Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
davidg

Millionaire Joan Bakewell Tells Pensioners To "spunk The Cash It While You Can"

Recommended Posts

Multi millionaire Joan Bakewell has advised pensioners not to "leave a single brick" to their kids but to "sell up and enjoy the profits while they still can". The Labour Peer bought her 5 million pound mansion in Primrose Hill for 12,000 in the 1960s. The leftie broadcaster, who has been sucking off the BBC teet for generations says she'd sooner give it to "an oligarch or a hedge fund manager,” than leave a brass farthing to her grandkids. “It’s my pension, innit" continued the 82 year old crone who was once referred to as the "thinking man's bit of crumpet".

article-1158362-00C06CCC00000190-21_468x

Bakewell, fronting some boring BBC arts programme back in the day

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/12134264/Joan-Bakewell-Obsession-with-inheritance-of-property-is-********.html

// Something went wrong with the title - autocorrect issue, sorry.

Edited by davidg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a 'free' country.....people should be free to do what they want with what they have accumulated.......action speaks louder than opinionated guidance.....practice what you preach or forever hold your tongue and thus a total loss of creditability.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah Joan Bakewell the millionaire that resisted a rise in the state pension age for her fellow boomer cohorts...the ''Pension Tsar'''.

If generation x and y wonder why they will have to work til 75.........................

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the OP shot was when Joan first met writer Harold Pinter in a BBC interview which began a long affair, that's why she is looking like the cat that got the cream. She couldn't wait to get her hands on him. This is a panned out shot of that interview, looks like the same interview. Just adding a bit of trivia.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01556/pinter4_1556085a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its my pension init....only applies to people with Human Rights and BTL empires

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually shouldn't we be applauding Joan, I'm a bit anti inheritance because it means man child and woman child outbid me for that house I want, and they bloody well haven't earned it.

Ok neither did Joan earn that house in Primrose hill at today's values but the unfairness will go on forever and it becomes a birth lottery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Multi millionaire Joan Bakewell has advised pensioners not to "leave a single brick" to their kids but to "sell up and enjoy the profits while they still can". The Labour Peer bought her 5 million pound mansion in Primrose Hill for 12,000 in the 1960s. The leftie broadcaster, who has been sucking off the BBC teet for generations says she'd sooner give it to "an oligarch or a hedge fund manager,” than leave a brass farthing to her grandkids. “It’s my pension, innit" continued the 82 year old crone who was once referred to as the "thinking man's bit of crumpet".

article-1158362-00C06CCC00000190-21_468x

Bakewell, fronting some boring BBC arts programme back in the day

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/12134264/Joan-Bakewell-Obsession-with-inheritance-of-property-is-********.html

// Something went wrong with the title - autocorrect issue, sorry.

If proven that she received an inheritance, then she would a disgusting hypocrite. I do however think, parents should sell their houses and pass money to their kids slowly and discretely so as not to be taxed upon death for wealth that has been already taxed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If proven that she received an inheritance, then she would a disgusting hypocrite. I do however think, parents should sell their houses and pass money to their kids slowly and discretely so as not to be taxed upon death for wealth that has been already taxed.

Stockport grammar school girl, don't think parents were especially rich. I'm guessing not, because that's probably why she doesn't feel obliged to leave anything either. Do unto others and all that.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah Joan Bakewell the millionaire that resisted a rise in the state pension age for her fellow boomer cohorts...the ''Pension Tsar'''.

Can anyone here tell me why women still get to retire earlier than men (on a state pension)? Men die earlier than women. It's never made any sense to me. Nobody's ever really answered this to my satisfaction (perhaps because there's no real answer to this). I realise that by 2020, both men and women will retire at the SAME age of 66.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone here tell me why women still get to retire earlier than men (on a state pension)? Men die earlier than women. It's never made any sense to me. Nobody's ever really answered this to my satisfaction (perhaps because there's no real answer to this). I realise that by 2020, both men and women will retire at the SAME age of 66.

....at a guess......historically a woman when married became a possession of her husband, given to him by her father, a woman often did not work and was a housewife and child carer, her pension was paid from her husbands wages at a fraction of what he got.....a man was approximately around five years older than his wife, so when he retired her small pension at 60 was a substitute for his housekeeping money because he now collected his own state pension age 65.

A house at one time could be purchased using one persons salary and could also support another and 2.5 kids without help....... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a big fan of inherited wealth either. It was just Joan's attitude. She's been supported out of the public purse all her life and now she wants to pull the ladder up. She's part of the problem, not the solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a 'free' country.....people should be free to do what they want with what they have accumulated.......action speaks louder than opinionated guidance.....practice what you preach or forever hold your tongue and thus a total loss of creditability.....

