Why are people obsessed with getting a pension

Jim2007

Bass Reeves wrote: »

All public servants pay 10% PRD( pension related deduction) on salary over 26K/year. he have been paying about 2500/year in a PRD deduction. It worse for HSE staff who were paying a pension deduction already prior to the 2010 bail out. Admittily they are only pay it 10 years. However in 20 year time staff retiring from the public service will have paid more into a pension pot than they get out maybe even before an employer contribution. This is especially true for staff on income in the 40-50K bracket especially with average income based pensions.

OK, I'm not at all familiar with public servants pensions... are you saying he paid 2.5pa for 22 years for sum total of 55k, then got a €42k lump sum + €6.9K a year there after....

That does not really seem likely....

S.M.B.

That's what it sounded like so I must be missing something. Combined with the claim that some 'will have paid more into a pension pot than they get out' this has left me very confused.

Dodge

S.M.B. wrote: »

That's what it sounded like so I must be missing something. Combined with the claim that some 'will have paid more into a pension pot than they get out' this has left me very confused.

None of this figures add up. It’s best to leave it alone IMO

It is true that some public servants will end up paying in more than they get out now, particularly on the lower scale

Crude example here but someone was recruited post 1994 who works 40 years and has a final salary (for pre 2013) or average annual salary (for post 2013) of €40,000 per year will have an occupational pension of circa €7,500

They’ll also have the state pension of €12,500. Leaving them with a pension ‘package’ of €20,000 per annum (and a €60k lump sum)

To get their lump sum and their €7,500 a year they’re currently paying about 15% of their salary in pension payments (inc the PRD)

Not suggesting it’s poor mouth stuff either fwiw

S.M.B.

Dodge wrote: »

None of this figures add up. It’s best to leave it alone IMO

It is true that some public servants will end up paying in more than they get out now, particularly on the lower scale

Crude example here but someone was recruited post 1994 who works 40 years and has a final salary (for pre 2013) or average annual salary (for post 2013) of €40,000 per year will have an occupational pension of circa €7,500

They’ll also have the state pension of €12,500. Leaving them with a pension ‘package’ of €20,000 per annum (and a €60k lump sum)

To get their lump sum and their €7,500 a year they’re currently paying about 15% of their salary in pension payments (inc the PRD)

Not suggesting it’s poor mouth stuff either fwiw

By 'get out' do you just mean what they are likely to see in actual cash in their pocket each year before they die? Or the pension package they 'get' at retirement?

Because those numbers don't seem drastically different to what I would expect someone paying into a private pension would expect from an annuity.

Dodge

S.M.B. wrote: »

By 'get out' do you just mean what they are likely to see in actual cash in their pocket each year before they die? Or the pension package they 'get' at retirement?

Because those numbers don't seem drastically different to what I would expect someone paying into a private pension would expect from an annuity.

It’s not drastically different. I think some people think it is drastically different (in favour of public servants)

Anyway, loathe to get into a public v private argument as they pop up here all the time.

S.M.B.

Dodge wrote: »

It’s not drastically different. I think some people think it is drastically different (in favour of public servants)

Anyway, loathe to get into a public v private argument as they pop up here all the time.

That's fair enough, especially considering this whole discussion came about from a comment full of hearsay from someone who's gone awol.

Jim2007

S.M.B. wrote: »

Because those numbers don't seem drastically different to what I would expect someone paying into a private pension would expect from an annuity.

It is probably in fact a little bit better at around 4%.

Bass Reeves

Jim2007 wrote: »

OK, I'm not at all familiar with public servants pensions... are you saying he paid 2.5pa for 22 years for sum total of 55k, then got a €42k lump sum + €6.9K a year there after....

That does not really seem likely....

No he is paying it since 2010 when the PRD came in but as years roll on there are people working in the PS that will have made those contribution and receive pensions of that level. As well PRD is paid on overtime and allowances which are in the nature of pay whether pensionable or non pensionable. Mind you most allowances that are in the nature of pay are pensionable.

