Do you have a pension?

suicide_circus wrote: »

What are you going to spend your extra fiver a week on, Srameen? :P

I don't draw a state pension. My private pension has served me very well for the past 17 years. I wouldn't get out of bed for an additional fiver.

animaal

kazamo wrote: »

How to fund it......apply BIK to employer pension contributions.
If BIK is applied to other employer paid benefits such as cars, health insurance etc, would only seem fair to apply it to pensions also.

Public sector pension entitlements would also have to be valued by an actuary, and taxed as BIK?

The problem is that not enough people are contributing to their own pensions. Throwing more disincentives at them won't solve the problem.

While it might be tempting to look at those who are preparing for the future, and try to bring them down to the same level as those who don't, it won't solve anything.

beeno67

spud_grower wrote: »

1990 - 2015

the portfolio he details has grown far more than 7-8% per year

OK. Show me

spud_grower

beeno67 wrote: »

Simply untrue. But, hey why not provide evidence that funds such as yours have averaged 7-8% a year over the last 20-30 years. Pick say 25 years (i.e. 1990 - 2015) just to be fair.
For example FTSE August 1990 2162 now 6718. That is nowhere near 7-8% a year growth.

the S + P for example was priced at 339.97 on January 1st 1990 , its closed Friday @ 2080

spud_grower wrote: »

its still higher than it was ten years ago

So is inflation and the cost of living and it's not indexed to the true cost of living in this country. I have a friend who is a lone parent and she has suffered huge cuts this year.

howamidifferent

Greentopia wrote:

You should spend a day with a a charity like ALONE who work to ease the suffering of the 1 in 5 older people who are at risk of poverty or suffering deprivation. They are far from the group that has suffered the least during the recession. That would be the top earners.

So if it's that bad for them why do you aspire to become one of them by relying on the same pension when it's your turn?

spud_grower wrote: »

no investment is bullet proof as wealth creation involves risk

Indeed, none are. Not even so called safe bets like stocks. That was my point.

spud_grower wrote: »

the state pension completely falls apart under scrutiny , its built upon future promises which politicans will not be able to keep and besides those currently handing out the goodies will not be around when the whole thing falls apart

None of us know what the future holds but personally I'm hoping they won't be around either, but not for reasons you would like I'm sure

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

So has inflation and the cost of living and it's not indexed to the true cost of living in this country. I have a friend who is a lone parent and she has suffered huge cuts this year.

inflation has been non existent since 2008 , when your dependent on the charity of the state , you really cant complain too much , lone parents are not special , some make them out to be heroes , they are not

FURET

beeno67 wrote: »

OK. Show me

Taking Canada as an example, www.moneysense.ca/2006/04/05/classic-couch-potato-portfolio-historical-performance-tables/

Taking the US, http://www.uexpress.com/scottburns/index.html?uc_full_date=20090215.

Since 1970, the US index and the international index have performed very similarly, with less than a 1% difference in compounding between the two. There's no saying which will perform better going forward - but the correlation is very tight. So guessing whether Europe, the US or Emerging will do better going forward is pointless. The trend is similar. (David Swensen, Pioneering Portfolio Management, New York Free Press, 2009, p. 170)

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

You should spend a day with a a charity like ALONE who work to ease the suffering of the 1 in 5 older people who are at risk of poverty or suffering deprivation. They are far from the group that has suffered the least during the recession. That would be the top earners.

no pensioner in Ireland is short money to buy essentials for reasons to do with the level of entitlement available to those over 66 , the government cannot manage every single situation , some people are terrible money managers or have expensive substance addictions

219 per week ( the minimum pension ) is more than enough to live on and that's before you list the following benefits

medical card
free transport
fuel allowance
electricity subsidy
phone subsidy ( phone rent allowance was cut I acknowledge )
no dirt tax on savings
living alone allowance

howamidifferent wrote: »

So if it's that bad for them why do you aspire to become one of them by relying on the same pension when it's your turn?

I aspire to not being able to feed, clothe, have a decent roof over my head and be able to stay warm in winter? where did I say that?

I already own my own house outright. I grow some of my own food and am an aspiring permaculturist/gardener who will be making a living from this when I graduate so that won't be a problem and I'll be about 70%/80% self sufficient in food. I intend to be off grid, harvesting my own rainwater and have my own well when I'm older so no bills there either.
My income and savings should cover whatever food I do have to buy and bills I will have to pay.