Yep - when wealthy older property owners cash in on some of their accumulated wealth to give it to their kids to help them buy a house, they are slated by the same crowd for perpetuating the housing bubble. Can't really win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....at a guess......historically a woman when married became a possession of her husband, given to him by her father, a woman often did not work and was a housewife and child carer, her pension was paid from her husbands wages at a fraction of what he got.....a man was approximately around five years older than his wife, so when he retired her small pension at 60 was a substitute for his housekeeping money because he now collected his own state pension age 65.

A house at one time could be purchased using one persons salary and could also support another and 2.5 kids without help....... ;)

I think housewives got away with it tbh. There is a programme about a family living in the 1950s beating rugs etc being trailed...and showing how tough times were. Really, is beating a rug that difficult, try weeding a massive expanse of modern block paving. I reckon I could clean my house with a dustpan and brush in thirty minutes if necessary. People work much harder now, families with kids both full time, houses done to perfection...eighty year aggregates of paid work to retirement not the forty of old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - when wealthy older property owners cash in on some of their accumulated wealth to give it to their kids to help them buy a house, they are slated by the same crowd for perpetuating the housing bubble. Can't really win.

That is if they have kids.....how many kids and how old their kids are when they get something, if anything.....how much older property owners will need to live on/life expectancy v income keeping themselves independent from help....lots of different situations.......sometimes it might just all end up going to a home or cats home. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think housewives got away with it tbh. There is a programme about a family living in the 1950s beating rugs etc being trailed...and showing how tough times were. Really, is beating a rug that difficult, try weeding a massive expanse of modern block paving. I reckon I could clean my house with a dustpan and brush in thirty minutes if necessary. People work much harder now, families with kids both full time, houses done to perfection...eighty year aggregates of paid work to retirement not the forty of old.

The girls made up for it during the war......they did the work of the men...... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - when wealthy older property owners cash in on some of their accumulated wealth to give it to their kids to help them buy a house, they are slated by the same crowd for perpetuating the housing bubble. Can't really win.

Indeed I actually supported her on that bit earlier in the thread, very galling when you have to compete with the inheritance of man and woman child.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is if they have kids.....how many kids and how old their kids are when they get something, if anything.....how much older property owners will need to live on/life expectancy v income keeping themselves independent from help....lots of different situations.......sometimes it might just all end up going to a home or cats home. ;)

Yeah, we're starting to hit the point now where the goodies have run out and older people are having to start paying for stuff. Hence assets have to be liquidated for care home costs, for example. This could be avoided if the kids who stand to be beneficiaries would look after the OAP themselves ensuring that the house/wealth is still available to be inherited (as might have been the case in previous generations where it wasn't uncommon to have three generations under one roof).

Strangely enough, no-one ever seems to adopt (or even advocate) this approach. Plenty of irate kidults complaining that 'their rightful inheritance' is being spunked away on a care home to look after their infirm parent(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed I actually supported her on that bit earlier in the thread, very galling when you have to compete with the inheritance of man and woman child.

The thing is that this wealth quickly spreads out and fades away over a couple of generations as it will end up being split between multiple kids and then grandchildren.

We're probably still at the stage when enough people are in the situation where their parents' contribution enables them to keep paying silly asking prices (usually by funding a deposit and/or paying down their debts) and thus supporting the overpriced market - but give it another 15-25 years and that will be gone as the wealth dissipates.

Then we'll be properly back to a small core of rich rentiers and indebted serfs. :lol::ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then we'll be properly back to a small core of rich rentiers and indebted serfs. :lol::ph34r:

And the properly wealthy will pass on their vast fortunes free of tax by using trust law etc.

Inheritance tax is for the little people. It helps to keep them in their place.

Access a copy of "Who Owns Britain" by Kevin Cahill - a very revealing read.

If only Joan would mention this ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on..in 2009 she was a big fan of inheritance tax. Incidentally also a landlady, letting out the basement flat of her four storey pile (where she lives alone) to tenants.

What about passing money onto the next generation?

I have a small trust fund for my grandchildren so I know they will be able to get through University, but actually I believe in inheritance tax. I deplore the divergence between rich and poor and because I would like to see a more egalitarian society I don't mind it. This is a tax you'll never know you are paying because you won't be there – what could be nicer?

Telegraph Personal Finance Feb 17 2009

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/fameandfortune/4679284/Joan-Bakewell-My-tenant-was-a-professional-con-artist.html

So Joan believes in Inheritance Tax, but is telling us to make sure we don't pay any!

Edited by juvenal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   34 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.