Bear Necessities

OOOOOOF!

It's true I never miss an opportunity on here to mention that we inherited early. and do find it difficult to spend anything, having had to live frugally before now.

Well quite. We have inherited from one side, but had never assumed we would and made sure our house was paid off as soon as we could so as not to be reliant on a windfall (and we aren't in the income bracket for private school fees) I think the assumption of a massive inheritance (or two!) will be the downfall of a LOT of people (especially with the costs of care and increased life expectancy and when they find out the house isn't worth as much as they thought it was, and it hasn't been maintained in the years since the kids left home)

I don't think the post is nonsensical. It has an internal logic. At its heart its one person's proposal for what might come to pass, whether it is the most likely one, whether you think its true or not, we shall see in time I suppose. And of course these generations are just artificial constructs. Does a GenX-er from 1979 really feel that different from a Millennial from 1980? I doubt it. I had to look it up to see which one I was supposed to be in and which one my parents were in. These boxes to put people in don't really exist, its a continuum and not everyone in those boxes behaves the same way or has the same money or life experience or even has their own kids in the same decade (or any kids at all) Also it doesn't really take into account a lot of this wealth transfer is not from one generation to another (skipping generations or not), a lot of it is wealth transfer between the elderly and private care homes, younger people and private schools and the very real possibility of a lot of this house wealth just evaporating into thin air as big houses are freed up but a lot of people realise they don't want to live in a house they can't afford the upkeep on (and that they dont need the room for books, dvds, cds, and all the other things they used to pack houses with before it all disappeared into a tiny rectangle of metal and glass.

Well exactly, I agree I can't see anything that is going to stop this for a while. And given that the rest is HODLed maybe a couple for summer 2025 holiday spends might be fun.

Yes. My wife and I are millennials (if you go by that starting in 1980) and our parents are/were boomers but OUR two kids are Gen Z and whatever the gen after that is. So if lots of boomers have Gen-z kids then there must be something in the water... But then also my Gen X cousins (15 years older than me) are both loaded (despite their War generation parents still both being alive in their 80s) have three kids between them the same age as ours because they started late, so bascially the entire "gen" thing is a mess, or at least it is in our family. My millennial wife has inherited due to losing her boomer parents relatively young, but my Gen-X cousins (15 years older) still have both of their pre-boomer (Post war? Born in the late 30s) parents well into their 80s.

Choose the worst nursing home.

Makes me wonder if I have enough time to pick up a couple more coins for a short term play. I guess it's hard to judge how far we will get from here on this cycle. I feel we are heading for the £125k-£150k range over the next year maybe, but I've been very wrong before.

yup

What's happening today? It's up a grand in the time it took me to write a boring self absorbed reply on this thread. It is just going to keep on doing this all year? because this is doing nothing for my work ethic.

I guess we all have a different threshold for what constitutes FU money as well. I sold some two cycles ago when it was "new PC" money and I really really needed a new PC. Didn't sell any last cycle when it reached "new car money" (partly because money wasn't so tight and I didn't need a new car, so I was more willing to wait and see). This time around it might be "holiday home in Tuscany money" which isn't far off my FU threshold, and makes it far more difficult to "wait and see". So I think selling half at that level does make a lot of sense.

That's also the problem this time around. The odds are so short that it's not worth it.

We used to have wine with Sunday lunch from about 10+, but I think my parents would have drawn the line at me necking a bottle of vodka on election night at 15

1997 I have fond memories of Portillo losing his seat, but wasn't technically old enough to drink (well not all night, with school in the morning anyway!) I remember watching the Election Night Armistice with Iannucci and co. Good times.

I've put my name down on the waiting list for a new liver, as my one is going to be destroyed on election night after taking a shot every time a Tory loses their seat.

I find it difficult to get any work done when it's going up this sharply. Feels like a waste of time working, might as well just ride the wave.

I assume "we" are paying for it in the end.

The thing is there is absolutely no incentive for politicians to work for the long term good, even if they knew what that would look like. Given that no government stays in power for more than 15 years or so, and they only manage that by doing short term giveaways or populist policies every 5 years, there's just no incentive for anyone to think long term. The current lot of whichever flavour know that they just have to keep the plates spinning as long as they can, so as to give themselves time to either get through their own pet ideological legislation, or grift as much as they can from the system, or set themselves up for a lifetime of directorships, fat pensions or a seat in the lords or all of the above, and then they'll be out of there as soon as the plates fall, and it is someone else's problem. They will actively make things worse for the population if it means getting their project over the line, even if it stores up huge issues for future governments and the people. The stuff that would make a difference in the long term (sorting out our energy infrastructure and energy independence, reforming planning and building enough homes (and to a higher quality) reorganising how benefits/UBI/tax works, balancing immigration etc) are all 30 or 40 year projects, which never happen and never will (see HS2) because often those things are massively unpopular in the short term (also see HS2), so even if they wanted to do them for ideological reasons (and not that many of them really do), they know its electoral suicide to do so, so they keep on spinning the plates a little bit longer, tinkering at the edges of what needs to be done without actually ever doing it, or announcing it and then cancelling it, or getting started on something and then the other lot come in and reverse it. I'm not sure how you structure the system to allow these huge changes to create a better future, other than them happening by accident when the private sector pumps out some new technology or other that disrupts the status quo accidentally. But nothing in politics is designed around long term thinking and that's a major problem. Country before party before self is just a joke and always has been.

