You Think Thailand Is Bad? Try The Uk Pensions Lot!

[inthepink]

Not sure what you're saying. Can people putting money into a pension fund dictate where their money is invested? I wouldn't have thought so. One reason that I wouldn't use a private fund.

Look at Iceland; their supposed knowledgeable investors lost it all on gambling on the US market, and we know what a scam that was now. If the "experts" can get suckered, what chance does the average person have?

Of course they can.

When you join a private pension fund you get a wide range of choices of investment to place it in - some will be aggressive based around overseas shares, emerging markets etc, and others will be defensive and geared towards bonds, cash etc. Some might be local, some might be international. As you go through life and get closer to retirement age, your risk profile will fall so you should shift to defensive funds.

It's not about being suckered or being an average person having no chance. EVERYONE should educate themselves about basic investment. Your pension fund is the most important financial decision you make.

I am absolutely incredulous that people don't seem to have a clue about even the most basic financial information here.

If it is possible for the so called financial "experts" to get suckered, how can those of us that have no financial education going to know. How many clever people did Bernie fool?

As for myself, I don't trust any financial foolery- it's all gambling with crooks ( bankers/ financiers ) holding the winning cards. Up to me, 99% of Wall St financiers would be in jail.

I just put my money in the bank- it's guaranteed by the government, and I get some interest.

However, if everyone was like me, there'd be no derivatives market with the inevitable financial meltdown. Better world all round.

Of course there would be a derivatives market - what do you think your bank does with the money you leave in your account?

I suppose you would outlaw stock market, bond market, commodities futures and foreign exchange speculation as well if you could?

Edited February 22, 2012 by inthepink

[bendix]

If it is possible for the so called financial "experts" to get suckered, how can those of us that have no financial education going to know. How many clever people did Bernie fool?

As for myself, I don't trust any financial foolery- it's all gambling with crooks ( bankers/ financiers ) holding the winning cards. Up to me, 99% of Wall St financiers would be in jail.

I just put my money in the bank- it's guaranteed by the government, and I get some interest.

However, if everyone was like me, there'd be no derivatives market with the inevitable financial meltdown. Better world all round.

Good for you. Just put your money in the bank - great strategy, except for one small point. Just putting your money in the bank is the ONLY guaranteed way to lose your money because history shows that bank interest rates are always lower than the prevailing rate of inflation. So, by being safe and sure, you're actually being 100% certain that you are losing your money, slowly and surely, without even realising it.

So, congratulations. You've made a wise financial decision.

You're quite right. If everyone was like you it would be a better world or, at least, much more simple.

I'll get my coat . . . . .

Edited February 22, 2012 by bendix

[thaibeachlovers]

Not sure what you're saying. Can people putting money into a pension fund dictate where their money is invested? I wouldn't have thought so. One reason that I wouldn't use a private fund.

Look at Iceland; their supposed knowledgeable investors lost it all on gambling on the US market, and we know what a scam that was now. If the "experts" can get suckered, what chance does the average person have?

Of course they can.

When you join a private pension fund you get a wide range of choices of investment to place it in - some will be aggressive based around overseas shares, emerging markets etc, and others will be defensive and geared towards bonds, cash etc. Some might be local, some might be international. As you go through life and get closer to retirement age, your risk profile will fall so you should shift to defensive funds.

It's not about being suckered or being an average person having no chance. EVERYONE should educate themselves about basic investment. Your pension fund is the most important financial decision you make.

I am absolutely incredulous that people don't seem to have a clue about even the most basic financial information here.

If it is possible for the so called financial "experts" to get suckered, how can those of us that have no financial education going to know. How many clever people did Bernie fool?

As for myself, I don't trust any financial foolery- it's all gambling with crooks ( bankers/ financiers ) holding the winning cards. Up to me, 99% of Wall St financiers would be in jail.

I just put my money in the bank- it's guaranteed by the government, and I get some interest.

However, if everyone was like me, there'd be no derivatives market with the inevitable financial meltdown. Better world all round.

Of course there would be a derivatives market - what do you think your bank does with the money you leave in your account?

I suppose you would outlaw stock market, bond market, commodities futures and foreign exchange speculation as well if you could?

