Saturday, Sep 09, 2006

Work till 68 and then enjoy retirement in poverty - why bother?

FT.com: Message to save early and save often falls on deaf ears

According to recent research on pensions saving, not that many. Scottish Widows says the number of people saving adequately for retirement has dropped from 55 per cent last year to 46 per cent this year, while the proportion of people who do not know where their main income in retirement will come from has almost doubled to 23 per cent.

Posted by uncle chris @ 10:44 AM (581 views)
Add Comment
Report Article

19 Comments

1. Retired Banker said...

If you cannot make provision for an adequate pension then don't bother, as the welfare state will have to
look after you. A small pension will merely reduce your state benefits, so any contributions paid to a
private pension scheme will have been putting money down the drain.
This has always been my advice to people, and Frank Field (one of the few politicians that I respect),
lost his ministerial position for saying the same.

My own late father had his own quite profitable business, but chose to rent a large Victorian House
with attractive views over a London Park on the opposite side of the road. He and my mother lived there
for over 45 years, and being a controlled tenancy the rental was well below market value.
No pension provisions were made, and when dad's health started to deteriorate the local council provided
my parents with "sheltered" accomodation in a small, modern, purpose-built block of maisonettes with
a nice communal garden. Virtually everything except food and telephone was provided for 42 per week
(this was 8 years ago), and I noticed that quite a few of the other tenants could afford to run cars.
When talking to various council employees, I commented on what good value this was, and was told
that "the largesse being generally distributed by the council was unbelievable".

Saturday, September 9, 2006 03:22PM Report Comment
 

2. sirgoogle said...

Fully agree. If you need nursing care in your twilight years, the state will force you to sell your home and take the money to pay for you. When that runs out then the state will support you. If you made no provision then they will look after you from the word go.

If you die then the death duties applied mean that what you had want to leave to the kids is reduced significantly.

There is absolutely no incentive for planning ahead, being self sufficient and honest. The system promotes scroungers and spongers.

Saturday, September 9, 2006 03:46PM Report Comment
 

3. Magnifico said...

the only way to invest your savings in this respect is to 'hide' them. Not as difficult as it sounds... they tell me.

Saturday, September 9, 2006 04:06PM Report Comment
 

4. Ticktock said...


REF-There is absolutely no incentive for planning ahead, being self sufficient and honest. The system promotes scroungers and spongers.

But people do plan ahead, they pay National Insurance for the whole of their working life. If a life time of NI contributions does not cover it, then N.I. contributions need to be raised do they not?

People who have contributed for the duration of their working life have fulfilled their part of the 'deal', and should not be disrepected for simply using the services that they are entitled to.

What the real objection here seems to be, is that in order to pay for our social contract, N.I contributions may need to be raised, and while you usually find little resistance to this from low income people, those good old 'decent, hardworking, middle class people' object as they are unlikely to get back as much as they have put in.

I would remind you all that the 'social contract' was designed for good reason, and it may not be wise for the 'decent, hardworking and honest' classes' to begin playing with this fire. After all, the 'great unwashed' may start to question how such a gap in classes has allowed to become so big anyway, and I assure you, you wouldn't fare well in such a clash.

Saturday, September 9, 2006 04:55PM Report Comment
 

5. Ticktock said...


REF-There is absolutely no incentive for planning ahead, being self sufficient and honest. The system promotes scroungers and spongers.

But people do plan ahead, they pay National Insurance for the whole of their working life. If a life time of NI contributions does not cover it, then N.I. contributions need to be raised do they not?

People who have contributed for the duration of their working life have fulfilled their part of the 'deal', and should not be disrepected for simply using the services that they are entitled to.

What the real objection here seems to be, is that in order to pay for our social contract, N.I contributions may need to be raised, and while you usually find little resistance to this from low income people, those good old 'decent, hardworking, middle class people' object as they are unlikely to get back as much as they have put in.

