Health is important with investing, not just wealth.

Albermarle

 They may eat unhealthy ready prepared foods or give up a physically active job. They may spend their extra money on drugs or alcohol.

Are you talking about me Jimmy ?

Albermarle

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104651#Comment_82104651

 

I still have absolutely no idea what this thread is doing on a board about investments,

Well the title mentioned about health and wealth, then it has just digressed a bit, as threads often do.

Not sure why that is an issue- makes a change from talking about tax relief and index funds !

GeoffTF

Here is what a panel of people said about how they would spend different levels of retirement income:

https://www.retirementlivingstandards.org.uk/

I have two observations. Firstly that they are not good at getting value for the money that they spend. More relevantly, that their proposed spending at the higher levels of retirement income is not likely to improve their health one jot.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104651#Comment_82104651

No the science is clear and unequivocal - poor people live shorter lives and suffer poor health for longer.

I do not know who you are disagreeing with. It certainly is not me. I have not said that poor people (on average) do not live shorter lives than wealthy people. They do. The question is why. That is what I was addressing.

I still have absolutely no idea what this thread is doing on a board about investments, but your comments cannot go unchallenged.

This thread is about whether scrimping and saving to increase your wealth is likely to be good or bad for your health. Some will say that you are deliberately making yourself poor and that will worsen your health. Others will say that you are increasing your overall wealth, and that will automatically improve your health, even if you never spend any of the money.

poseidon1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104850#Comment_82104850

Had a quick look at the different figures for single people, and the number of £13, 900 ( just above the current state pension) as being adequate to cover all necessities and a' bit left over for fun' looked like nonsense to me, even if you live in mortgage/rent free accommodation.

Seems to me no real account taken of ever rising utility bills, and food price inflation noticeably exceeds the annual increase in the state pension notwithstanding the triple lock.

I live in London so no real need for a car, although I personally treat it as a necessity. However there are many parts of the country where a car can be considered a necessity, so for single people in those circumstances £13, 900 just does not cut it in meeting that need along with everything else.

Two people living together maybe able to achieve a basic standard of living on two 'tax free' state pensions, but not singletons without a decent amount of savings behind them.

Just to tie this to the original post, I would certainly consider it bad for my mental if not physical health if I were forced to rely largely on the state pension to survive. Having to make a choice between heating your home or eating ( as seems to be the case for many elderly) is not conducive in maintaining a reasonable level of health.

GeoffTF

I could not find any good UK statistics for the relationship between income and life expectancy for the UK. The ONS only compiles data by area, not by income. There is, however, some data from the US:

Figure 2. Race- and Ethnicity-Adjusted Life Expectancy for 40-Year-Olds by Household Income Percentile, 2001–2014.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4866586/

The important finding here is that life expectancy increases significantly with income even when moving from a household income of $115K to $2.0M with data from 2001 to 2014. The income numbers will be higher now. This cannot be explained by saying that the households with $115K per annum did not have enough money for a healthy diet. Other factors are clearly at work here.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104903#Comment_82104903

I am a retired gentleman living alone. My expenditure for FY 2025-26 was £8,702.92. I ran a small car, but did not have any capital expenditure on my house in that year. I am in excellent health in my late 70s, and spent the afternoon out walking. I could easily spend over £100K per annum if I wanted to, but I do not believe in wasting money. There are others who need it more than me.

InvesterJones

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82104903#Comment_82104903

Rising utility bills and food prices are exactly the kind of thing already taken into account, which is why the value is updated from year to year.

LHW99

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82105082#Comment_82105082

Or is the correlation between poor health outcomes and poverty? ie if you (from genetics, or other) have poor health, does that make you more likely to be poor? It seems likely, so rather a chicken and egg situation.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82105082#Comment_82105082

Absolutely. I stand by that. There is a statistical correlation between income and longevity, but correlation is not causation. Some people live less long as a result of being poor. Sometimes it is the other way around: unhealthy people are more likely to be poor. (Employers are more likely to employ healthy people than unhealthy people. Healthy workers are likely to be able to earn more than unhealthy ones.) There are other factors affecting longevity too: intelligence, education, genetics, and upbringing to name a few. Some people are poor and stay poor. Others get rich. Nonetheless, there is a lot that we do not understand.