I thought that regulations had been reintroduced to seperate "customer" money from speculator money. It was only after Clinton agreed to deregulate the banks that the rot set in.

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

[inthepink]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

Unfortunately, if the financier sum had to get different jobs, companies would not be able to raise money on the stock exchange to fund expansion plans. There would be no market for corporate paper so they would not be able to borrow money as easily as in the past, which would also adversely affect the economy. Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.

You may want to look at how much of the yearly tax bill is paid for by the city of London before you do though - it might be missed (if you are from the UK. If not I dare say you wouldn't give a toss).

[ludditeman]

I am absolutely incredulous that people don't seem to have a clue about even the most basic financial information here.

Some of us have final salary pensions.

[bendix]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

I love this kind of post. It's full of self-righteous anger, directed against a vaguely understood evil force in their minds.

If you dissect it, it's all hot air.

Ask the poster what ''all that'" is that he wants to outlaw, and he won't have a clue what he really means. Ask him what a banker is, and he'll waffle vaguely about fatcats and some such nonsense, without really getting to the point. Ask him to talk coherently about the evils of finance are, and he won't be able to say a word but . . . oh lordy . . never mind, he's still 'firmly in the Occupy Wall Street group' without really knowing why or what is is, precisely, they're protesting against.

[bendix]

I am absolutely incredulous that people don't seem to have a clue about even the most basic financial information here.

Some of us have final salary pensions.

Congratulations. You're one of the lucky ones.

[ludditeman]

Ask the poster what ''all that'" is that he wants to outlaw, and he won't have a clue what he really means. Ask him what a banker is, and he'll waffle vaguely about fatcats and some such nonsense,

Give me a semi-automatic rifle, plenty of ammunition, and I'll give it a go.

[thaibeachlovers]

If it is possible for the so called financial "experts" to get suckered, how can those of us that have no financial education going to know. How many clever people did Bernie fool?

As for myself, I don't trust any financial foolery- it's all gambling with crooks ( bankers/ financiers ) holding the winning cards. Up to me, 99% of Wall St financiers would be in jail.

I just put my money in the bank- it's guaranteed by the government, and I get some interest.

However, if everyone was like me, there'd be no derivatives market with the inevitable financial meltdown. Better world all round.

Good for you. Just put your money in the bank - great strategy, except for one small point. Just putting your money in the bank is the ONLY guaranteed way to lose your money because history shows that bank interest rates are always lower than the prevailing rate of inflation. So, by being safe and sure, you're actually being 100% certain that you are losing your money, slowly and surely, without even realising it.

So, congratulations. You've made a wise financial decision.

You're quite right. If everyone was like you it would be a better world or, at least, must more simple.

I'll get my coat . . . . .

Hmmmm. Actually, I do know that I "lose" money by earning less interest than the rate of inflation. However, I put money in saver accounts- I think I get about 4 or 5%, and use credit unions etc rather than the big banks that are just out to scam us. I haven't had a cheque account for years because they charge a fee on a standard account. I used to have one when the interest earned exceeded the fee, but when they increased the fee so I was losing money, I cancelled it.

I also don't EVER pay interest to banks, as I haven't been in debt/ overdraft/ whatever, for over 20 years.

Anyway, I'd rather lose a little bit through inflation, than a lot through speculation/ gambling.

What does worry me, is that all the so called Quantative Easing BS that the US and the UK is indulging in is going to bring about hyperinflation- think Weimar Republic or Zimabwe, and I'll get wiped out. So will everyone else, but it's hardly going to be a comfort starving together in our paper bags in holes in the road.

[GuestHouse]

I doubt that many of us realised that the baht would fall from 70 to 47/48(?) per pound.

But obviously our IQ is deficient.

I'm quite certain that at the time of the collapse of the THB (when it slipped from the long standing THB34/38 per £ the advice here on TV was "enjoy it while it lasts - buy property while it is cheap but do not plan a retirement on the cheap x-rate"

I know for sure the comcensus was make long term plans on the old THB 34/38 rate, plan at a lower rate to be sure.

THB 70/£ was never going to last and I don't recall any serious argument on TV (or elsewhere) that it would.