I would remind you all that the 'social contract' was designed for good reason, and it may not be wise for the 'decent, hardworking and honest' classes' to begin playing with this fire. After all, the 'great unwashed' may start to question how such a gap in classes has allowed to become so big anyway, and I assure you, you wouldn't fare well in such a clash.

Saturday, September 9, 2006 04:56PM Report Comment
 

6. Smiffy said...

you lot are talking out your A holes, has anyone thought about what kind of world we will be living in in say, 30 years time?
I can assure you it wont be flying cars and trips to the moon, and electric scooters, it will be a world of climate disaster, a low energy world and a collasped monetary system, have any of peak water, peak oil and peak gas, let alone peak uranium, by that time i hope they have figured out how to decomision all those nuclear plants without oil!

The entire monatery system setup in Bretton woods in the 1940's was aranged for a cheap ubundant energy supply that many thought would last forever, guess what? They were delusional and many still remain that way today!

Saturday, September 9, 2006 07:29PM Report Comment
 

7. inbreda said...

Ha ha ha

electric scooters

how preposterous!!

Saturday, September 9, 2006 11:58PM Report Comment
 

8. hard cheese said...

I reckon when I retire it will at the age of 85, it will be every man for himself as the state will be bankrupt!!

Sunday, September 10, 2006 09:50AM Report Comment
 

9. Retired Banker said...

I fear that Smiffy and hard cheese may well be right.

My wife certainly thinks so. In the seventies she worked in the "private office" of the goverments' main
environmental agency, as the chairman's p.a..
During the course of her work she met most of the leading ecologists and environmentalists of the day,
and their outlook for the future was uniformly pessimistic.Their general consensus of opinion was that
even then it was too late for mankind to do anything other than commence "a damage limitation exercise".

Perhaps Jay Hanson (www.dieoff.org),and Michael Ruppert (www.fromthewilderness.com) are right,and it
is inevitable that bio-weapons will be used to reduce the World's population to sustainable levels.

Sunday, September 10, 2006 11:58AM Report Comment
 

10. japanese uncle said...

I am afraid life expentancy of this nation is not that long as spinned by the government in view of the nationwide obseity and lack of exercise across all ages. Actually government itself is stuck in the midst of its stupid 'spinning wheel', saying on the one hand "You must work hard as long as physically possible as people live much longer than before", and "By 2010 more than half of the population will be seriously obese potentially with many early deaths." on the other. Which on earth is correct, eh? After the departure of Alastair Campbell, nobody seems in charge of sorting out the traffic of countless lies told not only by Bliar but by all his luetenants and officials, hence this absurd contradiction. Telling lies involves huge amount of diligence, precisely memorizing where, when, to whom and what was lied about. Cambell was apparently an expert.

In any event if people will suffer such severe drop in income level after retirement, they will quickly drop as well because of depresson.

Sunday, September 10, 2006 12:18PM Report Comment
 

11. indiablue19 said...

No doubt you are planning to attend the UK premier of the film "An Inconvenient Truth," on the consequences of global warming we will be reaping in the next ten years. According to the flood waters simulator superimposed on NASA maps by computer technician Alex Tingle, about half of the UK will be gone entirely, along with all the Benelux countries, Florida, the East Coast of the United States, Bangladesh, many of the South Pacific Isles, and the Baja Peninsula of Mexico, to name a few locales. A number of environmental scientists have reviewed the film and find the technology and claims sound. I think HPC, pensions, the BOE, and most economic ledgerdemain are quite minimised in this scenario.

Sunday, September 10, 2006 05:14PM Report Comment
 

12. harold said...

RB

"During the course of her work she met most of the leading ecologists and environmentalists of the day,
and their outlook for the future was uniformly pessimistic."

And what was the uniformly pessimistic view envisioned by ecologists in the 70's? Err... the coming ice age, if I remember correctly. While I would not downplay Mans' destruction of the environment at all (indeed I see little harm in exaggerating it), we should also remember that the Enviro Lobby is an industry like, for example, the Middle East Peace Process. That is, it contains a large number of grant-applying VIs whose interests are not served by making light of the future. [Actually the comparison with the Middle East Peace Process is not entirely fair as the latter is clearly entirely cynical and not at all serious about peace, but that's another issue.]

