Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
nome

Is Retirement Over?

Recommended Posts

With QE, pretty much for the private sector.

Whats the costs of QE? people ask.

10 years off your retirement I respond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth hurts.......I can't see the majority being strong, mentally or healthy enough to beable to work into their 70s or 80s after a lifetime of work...also where are all these extra jobs supposed to come from to support the wages, automation and everything else....people need money to spend money, to support jobs......lots of debt clearing and saving to be done for the future......or a new radical change to the system.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd disagree with the opening statement that people currently under 20 years old won't get to enjoy any form of state funded retirement.... I'm 41 and I'm convinced the state pension won't exist in any meaningful form for me whenever I reach "retirement age" (whatever age that will be by then)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historically it was you looked after your kids then your kids looked after you...a pooling of resources.....nowadays many elderly sometimes live hundreds or even thousands of miles from the one or two kids they now have....so the next question is are we not producing enough children to support our futures?.....just saying.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe its time the HPC massive got together and made a website on how to retire early.Its a huge subject with many sides,not covered anywhere,yet there will be huge demand.

Frugal living,income producing assets,capital drawdown and debt free are the four planks for me.

QE has made the private sector pensions a disaster mainly because people just sit in them with no control.They would be far better being in a SIPP.

I actually think retiring early is still very possible for anyone on average wages,but it takes a certain mindset,and an eye on the prize very early in life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone born in 1959 I `m really not bothered.

Besides, I`ve been retired for 3.5 years now, life`s pretty peachy. It`s just a question of living within your means....if you don`t need it don`t buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think retiring early is still very possible for anyone on average wages,but it takes a certain mindset,and an eye on the prize very early in life.

Completely agree, the trouble is most people are more interested in buying status & stuff than buying a life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historically it was you looked after your kids then your kids looked after you...a pooling of resources.....nowadays many elderly sometimes live hundreds or even thousands of miles from the one or two kids they now have....so the next question is are we not producing enough children to support our futures?.....just saying. ;)

That model still exists in Europe. I was seeing a Portuguese girl years ago and stayed at her family home for a week. Four generations lived in a large house that was essentially sub-divided. This model would have been common there.

We had a similar model here in the UK with the granny flat, something that has died off a little in recent years. I can actually see it making a come back in later years though. I suspect that in 20-30 years from now, people entering pension age are likely to be property rich, but cash/pension poor. I reckon an opportunity exists where a less well off child could move in, provide care for their parents, and ultimately receive the house as payment for care services when the parent(s) die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we've had any meaningful progress in the last few decades retirement should be perfectly possible. For such "progress" to be worth doing it has to offer us something worth having, and more time to ourselves is definitely in that category yet reduction in working hours (without it coming along with unpleasant cuts in pay) stalled rather a long time ago. But it might make sense if you consider that averaged over your entire life. So the question is precisely what has gone wrong?

Also the "where are the jobs for the over 70s?" question is classically missing the point - it's looking at jobs as something to exist as a purpose in their own right. If we don't need them to provide the stuff we need and want (remember that money doesn't do that, it's just part of the means of organising those resources) then again, exactly where have we lost the plot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historically it was you looked after your kids then your kids looked after you...a pooling of resources.....nowadays many elderly sometimes live hundreds or even thousands of miles from the one or two kids they now have....so the next question is are we not producing enough children to support our futures?.....just saying.;)

It's not just a question of how many but who is having the kids. Our system incentivises the poor and those on benefits to have kids but doesn't encourage the better off - your boss won't give you a pay rise or a bigger house when you have kids but the government will.

So we may be creating more dependents than future net contributors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That model still exists in Europe. I was seeing a Portuguese girl years ago and stayed at her family home for a week. Four generations lived in a large house that was essentially sub-divided. This model would have been common there.

We had a similar model here in the UK with the granny flat, something that has died off a little in recent years. I can actually see it making a come back in later years though. I suspect that in 20-30 years from now, people entering pension age are likely to be property rich, but cash/pension poor. I reckon an opportunity exists where a less well off child could move in, provide care for their parents, and ultimately receive the house as payment for care services when the parent(s) die.