Greentopia wrote: »

I aspire to not being able to feed, clothe, have a decent roof over my head and be able to stay warm in winter? where did I say that?

I already own my own house outright. I grow some of my own food and am an aspiring permaculturist/gardener who will be making a living from this when I graduate so that won't be a problem and I'll be about 70%/80% self sufficient in food. I intend to be off grid, harvesting my own rainwater and have my own well when I'm older so no bills there either.
My income and savings should cover whatever food I do have to buy and bills I will have to pay.

Well, good luck with that plan.

FURET

Greentopia wrote: »

Who is this all of us? my livelihood, food on my table or roof over my head doesn't depend on the existence of multi national corporations.

If you think you wouldn't suffer in an event that would wipe out 2000 of the biggest businesses on the planet, you don't understand how the world works (but that's clear enough already). An event of that magnitude could only be instigated by a global catastrophe. WWI, WW2, the Great Depression, huge earthquakes - none of those brought down anywhere near that number of businesses. To lose 2000, we're talking a Global Pandemic of biblical proportions, a global war more devastating than any previous, a supervolcano, or a cosmic impact. So yeah, I think you'd suffer.

God forbid. And it's not fear mongering to point out that stocks are not bullet proof investments.

Hehe, tell that to anyone - anyone - who has stayed the course in a diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds over the past 30 years. They'll smile politely at you and change the subject.

Anyway, don't worry, I'm sure you'll be grand.

Greentopia wrote: »

have my own well when I'm older so no bills there either.

Except the cost of maintaining the well and the electricity costs of running the well, which are greater than any water charges.

Rural people are laughing at urban folk protesting about water charges. We've had water charges for years, and they're larger than any bill people are getting for being on a public supply.

spud_grower wrote: »

no pensioner in Ireland is short money to buy essentials for reasons to do with the level of entitlement available to those over 66 , the government cannot manage every single situation , some people are terrible money managers or have expensive substance addictions

No pensioner? how would you know? do you work in social services or in an old people's charity? the statistics are as I've said- 1 in 5 are suffering some for of poverty or deprivation such as food or fuel poverty, and for some homelessness.
It's not about managing every single situation, it's about providing a living income for those who have no other source of income so pensioners don't have to choose between food or keeping warm, which is the situation for many.

Substance addictions? you think the 1 in 5 old people iiving in poverty are doing so because they have substance addictions or just terrible with money? ridiculous. Older people in my experience are actually better at managing their money because they don't have the 'live on credit' mentality many younger people have spending money on crap they don't need to impress others, and value saving what they can for a rainy day-that's how my Mum, my Aunt and many of her friends were.
Substance abuse cuts across all sectors of society, drug abuse is more prevalent in younger people not OAPS and alcohol abuse is indeed an increasing problem in the elderly, but that's caused in many cases my loneliness and social isolation which they can't be blamed for.

spud_grower wrote: »

219 per week ( the minimum pension ) is more than enough to live on and that's before you list the following benefits

medical card
free transport
fuel allowance
electricity subsidy
phone subsidy ( phone rent allowance was cut I acknowledge )
no dirt tax on savings
living alone allowance

Again, how would you know? are you an OAP on €219 a week? all those ancillary benefits are what they should be entitled to after a life time of work. Do you begrudge them that?

Property tax, bin collection charges, prescription charges and drug charges for some, now water tax though not for long methinks), all the costs of upkeep of a property if they own one or rent if they don't, and those bills you mention still have to be paid even if they are slightly reduced by state allowances.

To be honest you sound clueless about the real costs of living most older people face. I know what my Mum had to pay and she was frugal and her pension only barely covered her expenses week on week and she didn't even have any long term medical costs.

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

Well, good luck with that plan.

Thank you. It's working very well so far. :-)

I could live a very happy existence off €219 euro a week. Anyone that can't either is dreadful with money or made some shocking financial decisions in their past.

FURET wrote: »

If you think you wouldn't suffer in an event that would wipe out 2000 of the biggest businesses on the planet, you don't understand how the world works (but that's clear enough already). An event of that magnitude could only be instigated by a global catastrophe. WWI, WW2, the Great Depression, huge earthquakes - none of those brought down anywhere near that number of businesses. To lose 2000, we're talking a Global Pandemic of biblical proportions, a global war more devastating than any previous, a supervolcano, or a cosmic impact. So yeah, I think you'd suffer.

