Govt confirms pension freedom age hike to 57

Anonymous101

barnstar2077 said:

Albermarle said:

I have thought about this too, but the problem is I want to retire many years before I can access my pension
I'll hopefully be in a position to step away from full time employment in my mid to late 40's.

I think you have to take into account that wanting to retire very early is a specific ( and still quite unusual) lifestyle choice/hope and pension changes are never going to take into account how they affect a small minority who have a wish to retire at an unusually young age. 

It is unusual, but I think it is probably a combination of people not realising that they could retire earlier with a bit of planning, and the fact that it isn't the norm means that most people probably never even think about it in the first place.

Agreed - I think the biggest hurdle is just realising its possible in the first place.
People think retiring at 55 is early but they don't extend their thinking to bring that into your 40's or even 30's just doesn't connect with most people.

LHW99

Anonymous101 said:

barnstar2077 said:

Albermarle said:

I have thought about this too, but the problem is I want to retire many years before I can access my pension
I'll hopefully be in a position to step away from full time employment in my mid to late 40's.

I think you have to take into account that wanting to retire very early is a specific ( and still quite unusual) lifestyle choice/hope and pension changes are never going to take into account how they affect a small minority who have a wish to retire at an unusually young age. 

It is unusual, but I think it is probably a combination of people not realising that they could retire earlier with a bit of planning, and the fact that it isn't the norm means that most people probably never even think about it in the first place.

Agreed - I think the biggest hurdle is just realising its possible in the first place.
People think retiring at 55 is early but they don't extend their thinking to bring that into your 40's or even 30's just doesn't connect with most people.

Considering it is now fairly usual for people to start their family in their 30's, I suspect they may have other considerations at that point than retiring early.

bigadaj

LHW99 said:

Anonymous101 said:

barnstar2077 said:

Albermarle said:

I have thought about this too, but the problem is I want to retire many years before I can access my pension
I'll hopefully be in a position to step away from full time employment in my mid to late 40's.

I think you have to take into account that wanting to retire very early is a specific ( and still quite unusual) lifestyle choice/hope and pension changes are never going to take into account how they affect a small minority who have a wish to retire at an unusually young age. 

It is unusual, but I think it is probably a combination of people not realising that they could retire earlier with a bit of planning, and the fact that it isn't the norm means that most people probably never even think about it in the first place.

Agreed - I think the biggest hurdle is just realising its possible in the first place.
People think retiring at 55 is early but they don't extend their thinking to bring that into your 40's or even 30's just doesn't connect with most people.

Considering it is now fairly usual for people to start their family in their 30's, I suspect they may have other considerations at that point than retiring early.

and many people won't be starting serious employment until their mid 20s. A desire to retire in thirties or even forties to me suggests a wrong choice of career, you have to occupy your time somehow after all and that may as well be in a job you reasonably enjoy. I think the FI is far more important then the RE of the acronym but others opinion may vary. 

OldBeanz

noitsnotme said:

I miss out by 9 months and my wife by 7 months.  Always in the wrong place at the wrong time 

But if only one of you had been in the wrong place then you would never have met and married

fred246

I have said this before but I worked continuously year after year doing overtime and retired early. When I told the younger workers coming through they were saying that they could never retire. So it had the effect of demotivating them. They did a few months work and then went travelling or took part time work. They wouldn't take permanent contracts. So you retire later but the total amount of work done is the same. It may be better at avoiding higher rate tax?

bigadaj

OldBeanz said:

noitsnotme said:

I miss out by 9 months and my wife by 7 months.  Always in the wrong place at the wrong time 

But if only one of you had been in the wrong place then you would never have met and married

Don't make it worse!

ess0two

hildosaver said:

At this rate people will be working well into their 70's as the norm and dropping dead at their desks.

Unfortunately we all don't have the luxury of working or sitting at a desk

Anonymous101

bigadaj said:

LHW99 said:

Anonymous101 said:

barnstar2077 said:

Albermarle said:

I have thought about this too, but the problem is I want to retire many years before I can access my pension
I'll hopefully be in a position to step away from full time employment in my mid to late 40's.

I think you have to take into account that wanting to retire very early is a specific ( and still quite unusual) lifestyle choice/hope and pension changes are never going to take into account how they affect a small minority who have a wish to retire at an unusually young age. 