[inthepink]

If it is possible for the so called financial "experts" to get suckered, how can those of us that have no financial education going to know. How many clever people did Bernie fool?

As for myself, I don't trust any financial foolery- it's all gambling with crooks ( bankers/ financiers ) holding the winning cards. Up to me, 99% of Wall St financiers would be in jail.

I just put my money in the bank- it's guaranteed by the government, and I get some interest.

However, if everyone was like me, there'd be no derivatives market with the inevitable financial meltdown. Better world all round.

Good for you. Just put your money in the bank - great strategy, except for one small point. Just putting your money in the bank is the ONLY guaranteed way to lose your money because history shows that bank interest rates are always lower than the prevailing rate of inflation. So, by being safe and sure, you're actually being 100% certain that you are losing your money, slowly and surely, without even realising it.

So, congratulations. You've made a wise financial decision.

You're quite right. If everyone was like you it would be a better world or, at least, must more simple.

I'll get my coat . . . . .

Hmmmm. Actually, I do know that I "lose" money by earning less interest than the rate of inflation. However, I put money in saver accounts- I think I get about 4 or 5%, and use credit unions etc rather than the big banks that are just out to scam us. I haven't had a cheque account for years because they charge a fee on a standard account. I used to have one when the interest earned exceeded the fee, but when they increased the fee so I was losing money, I cancelled it.

I also don't EVER pay interest to banks, as I haven't been in debt/ overdraft/ whatever, for over 20 years.

Anyway, I'd rather lose a little bit through inflation, than a lot through speculation/ gambling.

What does worry me, is that all the so called Quantative Easing BS that the US and the UK is indulging in is going to bring about hyperinflation- think Weimar Republic or Zimabwe, and I'll get wiped out. So will everyone else, but it's hardly going to be a comfort starving together in our paper bags in holes in the road.

The Weimar Republic? I think you'll find that had more to do with borrowing to fund the war and the reparations that they were subsequently trying to pay.

The increase in the amount of money that was in circulation is not comparable to QE.

Edited February 22, 2012 by inthepink

[thaibeachlovers]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

I love this kind of post. It's full of self-righteous anger, directed against a vaguely understood evil force in their minds.

If you dissect it, it's all hot air.

Ask the poster what ''all that'" is that he wants to outlaw, and he won't have a clue what he really means. Ask him what a banker is, and he'll waffle vaguely about fatcats and some such nonsense, without really getting to the point. Ask him to talk coherently about the evils of finance are, and he won't be able to say a word but . . . oh lordy . . never mind, he's still 'firmly in the Occupy Wall Street group' without really knowing why or what is is, precisely, they're protesting against.

Oh dear. Bit judgemental are we!!! All the information is out there. Not a <vaguely understood evil force> at all. All the crooks are known, but as the polies are bought and paid for by them.......................

Goldman Sachs financiers were betting against the housing market at the same time as selling "junk" housing instruments and reassuring customers that it was a "safe" investment. In fact, they insured themselves to such an extent against the housing market with AIG that it brought that institution down. Could start with them.

Fannie execs are rewarding themselves for doing a terrible job, with taxpayer's money. Could arrest them for fraud.

Greenspan stated in a documentary that he KNEW before the crash that it was inevitable, but his "masters" refused to allow him to do anything to stop it- could find out who they were and put them in the dock ( along with him ).

GM were bailed out with taxpayer money, only to go on building gas guzzling rubbish ( how's the SUV looking with gas soon to be at $5 a gallon? ).

The US oil price is rising because of speculation, not lack of supply. Is Obama sweating yet?

Edited February 22, 2012 by thaibeachlovers

[GuestHouse]

But there's worse to come.

I've always argued that exchange rate fluctuations are a side show, and can in anycase be mittigated.

It is inflation that is the retirement dream killer and given the very high inflation rates that apply to expat expendature (higher than Thai inflation rates and way higher than the rate applied by the UK to pension indexing) then it this that will kill the dream.

Even if pension indexing is given to UL pensioners in Thailand it will only postpone the inevitable point where retirement in Thailand on a UK pension is nolonger doable.

That's not good news for an old guy who has already retired, but it ought to be a real warning for younger guys who have a dream of spending their life here but have not made a well thought out financial plan.

[thaibeachlovers]

Ask the poster what ''all that'" is that he wants to outlaw, and he won't have a clue what he really means. Ask him what a banker is, and he'll waffle vaguely about fatcats and some such nonsense,

Give me a semi-automatic rifle, plenty of ammunition, and I'll give it a go.

I like your style ( as Richard said to Daffy )!

[thaibeachlovers]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

Unfortunately, if the financier sum had to get different jobs, companies would not be able to raise money on the stock exchange to fund expansion plans. There would be no market for corporate paper so they would not be able to borrow money as easily as in the past, which would also adversely affect the economy. Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.

You may want to look at how much of the yearly tax bill is paid for by the city of London before you do though - it might be missed (if you are from the UK. If not I dare say you wouldn't give a toss).

Hmmmmm. I remember a different world where people actually had real jobs in their own countries because it wasn't considered the "right thing" to make people unemployed, so companies like Nike and Apple could ship the jobs to third world countries and exploit the workers there. For what- so the stockholders and company execs could make astronomical amounts of money, and dump the social problems caused by local unemployment onto the taxpayers.

Is Detroit worth making larger profits for?

Back then, none of the present financial scullduggery went on, and we all had jobs, money and decent lives.

If it was necessary, how did the City of London survive before the banks were deregulated. How did we all live without the IT bubble, the housing bubble and whatever bubble they are thinking up next?

I remember well how a work colleague in the '80s was always crowing about the huge amount of money she was making on the stock market. I laughed like a drain when she lost it all in the crash of '87. I also vowed NEVER to put money in that scam.

<Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.>

As nothing has changed in the corporate world, it's going to happen anyway, whatever you or I want. Greece is the future, happening now. Do those fools in Brussels think that the masses will live in the street and starve quietly just so the IMF can get paid back? It ain't over yet.

[thaibeachlovers]

But there's worse to come.

I've always argued that exchange rate fluctuations are a side show, and can in anycase be mittigated.

It is inflation that is the retirement dream killer and given the very high inflation rates that apply to expat expendature (higher than Thai inflation rates and way higher than the rate applied by the UK to pension indexing) then it this that will kill the dream.

Even if pension indexing is given to UL pensioners in Thailand it will only postpone the inevitable point where retirement in Thailand on a UK pension is nolonger doable.

That's not good news for an old guy who has already retired, but it ought to be a real warning for younger guys who have a dream of spending their life here but have not made a well thought out financial plan.

Well put.

I am hoping for a rise in the pound, but it doesn't look like happening.

My plan B has always been to return to land of origin and start claiming some of my tax back. They'll be sorry that they didn't enable me to stay here, as once I start occupying a hospital/ rest home bed full time, as it's going to cost them WAY over what it would cost to give me a liveable pension in LOS.

Edited February 22, 2012 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

I am absolutely incredulous that people don't seem to have a clue about even the most basic financial information here.

Some of us have final salary pensions.

As do I ( for the little that it's worth ). However, that didn't stop them reducing it without ever giving me a reason. Nothing is guaranteed anymore.

[StreetCowboy]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

Unfortunately, if the financier sum had to get different jobs, companies would not be able to raise money on the stock exchange to fund expansion plans. There would be no market for corporate paper so they would not be able to borrow money as easily as in the past, which would also adversely affect the economy. Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.

You may want to look at how much of the yearly tax bill is paid for by the city of London before you do though - it might be missed (if you are from the UK. If not I dare say you wouldn't give a toss).

Hmmmmm. I remember a different world where people actually had real jobs in their own countries because it wasn't considered the "right thing" to make people unemployed, so companies like Nike and Apple could ship the jobs to third world countries and exploit the workers there. For what- so the stockholders and company execs could make astronomical amounts of money, and dump the social problems caused by local unemployment onto the taxpayers.

Is Detroit worth making larger profits for?

Back then, none of the present financial scullduggery went on, and we all had jobs, money and decent lives.

If it was necessary, how did the City of London survive before the banks were deregulated. How did we all live without the IT bubble, the housing bubble and whatever bubble they are thinking up next?

I remember well how a work colleague in the '80s was always crowing about the huge amount of money she was making on the stock market. I laughed like a drain when she lost it all in the crash of '87. I also vowed NEVER to put money in that scam.

<Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.>

As nothing has changed in the corporate world, it's going to happen anyway, whatever you or I want. Greece is the future, happening now. Do those fools in Brussels think that the masses will live in the street and starve quietly just so the IMF can get paid back? It ain't over yet.

I suppose we have to accept that the four horsemen of ignorance, laziness, envy and entitlement are going to ravage our home economies, but I am surprised at the number of people on this forum gloating about it. I suppose they are the outriders for the horsemen,,,

SC

[inthepink]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

Unfortunately, if the financier sum had to get different jobs, companies would not be able to raise money on the stock exchange to fund expansion plans. There would be no market for corporate paper so they would not be able to borrow money as easily as in the past, which would also adversely affect the economy. Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.

You may want to look at how much of the yearly tax bill is paid for by the city of London before you do though - it might be missed (if you are from the UK. If not I dare say you wouldn't give a toss).

Hmmmmm. I remember a different world where people actually had real jobs in their own countries because it wasn't considered the "right thing" to make people unemployed, so companies like Nike and Apple could ship the jobs to third world countries and exploit the workers there. For what- so the stockholders and company execs could make astronomical amounts of money, and dump the social problems caused by local unemployment onto the taxpayers.

Is Detroit worth making larger profits for?

Back then, none of the present financial scullduggery went on, and we all had jobs, money and decent lives.

If it was necessary, how did the City of London survive before the banks were deregulated. How did we all live without the IT bubble, the housing bubble and whatever bubble they are thinking up next?

I remember well how a work colleague in the '80s was always crowing about the huge amount of money she was making on the stock market. I laughed like a drain when she lost it all in the crash of '87. I also vowed NEVER to put money in that scam.

<Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.>

As nothing has changed in the corporate world, it's going to happen anyway, whatever you or I want. Greece is the future, happening now. Do those fools in Brussels think that the masses will live in the street and starve quietly just so the IMF can get paid back? It ain't over yet.

Welcome to the global economy - get competitive or starve. How old are you by the way - 90? Edited February 22, 2012 by inthepink

[true blue]

im not sure which planet you live on,but people take there pension when they need it,ie when the reach retirement age,and if your managed or equity fund you have your funds in take a dive,and your units,depreaciate dramatically,you have to bite the bullet,you could propaly,look at a open market option,and hope??to get a better return on your fund,or as you advocate,starve to death and wait till the market has a upturn. which to my knowledge is still in a slump,since the very late 90s

Yes, markets can dive when you are nearing retirement. That is unfortunate.

That is why it is important to be actively interested in your pension fund and monitor it. A smart person - if you know what one of those is - will look at how long they have to retirement and adjust their asset strategy accordingly.

It is prudent to be heavily invested in shares and risky assets while you still have 10-20 years to retire, because you can risk the bad years and take advantage of the good years. As you get closer to retirement (say 5-10 years) you should adjust your portfolio to include a bigger propotion of safer assets like bonds or defensive shares. And within 5 years of retirement you should move out of shares and into cash investments, bonds, gilts, treasuries etc.

It's really not that hard, if you take an interest.

And there's the rub. People can't be bothered to take an interest, and instead blame the pension provider instead of t hemselves.

i agree to extent switching at times,can help you organise your pension arrangements,but unfortunally most contributors,dont have the time or inclanation to does this ,but i see you keep a tight rein on your finances,but as i said not every one is the same.

[thaibeachlovers]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

Unfortunately, if the financier sum had to get different jobs, companies would not be able to raise money on the stock exchange to fund expansion plans. There would be no market for corporate paper so they would not be able to borrow money as easily as in the past, which would also adversely affect the economy. Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.

You may want to look at how much of the yearly tax bill is paid for by the city of London before you do though - it might be missed (if you are from the UK. If not I dare say you wouldn't give a toss).

Hmmmmm. I remember a different world where people actually had real jobs in their own countries because it wasn't considered the "right thing" to make people unemployed, so companies like Nike and Apple could ship the jobs to third world countries and exploit the workers there. For what- so the stockholders and company execs could make astronomical amounts of money, and dump the social problems caused by local unemployment onto the taxpayers.

Is Detroit worth making larger profits for?

Back then, none of the present financial scullduggery went on, and we all had jobs, money and decent lives.

If it was necessary, how did the City of London survive before the banks were deregulated. How did we all live without the IT bubble, the housing bubble and whatever bubble they are thinking up next?

I remember well how a work colleague in the '80s was always crowing about the huge amount of money she was making on the stock market. I laughed like a drain when she lost it all in the crash of '87. I also vowed NEVER to put money in that scam.

<Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.>

As nothing has changed in the corporate world, it's going to happen anyway, whatever you or I want. Greece is the future, happening now. Do those fools in Brussels think that the masses will live in the street and starve quietly just so the IMF can get paid back? It ain't over yet.

I suppose we have to accept that the four horsemen of ignorance, laziness, envy and entitlement are going to ravage our home economies, but I am surprised at the number of people on this forum gloating about it. I suppose they are the outriders for the horsemen,,,

SC

Surprised- Why, for goodness sake?

I don't know about everyone reading this, but I was raised to believe that there was no free breakfast, lunch and dinner at someone else's expense.

I had BA ( that's not a uni degree, LOL ) when I started out, and I worked hard, did follow up education, scrimped at underpaid jobs to survive. I had to start from scratch at 35 when I lost everything to the b***h from hell, and worked hard for the next 28 years at a new public service career to end up with not a lot.

So, why should I feel sympathy for any of the spivs that have grown up in the era of "entitlement", thinking that the world owes them a living when it is all crashing down, and they're going to find themselves without a pot to p**s in.

I paid my dues to be able to have a comfortable retirement on a promised State pension. The compact was that I would do a public service job for a low wage, but when I needed it, the State would look after me. Now, because of all the greedies, that's probably not going to happen, so if the lazy and the bludgers come a cropper along with me, yes, I'll be gloating about it.

That may be the only satisfaction any of us hard working builders of society get amidst the devastation.

[ludditeman]

I had BA ( that's not a uni degree, LOL ) when I started out, and I worked hard, did follow up education, scrimped at underpaid jobs to survive. I had to start from scratch at 35 when I lost everything to the b***h from hell, and worked hard for the next 28 years at a new public service career to end up with not a lot.

Quite a lot of us experienced a similar 'female' in our 50s, it was just your good luck yours bailed when you were 35, now imagine making a comeback if you were 55. Good luck building a new life in 8 years. WHen it comes down to it, a man's retirement situation is often just down to luck. Most people have to rely on the state pension when their luck failed.

Edited February 22, 2012 by ludditeman

[transam]

I had BA ( that's not a uni degree, LOL ) when I started out, and I worked hard, did follow up education, scrimped at underpaid jobs to survive. I had to start from scratch at 35 when I lost everything to the b***h from hell, and worked hard for the next 28 years at a new public service career to end up with not a lot.

Quite a lot of us experienced a similar 'female' in our 50s, it was just your good luck yours bailed when you were 35, now imagine making a comeback if you were 55. Good luck building a new life in 8 years. WHen it comes down to it, a man's retirement situation is often just down to luck. Most people have to rely on the state pension when their luck failed.

Amen.

[true blue]

Bendix, first let me congratulate you on paying off your first mortgage at such a young age, no doubt this probably set you on the road to financial stability and the chance to have spare cash to top up your pension.

However you state earlier about any young man earning 20.000 per year should be able to save enough to have a decent private pension, problem is not many people can earn that amount in the Uk these days at that age and as for getting on the housing ladder, well am pretty sure its not as easy as it probably was for you back in 80's

You benefited greatly from a booming housing market and invested wisely, so hats off to you, am in a similar position myself, but to say its as simple as just putting a small amount away each month in a PP is off the mark. The charges you enjoy for one are not like that now.

Sure there are plenty of people in the UK that think the world owes them a living , but it's a minority and some of your comments are insulting to the majority of hard working people struggling to make ends meet right now.

Two points, mate.

Firstly the 0.5% management fee I pay on my pension plan is still the same. It is low because it is a passive scheme - i don't change much with it. Even the more actively managed schemes provided by my pension company - Winterthurlife - have fees of only 1.5%, hardly a lot of money to pay.

Secondly, I stand by my 5% figure. People do not stay at the same salary for ever. It grows. If you go to any pensions calculator (there are hundreds on the internet) you will see the effects of saving 5% of your salary (which increased over the 45 years of working life, remember) invested and getting an average 7% return per annum has on the final pension pot figure.

Investing for a pension is about doing a little over a long time frame. Time is your friend.

no pension company in uk will give you 7% return,in fact i doubt any in the world would,and compounded to boot,baa,

Seriously, you don't have a clue, do you?

It is not about pension companies 'giving' you 7%. The pension fund doesn't GIVE you a return. The assets you invest in provide the return.

Let me try to make this simple for you. When you hand your monthly pension contribution to a pension fund, they will invest in one or more managed funds based on whatever assets you choose - they could be shares, bonds, property, cash . . whatever. Even gold, if you like.

If the markets go up, your pension pot increases. If it goes down, they decrease.

It is universally accepted - and historically proven to be accurate - that over a long period, sharemarket funds return around 7% per annum as a minimum. Some years they will fall 20%. Others they will rise 40%. In just the first six weeks of 2012, sharemarkets around the world have risen nearly 13%. My personal pension fund has risen in value by 15% this year already, but of course it fell in the second half of last year. It is nothing to do with the pension company and EVERYTHING to do with the assets I - ME - chose to invest in.

Long term investments in bonds can generate 5-6%. Property around 7% etc etc.

Christ alive - it's like dealing with children.

god your so misguided,your contributions,in to a personal pension fund buys units,which at the end of the day are the guiding light to how much your designated fund is worth,more units(contributions) and a good fund performance,quids in.but of course as with all investments,past performances are not a guarentee for future growth.

[thaibeachlovers]

Yes, I would outlaw all that. It's how the "haves" rip off the "have nots". You may have guessed by now, but I'm on the Occupy Wall St side, against the bankers ( the crooks ). I reckon the guy on Wall St with the sign saying "JUMP" had it right!

Time for the financier scum to get a real job.

Unfortunately, if the financier sum had to get different jobs, companies would not be able to raise money on the stock exchange to fund expansion plans. There would be no market for corporate paper so they would not be able to borrow money as easily as in the past, which would also adversely affect the economy. Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.

You may want to look at how much of the yearly tax bill is paid for by the city of London before you do though - it might be missed (if you are from the UK. If not I dare say you wouldn't give a toss).

Hmmmmm. I remember a different world where people actually had real jobs in their own countries because it wasn't considered the "right thing" to make people unemployed, so companies like Nike and Apple could ship the jobs to third world countries and exploit the workers there. For what- so the stockholders and company execs could make astronomical amounts of money, and dump the social problems caused by local unemployment onto the taxpayers.

Is Detroit worth making larger profits for?

Back then, none of the present financial scullduggery went on, and we all had jobs, money and decent lives.

If it was necessary, how did the City of London survive before the banks were deregulated. How did we all live without the IT bubble, the housing bubble and whatever bubble they are thinking up next?

I remember well how a work colleague in the '80s was always crowing about the huge amount of money she was making on the stock market. I laughed like a drain when she lost it all in the crash of '87. I also vowed NEVER to put money in that scam.

<Still if you would be happy to decimate the economy and cause huge problems for everybody, you go for it.>

As nothing has changed in the corporate world, it's going to happen anyway, whatever you or I want. Greece is the future, happening now. Do those fools in Brussels think that the masses will live in the street and starve quietly just so the IMF can get paid back? It ain't over yet.

Welcome to the global economy - get competitive or starve. How old are you by the way - 90?

Ah, the good old law of the jungle. However, if the have's squeeze too hard, they're going to start a revolution, and how many stockbrokers know how to use military weapons to protect themselves!

No, I'm not 90- if I was I wouldn't be worried, as I'd be dead soon.

I've got potentially years and years of life left, but as my body is pretty stuffed after a lifetime of physically hard work, having a reasonable standard of living is going to be anything but easy.

Did you know that a worker in the docks of London in the 50's had an average lifespan of 49? Hard work takes it's toll. So I don't know why you felt it appropriate to speculate on my age. More appropriate to ask if I was capable of working or not.

Anyway, how many 60 year + old people do you see in good, non management jobs?

Not all of us were able to buy houses when they were cheap and sell them at the height of the housing bubble, to be able to live in Thai baht millionaire splendour!

BTW <get competitive or starve> The reason so many Thai girls end up in Pattaya et al is because they don't want to starve. Is that what you want for the girls of whatever western country you hail from?

[ludditeman]

BTW <get competitive or starve> The reason so many Thai girls end up in Pattaya et al is because they don't want to starve. Is that what you want for the girls of whatever western country you hail from?

If I may correct this misconception. Prostitution in Thailand is not to do with potential starvation.

Thailand is a land of plenty, there is no shortage of food, if you are hungry you can call at any temple and be fed.

The girls in Pattaya are more to do with laziness and lifestyle enhancement. Many actually enjoy the sex, booze and drugs.

[thaibeachlovers]

I had BA ( that's not a uni degree, LOL ) when I started out, and I worked hard, did follow up education, scrimped at underpaid jobs to survive. I had to start from scratch at 35 when I lost everything to the b***h from hell, and worked hard for the next 28 years at a new public service career to end up with not a lot.

Quite a lot of us experienced a similar 'female' in our 50s, it was just your good luck yours bailed when you were 35, now imagine making a comeback if you were 55. Good luck building a new life in 8 years. WHen it comes down to it, a man's retirement situation is often just down to luck. Most people have to rely on the state pension when their luck failed.

So sad and so true.

Now that the housing bubble has passed, it's not even an option to sell the house and live off the 50% share like they used to do before 2007. I'd reckon most of the big farang houses in Issan etc were built with proceeds from the housing bubble, but that's not going to happen any more.

BTW I walked out on her, not her on me. Didn't manage to salvage anything much of value from the preceeding 17 years of hard graft though.

She got to laugh all the way to the bank, went on to have 2 more marriages and lives very comfortably on Queensland's Gold Coast.

Life IS a bitch!

[msg362]

Is it not time to call a halt?

I sat out this evening, watching the sunset over the lake. Maybe 100 egrets flew over, going to roost. Sipping a glass of cold white wine in temperatures I could only experience one day a year in Scotland, my wife came home, we ate Massaman curry that I had made and I was at peace with the world. Change it for the UK ? No way. For all the gripes about not inflation proofing my pension, being here, with all it's carbuncles, is a thousand times better than living in my country of birth. But moaning a little is good for the soul, a bit like meditation.

[thaibeachlovers]

BTW <get competitive or starve> The reason so many Thai girls end up in Pattaya et al is because they don't want to starve. Is that what you want for the girls of whatever western country you hail from?

If I may correct this misconception. Prostitution in Thailand is not to do with potential starvation.

Thailand is a land of plenty, there is no shortage of food, if you are hungry you can call at any temple and be fed.

The girls in Pattaya are more to do with laziness and lifestyle enhancement. Many actually enjoy the sex, booze and drugs.

Fair enough. I was probably OTT saying starve. However it's true that bringing up 2 children on a worker's wage of about 300 baht/ day is not easy.

Still appropriate to ask if anyone wants a similar situation in their western country!

BTW I've never never met one that "enjoyed" the lifestyle, though none of them seemed to despise it to the extent that popular anti Thai nightlife media would imply. Indeed, most seem to tolerate it much as one "tolerates" having to use the toilet every day, a necessary part of life, no more or less.

The only exception would be the good old Hollywood Royale ( for those that remember it in the mid 90's ). Now that was a "party place"!

[ludditeman]

Is it not time to call a halt?

I sat out this evening, watching the sunset over the lake. Maybe 100 egrets flew over, going to roost. Sipping a glass of cold white wine in temperatures I could only experience one day a year in Scotland, my wife came home, we ate Massaman curry that I had made and I was at peace with the world. Change it for the UK ? No way. For all the gripes about not inflation proofing my pension, being here, with all it's carbuncles, is a thousand times better than living in my country of birth. But moaning a little is good for the soul, a bit like meditation.

You're right, life here in my 50s is far better than any moment I lived before coming here.