Dodge wrote: »

None of this figures add up. It’s best to leave it alone IMO

It is true that some public servants will end up paying in more than they get out now, particularly on the lower scale

Crude example here but someone was recruited post 1994 who works 40 years and has a final salary (for pre 2013) or average annual salary (for post 2013) of €40,000 per year will have an occupational pension of circa €7,500

They’ll also have the state pension of €12,500. Leaving them with a pension ‘package’ of €20,000 per annum (and a €60k lump sum)

To get their lump sum and their €7,500 a year they’re currently paying about 15% of their salary in pension payments (inc the PRD)

Not suggesting it’s poor mouth stuff either fwiw

While it is not poor mouth stuff neither is it mouthwatering that some may consider for staff post 1994 and especially for staff post 2013. For Staff who'es earning include a high porportion of non pensionable pay mainly overtime they can be paying substantical PRD. You also have to factor in taht the expectation is that the employer in such a situation would be matching pension contributions. there is another sting in the tail as the PRD is treated as a normal pension contribution it can limit staff ability to do an AVC

Bass Reeves

Jim2007 wrote: »

OK, I'm not at all familiar with public servants pensions... are you saying he paid 2.5pa for 22 years for sum total of 55k, then got a €42k lump sum + €6.9K a year there after....

That does not really seem likely....

No he is paying it since 2010 when the PRD came in but as years roll on there are people working in the PS that will have made those contribution and receive pensions of that level. As well PRD is paid on overtime and allowances which are in the nature of pay whether pensionable or non pensionable. Mind you most allowances that are in the nature of pay are pensionable.

Dodge wrote: »

None of this figures add up. It’s best to leave it alone IMO

It is true that some public servants will end up paying in more than they get out now, particularly on the lower scale

Crude example here but someone was recruited post 1994 who works 40 years and has a final salary (for pre 2013) or average annual salary (for post 2013) of €40,000 per year will have an occupational pension of circa €7,500

They’ll also have the state pension of €12,500. Leaving them with a pension ‘package’ of €20,000 per annum (and a €60k lump sum)

To get their lump sum and their €7,500 a year they’re currently paying about 15% of their salary in pension payments (inc the PRD)

Not suggesting it’s poor mouth stuff either fwiw

While it is not poor mouth stuff neither is it mouthwatering that some may consider for staff post 1994 and especially for staff post 2013. For Staff who'es earning include a high porportion of non pensionable pay mainly overtime they can be paying substantical PRD. You also have to factor in taht the expectation is that the employer in such a situation would be matching pension contributions. there is another sting in the tail as the PRD is treated as a normal pension contribution it can limit staff ability to do an AVC

neutral guy

I think this discussion started bank clerks trying get extra commisions.

Geuze

Bass Reeves wrote: »

All public servants pay 10% PRD( pension related deduction) on salary over 26K/year. he have been paying about 2500/year in a PRD deduction. It worse for HSE staff who were paying a pension deduction already prior to the 2010 bail out. Admittily they are only pay it 10 years. However in 20 year time staff retiring from the public service will have paid more into a pension pot than they get out maybe even before an employer contribution. This is especially true for staff on income in the 40-50K bracket especially with average income based pensions.

You seem to suggest that HSE staff pay a special pension contribution.

This is false.

Most public servants (excl. civil servants) have always paid 6.5% superannuation pension cont.

Then, since 2010 approx, all public servants also pay the PRD.

The PRD has been cut as part of pay restoration, and is now re-named the ASC, applies on over 34.5k.

neutral guy

Geuze wrote: »

You seem to suggest that HSE staff pay a special pension contribution.

This is false.

Most public servants (excl. civil servants) have always paid 6.5% superannuation pension cont.

Then, since 2010 approx, all public servants also pay the PRD.

The PRD has been cut as part of pay restoration, and is now re-named the ASC, applies on over 34.5k.

In 2004 breakfast roll price was 2.40,today cost 4.

neutral guy

RPPPD,WWD,UFC,KKD and other.Ask your friends who paid to pension fund 50K before 2008 and now has 20K.

AlmightyCushion

neutral guy wrote: »

RPPPD,WWD,UFC,KKD and other.Ask your friends who paid to pension fund 50K before 2008 and now has 20K.

The stock market is well above what it was in 2008. Even when it nose dived back in March it was still well above what it was in 2008.

Dodge

neutral guy wrote: »

RPPPD,WWD,UFC,KKD and other.Ask your friends who paid to pension fund 50K before 2008 and now has 20K.

If you can find that mythical pension, please share so people can avoid. Thanks

neutral guy

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The stock market is well above what it was in 2008. Even when it nose dived back in March it was still well above what it was in 2008.

