PDA

View Full Version : Retirement poverty trap faces middle-aged



milanbenes
12th October 2005, 06:12
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1821863,00.html

AT LEAST one in ten 50-year-olds today can expect to live in poverty after retirement, says a study by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.


Ok then, straw pole, who's it gonna be from our congregation ?

Who's not been making preparation ?

Milan.

hyperD
12th October 2005, 06:41
Mornin' benes!

I don't think it's just 50 years olds - bring the age bar down and the same applies.

milanbenes
12th October 2005, 06:46
Morning Hyper,

I think you're right !

maybe bringing the age bar down will increase the
percentage in the net from 1 in 10 to...

come on then own up, who's saving and who's spending ?

Milan.

threaded
12th October 2005, 07:01
I keep trying to retire, but clients keep offering me too much money to come and do 'just another little job' for them. It's a weakness I admit too. :spank:

Fleetwood
12th October 2005, 07:34
to

voron
12th October 2005, 08:03
The standard of grammar & punctuation has fallen steadily on this new board.
Threaded's spelling and grammar has been awful recently. Either:

1) He is going through some mid life crisis and is desperately trying to impress his students by being all 'street'.

2) He has been kidnapped by aliens and an imposter called Clifford is posting under his name.

3) He has been telling porkies all this time. He is really called Trevor, went to Hackney Comp and works as a window cleaner.

mcquiggd
12th October 2005, 08:11
Not sure if well all live past 50... visions of Logans Run and Soylent Green spring to mind as Nu Labours Fourth Reich struggles to meet NHS targets and reduced farming subsidies.

G8_Summit
12th October 2005, 08:37
we'll

hyperD
12th October 2005, 08:38
Have to admit with minimum pension and savings and working harder and harder to earn more, seeing things like council tax, stealth taxes increasing at a higher rate, interest rates hovering above 3%, I just see the wealth being pinched.

My only financial regret is not making more of moving up the SE housing market from 1992 and buying a place in London, but then I might not have taken other risks.

ratewhore
12th October 2005, 08:55
The definition of poverty has changed from 'real' poverty where you can't put food on the table. You probably wouldn't even notice if you fall into the govt approved version of poverty...

:cool2:

hyperD
12th October 2005, 09:14
I heard the government's official criteria for poverty was not having Sky, only one mobile phone and not being able to buy more than 20 B&H/day.

ratewhore
12th October 2005, 09:23
you're not far off HyperD. I remember on the news the official definition was something like not having something that the majority of the population had (i.e 51%+). The reason it made the news was because the ownership of tumble dryers had risen above that mark so therefore if you didn't have a tumble dryer you were living in NL poverty...

:cool2:

AlfredJPruffock
12th October 2005, 09:39
Hope I die before I grow Old ... oh for the music of a distant drum, wave the rest and take the cash in hand and run !

My advice is that if you have any cash saved, then spend at least 80 per cent of it by this weekend.

You see after a lifetime of office drudgery and stress, by the time you hit 65 you will have false teeth, a dicky heart and terrible indigestion.

The majority of people who retire die within two years of retirement.

Live for today for tomorrow we die.

AlfredJPruffock
12th October 2005, 09:49
"Here today, gone tomorrah" DSOM.

I used that line in a song I cowrote with an old ami a few years back.

I inverted it to read "Gone Today , Here Tomorrow" I thought it was kind of Pink Floydish at the time ... sorry better run along ...me rice puddings getting burnt !

DimPrawn
12th October 2005, 10:00
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1821863,00.html

AT LEAST one in ten 50-year-olds today can expect to live in poverty after retirement, says a study by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Now since the government defines poverty in this country as being in the bottom 10% of the average income then there will ALWAYS be one in ten people living in so called fecking poverty. Idiot fecking socialist clap-trap meant to support the next range of tax rises to help the "poor" by taxing the "rich" (ie. those above average wealth).

:tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum:

mcquiggd
12th October 2005, 10:09
Why did we let the poor in anyway? Send em back where they came from.


Sorry, reverted to Tory Boy for a second. Will reboot.

wendigo100
12th October 2005, 10:44
Now since the government defines poverty in this country as being in the bottom 10% of the average income then there will ALWAYS be one in ten people living in so called fecking poverty. Idiot fecking socialist clap-trap meant to support the next range of tax rises to help the "poor" by taxing the "rich" (ie. those above average wealth).
I believe the official version of poverty is those earning below 60% of the country's median income. I don't know how much that is, but the median income must be lower than the average. So you could eliminate poverty simply by flattening the range of incomes below the median.

Poverty is not the term I'd use though. Poor yes, and it can be heartbreaking to hear of parents trying to buy clothes and food for kids (not all poor parents are wasting money on 20 fags a day).

But poverty is living in a muddy hole, with newspaper for a roof, and an empty baked bean can for a toilet. Isn't it?

mcquiggd
12th October 2005, 11:04
Not in Glasgow - thats urban regeneration.

AlfredJPruffock
12th October 2005, 11:18
But poverty is living in a muddy hole, with newspaper for a roof, and an empty baked bean can for a toilet. Isn't it?

Luxury !

We used to dream of living in a muddy hole ....