Some Asian families also live in that way, I agree as we become poorer or a growing number of us do we will have to club together and care for ourselves and each other, but at the same time retaining our independence, no good thinking the state will come to our aid in the way we would like it to......sometimes it is the young that require the help and support, sometimes the young will be helping their parents or both......I have seen recently widowed elderly living alone sell and move to or purpose build or buy a separate living unit close or attached to son or daughters home, works well imo.....time to do plan things differently. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just a question of how many but who is having the kids. Our system incentivises the poor and those on benefits to have kids but doesn't encourage the better off - your boss won't give you a pay rise or a bigger house when you have kids but the government will.

So we may be creating more dependents than future net contributors.

This is true....whilst the children are growing up the state provides help, then the help is withdrawn.....time to fend for yourselves and hope your kids will contribute more back into the economy.....a line has to be drawn. Not all take and no give, but to give back young people require opportunities to training and productive work.......This is where the problem has been let to fester multi generations of the head of the family not working, the state being the breadwinner. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the question of retirement itself being over? Well, that is obviously a silly question. Just go over to the Investing forum and you'll see wish i could afford one's uber thread. In ten years of saving and investing hard on a good (but not out of reach) salary, he built up a 7 figure pile of capital that will allow him to retire at just 43. He's obviously an outlier, but there is no reason why a Joe Soap shouldn't be able to retire with almost no sacrifice at 65, assuming they just take the standard approach (start as early as you can, and save a percentage of income that is half your age). By just doing that, all the monte carlo models guarantee that you can have a safe and decent retirement.

The issue clearly isn't that retirement at 65 isn't possible, the issue is that the traditional system of Defined Benefit/state guaranteed pensions are no longer sustainable. The private sector woke up to this reality in the 90's and since then, they have gradually shifted the liability of retirement onto the employee through Defined Contribution plans. The problem today is that the people have not been willing to accept that liability and because the onus is on the individual themselves to provide for retirement, the whole issue gets brushed under the carpet. It's scary the amount of people who think that their well-being in old age isn't their personal responsibility, but that of the State. That ship will have sailed long before you are ready to retire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some Asian families also live in that way, I agree as we become poorer or a growing number of us do we will have to club together and care for ourselves and each other, but at the same time retaining our independence, no good thinking the state will come to our aid in the way we would like it to......sometimes it is the young that require the help and support, sometimes the young will be helping their parents or both......I have seen recently widowed elderly living alone sell and move to or purpose build or buy a separate living unit close or attached to son or daughters home, works well imo.....time to do plan things differently. ;)

I like the idea too, but I wonder how viable it is. For a start, how many people will go into retirement childless? Secondly, how many children want nothing to do with helping their parents? In Asia, the elderly are revered. Very often in Western society, offspring are only too happy to throw their elders into a home at the first sign of stress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea too, but I wonder how viable it is. For a start, how many people will go into retirement childless? Secondly, how many children want nothing to do with helping their parents? In Asia, the elderly are revered. Very often in Western society, offspring are only too happy to throw their elders into a home at the first sign of stress.

Quite a few people remain childless out of choice......perhaps they will marry someone younger than themselves and hope they will be looked after. :blink:

I don't think offspring are happy to throw their parents into a home, more likely they work all over the country and the world and have their own lives to live and finance, have so little time, some of them have little time to care for their own children never-mind their parents also.... down to individual priorities, what is seen as important. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still remember all the TV programmes back in the 1980's. Most of the work would be done by robots and the working week would be 26 hours. Followed by a long and early retirement......

Problem is, all the fruits of economic growth have been stolen by global elites. This is the real reason you can't afford to retire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe its time the HPC massive got together and made a website on how to retire early.Its a huge subject with many sides,not covered anywhere,yet there will be huge demand.

Frugal living,income producing assets,capital drawdown and debt free are the four planks for me.

QE has made the private sector pensions a disaster mainly because people just sit in them with no control.They would be far better being in a SIPP.

I actually think retiring early is still very possible for anyone on average wages,but it takes a certain mindset,and an eye on the prize very early in life.

I'm trying on the website front. Covering:

- Earning more

- Living well below your means

- Investing including a dividend income stream so I don't have to sell down assets

- Minimising expenses

- Minimising taxes

Been working towards early retirement since 2007 and at the blog since 2009. Very few interested with a readership of a only a few thousand a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think offspring are happy to throw their parents into a home, more likely they work all over the country and the world and have their own lives to live and finance, have so little time, some of them have little time to care for their own children never-mind their parents also.... down to individual priorities, what is seen as important. ;)

It'd surprise you. My wife works with a lot of elderly people, there is a sizeable minority of people who don't want anything to do with their parents care and believe the state should pick up the slack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still remember all the TV programmes back in the 1980's. Most of the work would be done by robots and the working week would be 26 hours. Followed by a long and early retirement......