Agreed I'm thinking 2024 - labour landslide or at least a chunky majority 2029 - Lab still in power with a much reduced majority - because a chunk of people will expect them to magically fix things instantly, but we can all see the direction of travel is not going to allow that. It's unrealistic to sort out this mess in a single parliament so I think they will run on a policy of "come on everyone, give us a bit longer to sort this out" and people will. but if its either a much reduced majority or a hung parliament / coalition / supply and demand in 2029 or they realise that they are going to get fewer and fewer votes each time until the Tories come back, then I think they will consider bringing in proportional representation for the following election (2034?), - they can sell it to both ends of the spectrum as "look you get proper representation at last", for the greens, for reform, for the hard left, knowing that they will still be in a likely to be the largest party at that point or at least find it the easiest to form a government and stop the Tories getting back in. I think the country could really do with a more collaborative approach where they actually have to do some give and take with the smaller parties rather than ignoring them. Probably a pipe dream though.

Exactly that. I was really just trying to say that kids aren't quite as expensive as people think (as you say, the top end skew the average a lot!) I'm going to be retired sometime between 45 and 55 probably (unless I suddenly find a new calling) and the kids aren't going to mess that timeline up much Of course my two might grow up to be a couple of junkie scumbags, that I keep having to bail out of jail and pay off their gambling and drug debts, so perhaps I shouldn't count my chickens just yet!

What are you smoking? the Tories are going to be obliterated. Can't get a decent return on a Labour victory at any of the bookies because it's almost a dead cert.

We have two boys and I honestly don't recognise these articles about "oh it takes £200k to raise each kid to 18" and all the rest of it. Sure, maybe if you take them skiing every year, a new phone each year from the age of 11, and buy them designer clothes all the time and little nike shoes before they can even walk, maybe. Or maybe they are calculating the time spent out of work looking after them or something, but I've never had that high and income and we've never found it adding tens of thousands to our bills. The three bed house that we had for the two of us isn't any more expensive now we have 2 kids in it as well, it costs no extra to heat it than if they weren't here, the younger ones wears a lot of hand me downs from the older one, enjoys a lot of the books and games that the older one doesn't want any more, the food for them is free for the first year, (if you get it straight from the source) family meals cooked from scratch - it isn't any more time consuming to cook extra for them, a fix seater car isn't any more expensive just because it has a couple of crotch gremlins in the back. (apart from that time one of ours puked so hard we had to get the car cleaned) OK so now the eldest is a teenager he's eating loads and growing through clothes at a rate of knots and holidays abroad are ridiculously more expensive when you have to go during term time, so sure it's not as cheap as not having them, but personally I feel it was worth the extra expense (which was nothing like the cost that the newspapers would have you believe. They always seem to plan these numbers around taking them on three holidays a year, a summer and winter wardrobe every year, takeaways 3 times a week, school fees and ballet lessons (ha) for little Tarquin and Persephone etc, - we never had that growing up so I'm not sure why that should be considered the standard now, just puts people off when they read about how expensive it all (aparently) is.)

Had one very close relative die suddenly at 57 - 15 years ago now (no known health problems during life - just a cruel universe) and another also suddenly at 72 (health problems but nothing you'd think would keep them from reaching their mid 80s, again just the luck of the dice.) So yeah, stopping at 50, and have the funds to do so? 100% go for it! As you say, Life is for living and you really don't know how long you have. People can stuff their pensions all they like (and I'm not saying they shouldn't if they can) but it's a fat lot of good if they die a handful of years in (or don't even make it that far to begin with).

Don't think this one counts (although £500k drop is pretty chunky) but I thought it was funny because on the 20th January it went from £5.5 million to two quid. and then from two quid back up to £5.5 million! https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/134651561?fbclid=IwAR0EIByDN-Hea5r4QO0bVZEKda_zeWEwS5zIYYgdV2MRdr7ZMEOlPANasQY#/&channel=RES_BUY&utm_content=1602024/?channel=RES_BUY&utm_medium=socialo&utm_source=facebook

I suppose it works out ok if the last thing you buy on your spending binge is a nice car and then you Thelma and Louise it to escape your debts.