Sunday, September 10, 2006 06:10PM Report Comment
 

13. japanese uncle said...

indiablue:

I think it dangerours to assume the long term climatic trend simply by extrapolating the differential co-efficiency of the moment. I mean the climatic phenomenon observed in a year or two cannot possibly be treated as precursor of the trend for the next century, and not a few scientific experts take this position. Earth's climatic trend is so unpredictable and only an observation spanning incredible long period of time, say centuries can prove a reliable observation. I can clealy recall the times when the earth was believed to be rapidly cooling rather than warming, by many experts just a couple of decades ago. Drastic climatic change and global warming can conveniently pave the path to the full nuclear power plants network, by alleging the predicted exhaustion of the fossil fuel. It could be another commercial propaganda to promote ultra-lucrative nuclear industries, which can make profit doubly by commissioning power plants as well as decommissioning them. Having said that "An Inconvenient Truth" might well be worthwhile, for critical viewing.

Another film now on show which could be the sheer propaganda is "Right at Your Door" with thinly veiled intention to drive fear into the heads of the ignorant millions, as same as "Flight 93", which I did not bother to see, as use of mobile phones on a plane at higher than 10,000 feet altitude has already been proved impossible. I wonder how long they will dare mock us by pushing this sort of rubbish, by turning blind eyes to those blindingly obvious sparkling-clear facts?

Sunday, September 10, 2006 06:46PM Report Comment
 

14. sirgoogle said...

JU & IB

Well if we are now talking about Global Warming instead of HPC we may as well have some fun .. ;-))

Note that there is another less publicised but equally possible strand, namely the triggering of the next IceAge through Global Warming. This has to do with the rapid melting of the Greenland Icecap, causing changes in salinity in the North Atlantic, causing a permanent switch to the south in the Gulf Stream. The effect of this being that W Europe suffers badly from severe Canadian type Winters, and snow begins to stay on the mountains throughout the year, triggering an increase change in the reflectivity of the Northern Hemisphere ....

Therefore - initial rise in sea levels followed by Ice Age. Your house gets submerged and then when it emerges again .... rubbed out by an ice sheet. Renting is good !

I hear that in the above scenaio that the Sahara will receive rain again and that land prices there currently are relatively low for housing development. Guess that Northern Europe had better start to be nice to its southern neighbours in N Africa if "New London" to be built.

The Last Ice Age ended in ~8000 BC in around 50 years with most of the melt occurring in 3 years. It could occur quickly once the "tipping point" is reached.

Sunday, September 10, 2006 07:19PM Report Comment
 

15. Retired Banker said...

harold-

My wife recollects that some of the boffins speculated that an ice age could occur, but were not sure of
the timescale and the extent to which this might be offset by global warming.It was not generally
considered to be a matter of immediate concern.

The main concerns were depletion of resources,pollution and environmental degradation, deforestation, species extinction, all caused by excessive population growth, and large scale human migration.
There were also worries about the long term storage of radioactive waste, and I recommend reading
the U.N. report on this subject. Quite made my hair stand on end, and the fact that such major
problems have arisen in the western industrialised nations does not bode well for the projected large
scale adoption of nuclear power by third-world countries with even weaker environmental controls than
we have.

Many of the environmental concerns voiced in the 1960/70's were not predicted to become critical
until about 2050 ( The Club of Rome report, being one ), but depressingly things seem to be
deteriorating faster than expected.

Sunday, September 10, 2006 09:48PM Report Comment
 

16. indiablue19 said...