Or revolution, my preferred choice. If any of those catastrophes did happen like a super volcano we'd all be wiped out anyway so what good would having a good stock portfolio do you?

And I don't know where you're getting the figure of 2000 from-I told you I wasn't referring specially to your situation if that's the number of investments you've made.

FURET wrote: »

Hehe, tell that to anyone - anyone - who has stayed the course in a diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds over the past 30 years. They'll smile politely at you and change the subject.

Anyway, don't worry, I'm sure you'll be grand.

I live below my means and don't depend on the vicissitudes of the market to make money so I'm sure I will be.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Except the cost of maintaining the well and the electricity costs of running the well, which are greater than any water charges.

Ha, you've obviously not seen some of the bills people are getting and that's not taking into account how water charges will increase hugely once the caps are removed. If that all were to happen of course post next election.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Rural people are laughing at urban folk protesting about water charges. We've had water charges for years, and they're larger than any bill people are getting for being on a public supply.

For now perhaps. For some.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I could live a very happy existence off €219 euro a week. Anyone that can't either is dreadful with money or made some shocking financial decisions in their past.

Very easy to say. I'd like to see you try it for a month. Unless you're already living on a fixed low income then I'm going to politely suggest you're talking through your hoop.

Greentopia wrote: »

Ha, you've obviously not seen some of the bills people are getting and that's not taking into account how water charges will increase hugely once the caps are removed. If that all were to happen of course post next election.

My well and waste water system costs multiples of the water charges to maintain properly every year.

Greentopia wrote: »

Very easy to say. I'd like to see you try it for a month. Unless you're already living on a fixed low income then I'm going to politely suggest you're talking through your hoop.

My budget for spending at the moment is under 200 a week(I've been sticking to this since last year as im saving), so im already doing it. I could live on even less if I needed to.

Greentopia wrote: »

Very easy to say. I'd like to see you try it for a month. Unless you're already living on a fixed low income then I'm going to politely suggest you're talking through your hoop.

Oh come on! I have siblings and friends living on the state pension and they are not destitute. It wouldn't fit my lifestyle but they can manage to cut their clothe to what's available to them.

Greentopia wrote: »

Ha, you've obviously not seen some of the bills people are getting and that's not taking into account how water charges will increase hugely once the caps are removed. If that all were to happen of course post next election.

The highest water charge any household will be paying is 160 per annum. And that's for 2+ adult households.

I'd like to see you maintain a personal well/sewage system for under 500 a year (3 times the max charge)

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

My budget for spending at the moment is under 200 a week(I've been sticking to this since last year as im saving), so im already doing it. I could live on even less if I needed to.

Good for you. What are your circumstances? living with Mum and Dad or living alone paying rent or mortgage? paying the full cost of living on your own or with a partner like property tax, household charge, bin charges, fuel, electricity, telephone, food, water charges (if you're paying them) etc?

Under €200 a week won't get you far if you are. You said 'budget for spending'. What does that mean? is it your total income or not?

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

My well and waste water system costs multiples of the water charges to maintain properly every year.

Whose water charges? some bills I've seen have been very high. And as I've said, set to get much higher.

Greentopia wrote: »

Good for you. What are your circumstances? living with Mum and Dad or living alone paying rent or mortgage? paying the full cost of living on your own or with a partner like property tax, household charge, bin charges, fuel, electricity, telephone, food, water charges (if you're paying them) etc?

Under €200 a week won't get you far if you are. You said 'budget for spending'. What does that mean? is it your total income or not?

I'm renting alone. Budget for spending means exactly what it says on the tin...it's my spending budget. As I mentioned in my previous post im saving.

Greentopia wrote: »

Whose water charges? some bills I've seen have been very high. And as I've said, set to get much higher.

As we're talking about pensioners then let's take a two person household. They are not paying water charges in excess of 500 per year. Indeed not many household of any size are.

Are we now at the stage of argument for argument's sake?

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

Oh come on! I have siblings and friends living on the state pension and they are not destitute. It wouldn't fit my lifestyle but they can manage to cut their clothe to what's available to them.

Good, but that doesn't invalidate the stats that say 1 in 5 are suffering some form of deprivation.

And there are many old people who may have enough for basics but through necessity of cutting back on many things including any pleasures in life like a night out and are just scraping by. They're still living in poverty.