Whereas what actually happens is that some people lose their jobs and the rest get made to work longer hours (then even more can lose their jobs). The only slightly unpredictable part was those lost jobs being taken up in wonderful coffee-serving, call-centre pestering and zero-hour contract jobs instead of obvious unemployment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the question of retirement itself being over? Well, that is obviously a silly question. Just go over to the Investing forum and you'll see wish i could afford one's uber thread. In ten years of saving and investing hard on a good (but not out of reach) salary, he built up a 7 figure pile of capital that will allow him to retire at just 43. He's obviously an outlier, but there is no reason why a Joe Soap shouldn't be able to retire with almost no sacrifice at 65, assuming they just take the standard approach (start as early as you can, and save a percentage of income that is half your age). By just doing that, all the monte carlo models guarantee that you can have a safe and decent retirement.

...

Thanks for the hat-tip there NuBrit. I see no reason why many HPC'ers could not do what I have done (it might take less or more time but it can be pretty mechanical requiring limited skill) as there is nothing secretive amount my approach. It does however require a lot of determination and you can never fall into the victim trap. Otherwise it's just discipline and not following the herd which is just a HPC'ers way anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the hat-tip there NuBrit. I see no reason why many HPC'ers could not do what I have done (it might take less or more time but it can be pretty mechanical requiring limited skill) as there is nothing secretive amount my approach. It does however require a lot of determination and you can never fall into the victim trap. Otherwise it's just discipline and not following the herd which is just a HPC'ers way anyway.

Thought this chart might be interesting:

160730-9.png

Pre-2007 shows me being just like the masses. Working hard, spending everything I earnt via excessive consumption and on a trajectory That would see me retire when the State allowed me to (or maybe just a few years prior).

Post-2007 shows how I turned it around and now that I'm there it fells incredibly liberating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still remember all the TV programmes back in the 1980's. Most of the work would be done by robots and the working week would be 26 hours. Followed by a long and early retirement......

Problem is, all the fruits of economic growth have been stolen by global elites. This is the real reason you can't afford to retire.

Yes, I grew up with my teachers telling me that there would be no jobs for our generation because computers would be doing them all - this was obviously before the average primary school teacher had any friends that worked in IT.

There is of course the problem that if automation really is gathering pace to the extent that it destroys jobs rather than just creating new (generally more highly skilled) ones, then there is the problem that the wealth accrues to the "robot owners" rather than the people whose jobs the robots have replaced. So there's a life of serfdom rather than a life of leisure that awaits us.

Of course if that is the case, and I'm not convinced it is (at least, not quite yet), then capitalism itself is at risk, because there'll be no one with any money to buy the products that are produced by all these robots.

So automation is not really a risk to retirement as such - but more to the entire economic system. (But that's for another thread).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe its time the HPC massive got together and made a website on how to retire early.Its a huge subject with many sides,not covered anywhere,yet there will be huge demand.

Frugal living,income producing assets,capital drawdown and debt free are the four planks for me.

QE has made the private sector pensions a disaster mainly because people just sit in them with no control.They would be far better being in a SIPP.

I actually think retiring early is still very possible for anyone on average wages,but it takes a certain mindset,and an eye on the prize very early in life.

Aren't there several people with blogs like that?

I'm sure theres lots of people here that have "retired". I quit my last permie job several years ago, bought a house for cash and doubt I'll ever pay income tax again. No way am i paying for such a rotten system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought this chart might be interesting:

160730-9.png

Pre-2007 shows me being just like the masses. Working hard, spending everything I earnt via excessive consumption and on a trajectory That would see me retire when the State allowed me to (or maybe just a few years prior).

Post-2007 shows how I turned it around and now that I'm there it fells incredibly liberating.

I admire your plan and sticking to your targets. The only downside - and this is a huge one - is nature doesn't agree with your plan and sends you on your way early. With you sitting there thinking why the ****** didn't I just spend all the money when I had the chance.

Without hindsight its impossible to know. However I know of a few people who have followed this plan and had it ripped from them with a couple of months notice. Planned for 30 years - got 3 months.

No 'right' or 'wrong' answer to this IMO.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   92 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    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.