Dear JU,
So maybe the "Inconvenient Truth" is that we are having nuclear power rampantly visited upon us, whether we like it or not? Another great programme to add to the list was "The Power of Nightmares," done after 9/11 by the BBC before it lost its teeth, and highlighting the neo-Cons use of terror and pointed references to "religious" warfare to hype the population of the USA into a permanent state of fear. It even credits the US government with the coining of the name Al Qaeda, which OBL and the rest had never heard of before and decided to adopt because it was frightening people. I wonder what happened to all of the BBC research on this now that the same terror events are taking place in the UK? They've never followed up on the premise that I know of.

SirG.....This impending Ice Age may be the way out. Finding a good Saharan estate agent and getting on with it seems more likely than buying an affordable home in my lifetime in the UK. Especially if, as JU has just pointed out, life expectancy here is plummeting due to fat and depression and a "work till you drop" philosophy. Meanwhile, our family have taken the precaution of buying a rowing machine at least, hoping to outstrip the inevitable. What luck that on a whim I took lessons in camel riding a few years back. Makes property viewing so much easier.

Sunday, September 10, 2006 11:56PM Report Comment
 

17. george monsoon said...

Well.. thats it then, I can't afford to pay for a pension anyway with all the CSA money going out of my account each month. Im going to live fast and enjoy what I have today, because it looks like it will be gone very soon.

Monday, September 11, 2006 09:56AM Report Comment
 

18. harold said...

RB

Please do not misunderstand me, I agree with what you say and appreciate the enormity of the problem we face. However, in the meteorological modelling community the coming Ice Age was a view held by more than a few boffins (I remember the front cover of the New Scientist: a globe covered with ice, for example). My point is simply that speculative branches of science work by herd mentality and conformity to received wisdom. It's a process not unlike that of asset bubble creation: everyone piles in until some bright spark says, "Hang on a minute - you're all wrong". There are relatively few scientific truths regarding climate change, for example the positive correlation between CO2 levels since WW2 and mean global temperatures - but the consequences of this correlation, and whether this will continue to be positive, are not known. That's not to say we should ignore climate change, but nor should we necessarily be panicked by it.

Thank you for the recommendation of the U.N report on the long-term storage of radioactive waste.

Monday, September 11, 2006 10:48AM Report Comment
 

19. indiablue19 said...

RB.....On the idea that "things appear to be deteriorating faster than expected"....What I have noticed from reports of scientists who regularly visit these locales --such as the Greenland ice pack -- is their surprise about how much melting and run-off has happened from underneath the ice sheets that wasn't noticed from satellite views. Therefore the shrinking glaciers have been damaged further than believed. The combined effect with what is obvious from above by satellite appears devastating and much accelerates predictions of the process. There is also the projection, how accurate I've got no clue -- that the remainder of the glacier is unprotected now by a perimeter and could simply slide into the Sea, causing a more instantaneous rise. [This could be information similar to the faulty assumption that mobile phones work above 10,000 feet elevation.]

The film "An Inconvenient Truth" evidently reflects only the consequences of Greenland melting and an estimated 14 metre sea rise. Adding Antarctica to that is multiple times worse -- 110 metres from what I had read. I am skeptical, for the simple reason that, after the Flood [Noah's Ark], man was guaranteed that God would never again destroy the Earth with water. Since quantum physicists are now deciding -- just as Einstein had promised them they would -- that God is an inevitable reality -- perhaps they should determine to reconcile climate issues with Holy Writ.

It is interesting that the reverse-Gulf Stream phenomenon Sir G describes has an unknown effect on glacial melt and possibly countermands it in some unknown way. There already is evidence of the North Atlantic waters not warming sufficiently nor falling at the end of the Stream, which was the traditional pattern in it re-circulating South at great depths. Who knows what the outcome of that may be in terms of changing weather patterns. Although extreme cold in Europe is one prediction.

The implication for house purchases, in the short term at least, would seem to be that coastal property -- HPC or no -- may be out to Sea in the foreseeable future.

Monday, September 11, 2006 12:51PM Report Comment
 

Add comment

  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines
Username  
Admin Password
Email Address
Comments

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies