[YoungAtHeart]

Originally Posted by Nick1966

The survival of the wealthiest is the survival of the fittest.

At least initially. But when we run out of energy, wealth will mean nothing. Rather like those who had £500 on the Titanic and the all the lifeboats were filled and gone.

We won't run out of energy.

Maybe oil will be gone/minimal but there are other sources of energy we can utilise.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by Nick1966

Don't get me started.

As you know from previous exchanges, I save for a rainy days.

Thanks to successive chancellors , I resent watching my hard earned savings steadily to turn into glorified worthless toilet paper with '£10 Bank of England' written on each sheet.

Currency arbitrage is your friend here, Nick!

Try the Swiss Franc:

http://www.x-convert.com/chart/CHF-GBP?period=5y

We've debased our currency so much, had you bought in 2007 and sold last year, you would have doubled your money!

Regards,

Cypher

[Barry59]

It's clear that the elderly will suck up increasingly large amounts of money over the next few decades, leaving most other services bereft of finance.

Some tough choices ahead I think, and I hope some thought is given to reviewing the actual concept of money. I'm starting to think it's an idea that is coming to the end of its useful life.

Then again, a couple of good global wars might be the answer!

[Nick1966]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Currency arbitrage is your friend here, Nick!

Try the Swiss Franc:

http://www.x-convert.com/chart/CHF-GBP?period=5y

We've debased our currency so much, had you bought in 2007 and sold last year, you would have doubled your money!

Regards,

Cypher

That's depressing.

In 5 years when compared with the Swiss France, my British cash savings have halved in value.

Now I know how the Greeks feel.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by jmclaugh

Yet it seems most of the populace at large want low interest rates as most of them are in debt and most of the economists who get wheeled on support increased public spending aka borrowing or QE to increase lending to stimulate growth. Borrowing as a solution is still alive and kicking and governments and central banks are in part only reflecting that and their need to be seen to be doing something that keeps them in a job and in government.

This can be seen every time the markets cheer up when ano trache of QE is announced, the ECB hand out ano bailout in the Eurozone and the US has ano stimulus. Yet it is all very fleeting when the reality returns that the real underlying problem of debt is unchanged.

Meanwhile those who have saved just see their savings and pensions heading south.

Yup - have you noticed that it's all in diminishing returns tho' now?

The 100bn Spanish bank bailout announcement bought, what, 18 hours of calm in the markets? And the latest tranche of UK QE almost went unnoticed.

I think someone's realised that:

a) It's not working;
b) It's actually damaging.

Well, I suppose that penny had to drop sooner or later. Since when has funny money solved anything?

Regards,

Cypher

[ricky77]

Originally Posted by Turnbull2000

And in case anyone missed it, the 'solution' is a continuation of the current net immigration rates 1 million more people every four years. The left-leaning Indy has reacted to this prospect in almost celebratory fashion.

With only 100,000 homes being built each year and set to remain this low for many years yet, the housing crisis is set to get much, much worse (unless you're a landlord of course!).

Without an influx of workers who pay more taxes, we are in a very bad state.

Personally, I would go for some sort of option where we DID bring in people who were hungry for work, but on relatively short term stays (years, rather than tens of years).

Unfortunately, it looks like the option is either the Conservative pledge to reduce immigration to tens of thousands (massive shot in the foot) or continue with immigration which may help in the short term but makes the long term problem worse (we'll still need to look after the immigrants when they get old).

[Judge Mental]

Somehow we need to get the message across to those starting out on their working life that they will need to save from day 1 for their retirement. There should be a compulsory proportion of pay paid into a personal pension scheme and universal pensions should be replaced by a system of personal pensions with top ups only for the poorest.

Having worked in the public sector I got used at a very young age to giving up a proportion of my salary every month even in my 20s so that I could have a decent pension in retirement. Many of my friends in the private sector spent that money instead on nicer cars, clothes, more expensive homes and all the stuff that goes into them. Annoyingly they are the very people now complaining that I will get a 'gold plated pension'!

We need to accept that our standard of living now needs to reflect providing for ourselves later on.

[Nick1966]

Originally Posted by Judge Mental

Somehow we need to get the message across to those starting out on their working life that they will need to save from day 1 for their retirement. There should be a compulsory proportion of pay paid into a personal pension scheme and universal pensions should be replaced by a system of personal pensions with top ups only for the poorest.

Having worked in the public sector I got used at a very young age to giving up a proportion of my salary every month even in my 20s so that I could have a decent pension in retirement. Many of my friends in the private sector spent that money instead on nicer cars, clothes, more expensive homes and all the stuff that goes into them. Annoyingly they are the very people now complaining that I will get a 'gold plated pension'!

We need to accept that our standard of living now needs to reflect providing for ourselves later on.