Yes ,the stock market ! But not the people saving for pensions amount of money ! Which have spend money for pension funds clerks wages !Why I stopped pensions savings ! My savings in 2008 went down from 50K to 20 and from 20 K in 2008 they grew up to 25K because I had pay ADMINISTRATION FEES to guys in pension fund ! So from 2004 putting 50K in savings today after all I have 25K !

neutral guy

Dodge wrote: »

If you can find that mythical pension, please share so people can avoid. Thanks

No problem at all !


https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/how-to-spot-a-pension-scam

Here is UK

Please prove us you are not different !

JJayoo

In 30 years time the pension age will be close to 80

neutral guy

JJayoo wrote: »

In 30 years time the pension age will be close to 80

No ! Because old people has majority on elections this not gonna happen ! They simply will give vote for politicians who will not bring pension age to 80.No matter who it will nationalists,fashists,communists,populists.

The J Stands for Jay

neutral guy wrote: »

Yes ,the stock market ! But not the people saving for pensions amount of money ! Which have spend money for pension funds clerks wages !Why I stopped pensions savings ! My savings in 2008 went down from 50K to 20 and from 20 K in 2008 they grew up to 25K because I had pay ADMINISTRATION FEES to guys in pension fund ! So from 2004 putting 50K in savings today after all I have 25K !

Found the guy who switched to cash.

The J Stands for Jay

neutral guy wrote: »

No ! Because old people has majority on elections this not gonna happen ! They simply will give vote for politicians who will not bring pension age to 80.No matter who it will nationalists,fashists,communists,populists.

The old people who are already receiving the pension will vote to pull up the ladder after them to protect their pensions.

Jim2007

neutral guy wrote: »

RPPPD,WWD,UFC,KKD and other.Ask your friends who paid to pension fund 50K before 2008 and now has 20K.

Well if your friends ended up in that situation, then ask them what kind of rubbish they were invested in. And perhaps you will learn sometime from it.

Jim2007

neutral guy wrote: »

No problem at all !


https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/how-to-spot-a-pension-scam

Here is UK

Please prove us you are not different !

You made a statement about specific pension fund issues and when called out on it, all you could come with is a random article about possible scams. If that is all you got and that is what you rely on, then you better close down all your accounts etc.. because there are scams being done everywhere.

If you have a factual example to back up your statement, then let's have it. There are several people on this form with experience in fund management and people like myself who are specialists in in performance and attribution analysis, and we'll be only too happy to explain to you where you went wrong...

We are waiting on you to deliver up the facts...

neutral guy

The pension funds is the same as charity organisations.The top man has 20K salary per month,couple clerks has 15K and they all happy.Can somebody tell me why when I bring to pension fund 2K per year on end of the year I have bill :

All paid in 2000
Administration fee 500
Annual loss due with markets "jumps" 500
Your balance on end of the year is 1000

Well guys,can somebody tell me why I have pay 500 euros per year feeding guys who create me loss of 500 per year ?
You know what ? The bar of gold cost 360 buks in 2002 ,today it cost about 1900
Why should I share my money with guys in pension funds who waste them if I could buy bar of gold and throw it on attic lets say for another 20 years ?
I am not gonna feed anybody and I dont believe any pension funds !

And also guys,can somebody explain me why people got pennies on pensions or loss when markets are on top of the history sky height ?

The J Stands for Jay

neutral guy wrote: »

And also guys,can somebody explain me why people got pennies on pensions or loss when markets are on top of the history sky height ?

I could have a go at explaining it if you could give me an example of it occurring.

S.M.B.

neutral guy doesn't come across as very neutral when it comes to thoughts on pensions

JJayoo

Don't have kids and you won't have to worry about pensions, expensive little cnuts

colm_c

JJayoo wrote: »

Don't have kids and you won't have to worry about pensions, expensive little cnuts

Huh?

What have kids got to do with saving for retirement?

AnRothar

Jim2007 wrote: »

But remember that the demographics will have changed, the voters will be older and politicians won't get elected if they don't look after the voters....

Look at how badly everything is funded for the young in Florida, schools etc for example....

colm_c wrote: »

Huh?

What have kids got to do with saving for retirement?

No spare cash:)

colm_c

AnRothar wrote: »

No spare cash:)

Still not seeing the correlation.

No kids, don't save for retirement?

Kids, don't save for retirement?

A pension is merely a vehicle to allow a way to save for retirement with tax benefits.

Kids or not you should have something put away for retirement.