Savings and Investments thread

robinofottershaw

bobmunro said:

Rob7Lee said:

Huskaris said:

On another note, interesting how concerned many of us seem to be about the tax rises (with good reason) but markets seem confident, FTSE at all time highs etc. 

US government shutdown potentially lifting surging the FTSE, pre leaking tax rises having minimal impact from what I can see. I'm guessing it's more a bond market thing?

Markets are very different to individuals. Markets would drop (UK) if there was fear of a large ish corp tax increase, but not income tax.

Ill see what this month brings, but can only see it hastening my retirement and ultimately the likelihood of leaving the UK as my permanent home.

I think we are now too old for that, but if we were around your age then we would likely do the same. 

This is a conversation my wife and I have had recently. Unlikely from an age and family perspective but not impossible.

Jints

golfaddick said:

robinofottershaw said:

Carter said:

She, and by she I really mean the current government have to finally be the ones who make 2 unpopular decisions. 1 around the triple lock on pensions, that is going to go pop one way or the other and Labour and Starmer can't get much more unpopular so do it now, pensioners don't vote for them anyway and the way they keep moving the goalposts with the state pension hardly anyone in their 30s and even 40s who is paying for that now won't get a state pension to speak of anyway. 

And the welfare state needs to be gripped. The rate at which that is going up it will take the country down one way or the other 

She could incentivise people to help grow the UK economy by bringing in a big UK-company only ISA or something along those lines but she won't 

In an ideal world the whole tax system will get simplified and a load of loopholes removed but that won't happen either. 

Or Legalise cannabis and let a new industry absolutely rocket and grow the economy and generate revenue to pay for care and mental health services but that won't happen either 

The other elephant in the room is public sector pensions. I believe that aside from certain local council pensions, this is unfunded and not reflected in Public Sector Net Debt, which is often the debt number quoted as a percentage of GDP.

No government will dare address this, but each year the country is accruing billions of pounds of additional pension liabilities (i.e. debt) with no funding ring-fenced to pay for it. The last number I saw for this was £1,400 billion which i don’t think is reflected in Rachel’s “black hole” calculations.

As we know, the majority of remaining private sector DB schemes are no longer open to new members, because many companies found it difficult to fund and given pension legislation requiring schemes to have sufficient and appropriate assets to cover their assessed (i.e. actuarial) liabilities.

Whilst the argument has always been that retaining public sector DB pensions is a key component to help balance overall compensation relative to the private sector, it’s just another example of where something needs to be done address our country’s finances. I don’t see any of our politicians, regardless of their party, being able to get to grips with all these issues.

Probably the biggest is the NHS Pension. I know a lot about this having dealt with GP's & Hospital Consultants for 25 years. 

If the scheme was changed to a DC scheme then billions would be saved. Will never happen but should imo. 

It would only ever be possible to change it for new employees and so the savings would only accrue in the future. A good example of the trouble with democracies/political parties - they won't make decisions that benefit the country in the long-term but cost significant political capital in the short term.  

cantersaddick

Jints said:

golfaddick said:

robinofottershaw said:

Carter said:

She, and by she I really mean the current government have to finally be the ones who make 2 unpopular decisions. 1 around the triple lock on pensions, that is going to go pop one way or the other and Labour and Starmer can't get much more unpopular so do it now, pensioners don't vote for them anyway and the way they keep moving the goalposts with the state pension hardly anyone in their 30s and even 40s who is paying for that now won't get a state pension to speak of anyway. 

And the welfare state needs to be gripped. The rate at which that is going up it will take the country down one way or the other 

She could incentivise people to help grow the UK economy by bringing in a big UK-company only ISA or something along those lines but she won't 

In an ideal world the whole tax system will get simplified and a load of loopholes removed but that won't happen either. 

Or Legalise cannabis and let a new industry absolutely rocket and grow the economy and generate revenue to pay for care and mental health services but that won't happen either 

The other elephant in the room is public sector pensions. I believe that aside from certain local council pensions, this is unfunded and not reflected in Public Sector Net Debt, which is often the debt number quoted as a percentage of GDP.

No government will dare address this, but each year the country is accruing billions of pounds of additional pension liabilities (i.e. debt) with no funding ring-fenced to pay for it. The last number I saw for this was £1,400 billion which i don’t think is reflected in Rachel’s “black hole” calculations.

As we know, the majority of remaining private sector DB schemes are no longer open to new members, because many companies found it difficult to fund and given pension legislation requiring schemes to have sufficient and appropriate assets to cover their assessed (i.e. actuarial) liabilities.

Whilst the argument has always been that retaining public sector DB pensions is a key component to help balance overall compensation relative to the private sector, it’s just another example of where something needs to be done address our country’s finances. I don’t see any of our politicians, regardless of their party, being able to get to grips with all these issues.

Probably the biggest is the NHS Pension. I know a lot about this having dealt with GP's & Hospital Consultants for 25 years. 

If the scheme was changed to a DC scheme then billions would be saved. Will never happen but should imo. 

It would only ever be possible to change it for new employees and so the savings would only accrue in the future. A good example of the trouble with democracies/political parties - they won't make decisions that benefit the country in the long-term but cost significant political capital in the short term.  

I don't agree on the specific issue being discussed but agree around the Short-termism of our form of government. There are so many examples in my area of focus (Health and prevention) where there are huge huge saving to be made in avoiding future health costs with early interventions for children and loads of places where this has worked but governments haven't gone for it as the benefits accrue over 50+ years of a child's life. Therefore storing up future costs for the NHS that are avoidable. 

For me the solution is a more proportional representation system (but maybe not pure PR) maybe something like the system the Welsh are currently implementing. This would mean more coalition governments as is common in European democracies which has the downside of it being slower to get things done but it forces more cross party working and more consensus to be found which leads to longer term thinking.

Rob7Lee

On pensions you could argue the same for the state pension. There is no pot this money comes from, other than the current years tax receipts.

golfaddick

ecclesaddick said:

Can anybody recomnend a reliable Bank to deposit Trust Fund monies with

There are very few around nowadays. If you find one then probably best just to use them as I doubt there will be many others to which to compare with. 

Out of curiosity, how much are you looking to deposit, who for & for how long. Ime most monies placed under a Trust are done via an investment.