It is unusual, but I think it is probably a combination of people not realising that they could retire earlier with a bit of planning, and the fact that it isn't the norm means that most people probably never even think about it in the first place.

Agreed - I think the biggest hurdle is just realising its possible in the first place.
People think retiring at 55 is early but they don't extend their thinking to bring that into your 40's or even 30's just doesn't connect with most people.

Considering it is now fairly usual for people to start their family in their 30's, I suspect they may have other considerations at that point than retiring early.

and many people won't be starting serious employment until their mid 20s. A desire to retire in thirties or even forties to me suggests a wrong choice of career, you have to occupy your time somehow after all and that may as well be in a job you reasonably enjoy. I think the FI is far more important then the RE of the acronym but others opinion may vary. 

Yes absolutely agree the FI part is much more important than the RE. I suppose when I say retire I mean step away from full time permanent work or pick and choose projects / roles which isn’t influenced by money in the same way. I wouldn’t fancy never doing a days “work” again in my 30’s, but I’d love to be able to take a few years off whilst the kids are young or perhaps just work part time. Perhaps having gotten myself into an enjoyable but very full on stressful time consuming career I have fallen foul of that. All very well in your 20’s and early 30’s but not conducive to family life or longevity.

Unfortunately for many of my coworkers the perceived financial pressures on them to keep up with the Jones’s force them to live for work rather than cut their cloth accordingly and perhaps step away from the money to enjoy life more.

OldBeanz

Anonymous101 said:

bigadaj said:

LHW99 said:

Anonymous101 said:

barnstar2077 said:

Albermarle said:

I have thought about this too, but the problem is I want to retire many years before I can access my pension
I'll hopefully be in a position to step away from full time employment in my mid to late 40's.

I think you have to take into account that wanting to retire very early is a specific ( and still quite unusual) lifestyle choice/hope and pension changes are never going to take into account how they affect a small minority who have a wish to retire at an unusually young age. 

It is unusual, but I think it is probably a combination of people not realising that they could retire earlier with a bit of planning, and the fact that it isn't the norm means that most people probably never even think about it in the first place.

Agreed - I think the biggest hurdle is just realising its possible in the first place.
People think retiring at 55 is early but they don't extend their thinking to bring that into your 40's or even 30's just doesn't connect with most people.

Considering it is now fairly usual for people to start their family in their 30's, I suspect they may have other considerations at that point than retiring early.

and many people won't be starting serious employment until their mid 20s. A desire to retire in thirties or even forties to me suggests a wrong choice of career, you have to occupy your time somehow after all and that may as well be in a job you reasonably enjoy. I think the FI is far more important then the RE of the acronym but others opinion may vary. 

Yes absolutely agree the FI part is much more important than the RE. I suppose when I say retire I mean step away from full time permanent work or pick and choose projects / roles which isn’t influenced by money in the same way. I wouldn’t fancy never doing a days “work” again in my 30’s, but I’d love to be able to take a few years off whilst the kids are young or perhaps just work part time. Perhaps having gotten myself into an enjoyable but very full on stressful time consuming career I have fallen foul of that. All very well in your 20’s and early 30’s but not conducive to family life or longevity.

Unfortunately for many of my coworkers the perceived financial pressures on them to keep up with the Jones’s force them to live for work rather than cut their cloth accordingly and perhaps step away from the money to enjoy life more.

Yes. I don't think it is retiring that is important - it is having enough money to not be dependant on the 'money career' job. Careers can range from entertainment - where people enjoy the limelight and have no need to stop - to one's where stress, travel, competition etc lead to burn-out, missing out on kids development etc. I was able to retire where I was 4 out of 5 happy but stepping down to doing a 5 out of 5 job for 2 days a week is great. I was working one weekend last year and reckoned as well as not getting any pension contributions I was being paid less than half of what I had been 30 years before.

jamesd

barnstar2077 said:

jamesd said:

Of course there's often little to  stop you from borrowing for a few years then repaying with the pension money.

I have thought about this too, but the problem is I want to retire many years before I can access my pension.

I would want to borrow money for the shortest amount of time, probably the year before I get access to my private pension.  Ideally I would use my mortgage to do so, but by then I wouldn't be working, and I would imagine that will be one of the first questions the mortgage company asks me.

Longer term with an investment or pension mortgage approach probably works better for that. If interest only isn't available a term that's as long as possible is the substitute. The money that would have been used for repayments is then part of the money available to fill the gap.