Good point, I've heard somewhere that around half the UK working population do not have any kind occupational or personal pension plan.

Trouble is, with British household incomes being squeezed for the forseeable future, saving for retirement is going to get harder still.

Guess we are going to have accept a general, permanent and systematic reduction in living standards. That means economies in weekly shopping, travel habits, frequency of replacing household items from clothes to phones and holidays on the British seaside instead of fancy trips abroad.

Things are going to get worse before they get even worse.

[tewkesbury]

Originally Posted by Nick1966

Trouble is, with British household incomes being squeezed for the forseeable future, saving for retirement is going to get harder still.....

And if the retirement age keeps going up people will ask what's the point of saving ...instead of stopping at 65 and enjoying yourself the average worker will have to work until they drop

[gulliverfoyle]

could be worse

we could be Japan

they are seriously screwed

[Nick1966]

Originally Posted by gulliverfoyle

could be worse

we could be Japan

they are seriously screwed

We are in the middle of Japanese style lost decade(s).

Squeezed incomes, falling living standards, unemployment and economic stagnation. The Japanese tried a form of QE, too. And that didn't seem to work for them either.

[Relugus]

Originally Posted by Judge Mental

Somehow we need to get the message across to those starting out on their working life that they will need to save from day 1 for their retirement. There should be a compulsory proportion of pay paid into a personal pension scheme and universal pensions should be replaced by a system of personal pensions with top ups only for the poorest.

Having worked in the public sector I got used at a very young age to giving up a proportion of my salary every month even in my 20s so that I could have a decent pension in retirement. Many of my friends in the private sector spent that money instead on nicer cars, clothes, more expensive homes and all the stuff that goes into them. Annoyingly they are the very people now complaining that I will get a 'gold plated pension'!

We need to accept that our standard of living now needs to reflect providing for ourselves later on.

Given we allow parents to decide if their teenage kids can have a student bank account or not, it seems absurd to tell them they must set up a pension when their mum and dad can stop them doing anything.

[Relugus]

Originally Posted by gulliverfoyle

could be worse

we could be Japan

they are seriously screwed

Why? The younger generation of Japanese men seem to be alot smarter than ours; they've realised what a sham society is and are rejecting being used as baby-making wage-slave salary men.

[Relugus]

Given that the over 50s have something like 80% of national wealth, they can easily afford retirement costs.

See, the real problem is human beings living too long. When your body starts to stop working properly, that's when you are meant to die, living beyond that is unnatural and cowardly. We should ditch the idea of retirement, its a sick joke as it gives you free time when you can't do much with it. Far better to abolish retirement and up the school leaving age to 19.

People should learn to accept death, all it is is your consciousness ending (and probably starting again immediately after in another universe).

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by Relugus

Given that the over 50s have something like 80% of national wealth, they can easily afford retirement costs.

See, the real problem is human beings living too long. When your body starts to stop working properly, that's when you are meant to die, living beyond that is unnatural and cowardly. We should ditch the idea of retirement, its a sick joke as it gives you free time when you can't do much with it. Far better to abolish retirement and up the school leaving age to 19.

People should learn to accept death, all it is is your consciousness ending (and probably starting again immediately after in another universe).

Well, if that's the case we can do away with health provision completely,as by your logic a person of any age who falls ill should just be left to die.....

Been to the doctor recently?.....

[jcafcw]

Originally Posted by Relugus

Given that the over 50s have something like 80% of national wealth, they can easily afford retirement costs.

See, the real problem is human beings living too long. When your body starts to stop working properly, that's when you are meant to die, living beyond that is unnatural and cowardly. We should ditch the idea of retirement, its a sick joke as it gives you free time when you can't do much with it. Far better to abolish retirement and up the school leaving age to 19.

People should learn to accept death, all it is is your consciousness ending (and probably starting again immediately after in another universe).

You are right.

It is only the rich who deserve to live as they can pay healthcare costs.

The poor's job is to work to make the rich more money and when they can't to die. Maybe we should take on the Japanese solution of hari-kari so we are not bothersome to our betters. We should just accept we are scum with no right to rights or anything other than a completely anodyne, grey and soulless life.

On the other hand we spend years putting money into the system and maybe we are entitled to help in our latter years. And maybe someone who thinks people should be forced to work as their body is breaking down to fund tax cuts are the real scum.

[Turnbull2000]

Originally Posted by Relugus

Given that the over 50s have something like 80% of national wealth, they can easily afford retirement costs.

The bigger issue is that the current generation of over 50's are set to take in excess of 120% of what they contributed to state expenditure and benefits. Anyone that is younger gets less, with the under 35's fairing particularly badly. Young people are basically facing a hefty tax burden to support the over 50's, whilst seeing non of the benefits themselves.