Liquidate entire portfolio until virus is over?

justme111

bowlhead99 said:

justme111 said:

Keep in mind - CARE scheme can be taken unreduced at 67 currently - let's be honest ,  it that much life is left after 67... All this "generous" pension will probably be enjoyed for about 15 years only ..

Life expectancy for a 67 year old is more than 15 years (and there is coverage for a spouse too after that), and could end up being 30 or 40 years

" In Britain, the male lifespan averaged 76.2 years last year, with women living an average of 81.3 years."
Guardian article, the first page of search I done.
It "could" be 30 years or it could be nothing - I was talking about what it it is likely to be , not "could"be.
No argument that there are good sides to pensions funded by schemes- just wanted to draw the attention to overlooked fact that kne would not be likely to enjoy then for that long ...

EdGasketTheSecond

The real problem was a dead economy and inflated stocks, bonds, and real estate caused by QE and artificially low interest rates since 2008. That has yet to unwind. The virus was just the catalyst that has pricked these inflated bubbles. Wait until companies start defaulting on bank loans and there's another banking crisis. The economy could be dead for the next 10 years with all the money the government is having to spend and the austerity needed to pay for it. Either the markets go down or are propped up by so much 'funny money' generated by governments that your currency becomes worthless. Either way we are in for a bad time.

MaxiRobriguez

justme111 said:

bowlhead99 said:

justme111 said:

Keep in mind - CARE scheme can be taken unreduced at 67 currently - let's be honest ,  it that much life is left after 67... All this "generous" pension will probably be enjoyed for about 15 years only ..

Life expectancy for a 67 year old is more than 15 years (and there is coverage for a spouse too after that), and could end up being 30 or 40 years

" In Britain, the male lifespan averaged 76.2 years last year, with women living an average of 81.3 years."
Guardian article, the first page of search I done.
It "could" be 30 years or it could be nothing - I was talking about what it it is likely to be , not "could"be.
No argument that there are good sides to pensions funded by schemes- just wanted to draw the attention to overlooked fact that kne would not be likely to enjoy then for that long ...

Top level average life span figures includes people who die very early from underlying health conditions. I can't remember the exact figures but I remember seeing that if you make it to 60+ then your chances of making it to 90+ are quite high. 

bowlhead99

justme111 said:

bowlhead99 said:

justme111 said:

Keep in mind - CARE scheme can be taken unreduced at 67 currently - let's be honest ,  it that much life is left after 67... All this "generous" pension will probably be enjoyed for about 15 years only ..

Life expectancy for a 67 year old is more than 15 years (and there is coverage for a spouse too after that), and could end up being 30 or 40 years

" In Britain, the male lifespan averaged 76.2 years last year, with women living an average of 81.3 years."
Guardian article, the first page of search I done.

Probably what is more useful is not the average age of people dying last year (who on average were born on the middle of last century) but the cohort life expectancy of people who are paying into pension schemes and will draw from them.  If you've already survived long enough to reach adulthood, let alone retirement, you will have a life expectancy longer than the 76 or 83 respectively.

justme111

Well yes but if we start second guessing what is going to happen rather than seeing how ling people live at present then we may as well second guess another rise in SP age to which care is attached .. I accept that early mortality probably skews the figure - but by how much ? 10 months ? 1 year ? Splitting hairs ...

bowlhead99

justme111 said:

Well yes but if we start second guessing what is going to happen rather than seeing how ling people live at present then we may as well second guess another rise in SP age to which care is attached .. I accept that early mortality probably skews the figure - but by how much ? 10 months ? 1 year ? Splitting hairs ...

The cohort life expectancy for men born in the UK in 2018 is 87.6 years and for women it is 90.2, and that includes the fact that they might die before they get old enough to go to work let alone think about pension planning. (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/methodologies/periodandcohortlifeexpectancyexplained)

A man age 67 today can expect to live to 85 if he only has average health.
A woman, 87. (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandlifeexpectancies/articles/lifeexpectancycalculator/2019-06-07)

These are the more relevant figures for 67 year old retirees trying to make a pension pot last long enough;  longer than 15 years (even if they have 'only' average health).

The fact that the Guardian took figures from a survey that looked at everyone dying last year between the age of one minute and 112 years, and determined that 'the average' for a man was 76 years, should not lead a man to think that if he retires at 67 he will only need to provide for nine years without a job. His base case in average health would be double that, and with good health, four times it. A woman age 67 today has about a one in four chance of living to 94, and would be better planning for the one in ten chance of living until 98 or longer. Those statistics are historic the moment they are published, but use extrapolations. They presumably do ignore current Covid-19 'untreatable pandemic' distortions, which will bring some deaths forward from the next few years into this one, but still...

Bottom line, it's very useful to have a defined package of benefits that gives you an inflation protected income until you breathe your last (and then goes on to pay a portion of it to a spouse or civil partner).

It's all very well to say "if we start second guessing..." but making sensible observations and estimates is literally what the office of national statistics does for a living. If looking for useful and relevant information it's not "splitting hairs" to use good ONS-calculated cohort data, rather than the first Google hit for pop statistics from the Guardian, and as can be seen above, it makes a lot more difference than ten months to a year.

BananaRepublic

MaxiRobriguez said:

Sentiment is rising on expectation of Europe and US passing the peak in the next couple of weeks and the economy restarting shortly after. What people seem to be overlooking for now is:

1) We have no evidence in the West we can get our numbers to zero like China, so there's every prospect of 500 odd deaths a day for the forseeable which is just continued disruption for businesses even if they re-open.
2) Prospect of second, third, fourth wave being ignored.
3) Prospect of consumers not running out to buy tat from the shops in favour of hoarding cash is being ignored.

I think we're unlikely so see a significant 15-20% rally which is what I'd want to see if I was parting with lots of cash now. I've made small investments in the US and bought a fair chunk of Unilever yesterday but I'm still sitting on a decent chunk of cash to see what happens next.

From reports I’ve read the epidemic in China is dying down, either due to herd immunity or from stopping the virus from spreading causing it to become extinct. Infection rates here are said to be about 4%. So we don’t have herd immunity. Remove lockdown and it will again explode, either because it is not extinct in the UK, or because a carrier enters the UK. Most carriers do not have symptoms hence mass testing at points of entry such as airports would be needed. As yet we simply do not have the capacity to do that and won’t for many many months. What about illegal migrants? This isn’t just a few more weeks, this is many months of significant changes to our lifestyle, and the possibility of more lockdowns. 

But on a positive note ... 🙂 ... I am impressed with the way that governments are responding and most of us are being sensible. I’m also glad the expected market crash has happened, the future is looking bright. 

EdGasketTheSecond

6 minute news item on market direction, stimulus, inflation, gold, and jobs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifr65HmiO7w

Prism

I find it generally best to ignore commentators who predict the future direction of markets. Most of them have some sort of agenda anyway. It has no real bearing on my investments over the long term

MK62

If you only listen to Dr Doom et al, it's no surprise that you'll start to agree........what is a bit surprising is that someone from that "camp" was ever fully invested in the stock market in the first place.

Of course, most market observers/commentators are proved correct at least every now and then......how they capitalise on that is their "magic sauce".
He may be right this time......or he may not.......imho, he's a bit like a race horse tipster - have enough guesses over time and you'll get some winners.....pitch that right and you can get people to believe you have an "edge"....