 80. I am now at that age when those of the generation above me, who escaped strokes and cancer in their 70s, are succumbing in their 80s. It's a sobering experience.

So far my 93-year-old great uncle is the only male to have outlived a female spouse for longer than a few months. He has been in residential care for 7 years (LA funded).

My 88-year-old mother-in-law entered residential care a year ago (self funded).

My cousin's mother-in-law is 96. In a care home for over a decade, taxpayer funded for the last 5 years.

Another cousin's father and stepmother both died in residential care this year. He survived her by two months. He was 90. Both were LA funded after the equity from their home was exhausted.

My grandmother was unable to care for herself after my grandfather's death. My aunt cared for her for 7 years. The stress of looking after a 92-year-old with dementia nearly broke her.

This year two aunts have nursed their husbands through terminal illnesses at home. One of these aunts also cared for my grandmother. These ladies are aged 86 and 81. One is unlikely to cope alone for much longer and she and her children will soon face some tough decisions.

My husband's uncle was in his late 80s when he died last year. Both he and his wife suffered from dementia and both were only able to stay at home courtesy of the 24/7 care provided by their daughters with support from carers provided by the LA and self-funded.

None of these frail, elderly people have been able to maintain independent lives. Everyone who has reached the age of 80+ has needed domestic support and at-home or residential care of some description.

Two factors influence the quality of life for the very elderly: family and money. If you have a spouse or supportive children, or sufficient funds to pay for domestic support and care, then your final years are likely to be comfortable. Minus the family you will need a very large financial cushion. Minus both and the prospects if you live into your 80s are bleak.

Personal care and domestic support should appear as the largest expenses for those over 80. As most don't self-fund these costs they are omitted from the stats on income requirements. Do the fairies provide? No, the cost is mostly born by families and taxpayers and the personal and financial costs are often too high to be completely met by either. Add in the extra costs of mobility aids, home adaptations, hearing aids and loops, special glasses and extra dental treatment, and the true cost of longevity becomes apparent.

Minus the support of a spouse, singles and the survivor of couples will have the highest care costs but, ironically, these two groups are likely to have less household income to meet them.

Someone up thread suggested that old age required only a third of the income required in early retirement. This has to be the view of someone yet to witness the reality.

When we are younger old age is a remote and meaningless concept, but by the time reality hits in your 50s it's too late for deniers to provide for the expensive final phase of life. The state can't provide - working taxpayers can't afford it. Adult children don't have infinite time and resources, and who wants to put their spouse through the hell of caring for us in our dotage? Families do so out of love and obligation but it's the toughest 24/7 job on the planet.

I'm with Linton and badmemory. Self-funding all of my essential needs age 80+ (if I get there) is more important than blowing all of the dosh in early retirement. I would rather die with cash unspent than suffer the undignified exit suffered by many who rely on others to provide for them. The worst thing is that, by time you need that level of care, you are oblivious to the burden you are placing on those who provide it.

Spreadsheetman

DairyQueen wrote: »

.....
I'm with Linton and badmemory. Self-funding all of my essential needs age 80+ (if I get there) is more important than blowing all of the dosh in early retirement. I would rather die with cash unspent than suffer the undignified exit suffered by many who rely on others to provide for them. The worst thing is that, by time you need that level of care, you are oblivious to the burden you are placing on those who provide it.

Awesome post DQ. I'm in that camp too.

The problem is with a (hopefully) long timeframe it's hard to tell what level of spending in early retirement counts as too much until it is too late. I'm going to start lower than my target and see how things go, I can't think of a better way to keep a safety margin.

Kynthia

DairyQueen your family experience has given you knowledge and a view that many of us don't have. While my husband and I consider ourselves fortunate to have defined benefit pension schemes, which will pay out for our entire retirement and not run out, they do reduce greatly upon death. The spousal pension is only a third of the main pension, so there will be a noticable drop in income when one of us dies, particularly for my OH as my pension is much larger. So any plans have to take it account of this potential drop, which for him could be 40% if accumulation continues at the rate it has been. Not everyone considers the drop in income when one dies or should a couple separate near or during retirement.

In my family no-one has lived long enough to need residential care for more than a couple of years. Most have died in their late 50s or early 60s of cancer, gone suddenly, or needed just a few months of care at the end of their lives in their early 80s. So while I do want to ensure I prepare as much as possible and can afford help to stay in my home, I don't want the big expense of funding a care home that only has a small possibility of being needed to become a dominating factor in my planning.

lisyloo

Interesting that people think you can't go into decent care homes if funded by the state.

You may be lucky you may not. There might be a good one in the area you want to live in that meets your needs within budget, but there is no guarantee. Paying privately buys you choice.


Note the local authority wanted to split up my MIL and FIL after 60 years of marriage to save money, so even being with your spouse isn't guarantee (we fought that succesfully although he only lived 11 days).

A relative of mine was happy to pay for a career to take him for a walk each day. I doubt whether the council would pay for that.

Our council (BANES) paid for my FIL to go out with a carer for cake and coffee and also for respite (day care) for my MIL where she got transport included and only had to pay for lunch, so it is possible.
From talking to others it's a postcode lottery and again your own money gets you choice.


We were lucky to have a good social worker who understood that when Dad hes was "fine" that he actually needed help. Depends on your social worker I think. If family can get involved then that will help as some people will minimise their needs and others don't stop complaining.
My MIL likes to put on a good front (like hyancinth bucket) but one day MIL & FIL had a blazing row in front of the social worker. That was great because the social worker saw what it was really like rather than the usual front that normally on view. Family can help bridge that gap.