Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Savings and Investments thread
Comments
-
My children's stocks and shares ISAs had their best ever day yesterday. I suspect by the end of Trump's term I'm going to look back on that with a bit of a wry smile though.2
-
Make hay while the sun shines. Who knows what the weather is going to do?2
-
Piss it down & all the paper gains will just turn to mush....😄IdleHans said:Make hay while the sun shines. Who knows what the weather is going to do?0 -
robinofottershaw said:
This morning when we woke up my wife and I were wondering how the markets would react to Trump's win. I checked at 6 pm and our combined portfolios had increased by £90K from this morning's value.golfaddick said:Looks like worldwide markets are now having a rethink re Trump.
FTSE ends lower.....but by just 5 points
Germany ends lower......but by 1.1%
France ends lower by 0.67%
Spain lower by almost 2.5%......but that is probably more due to the big rebuilding costs needed
But the US powers upwards.
Dow Jones up 3.25% & smashing through its all time high.
S&P500 up 2% and again at an all time high.
Not quite at 90k a day growth levels yet, but once again my SIPP reaches an all time high. Been a good couple of years for investors0 -
I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.1 -
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.2 -
valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.Lies, damned lies and statistics and all that - but assumptions can be false as well as true.Snippet:Trends in public sector pay
In April 2023, median weekly earnings for full-time employees in the public sector were 8% higher than those in the private sector. The gap had been narrowing prior to the pandemic, but increased again in 2020, partly because of greater use of furlough in the private sector. It has been narrowing since 2021.
6 -
I think a lot of that is a fallacy. Especially when it comes to teachers, nurses & doctors. Not sure where else they can work on a comparable job where they would get an annual bonus.valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.
And you forget the inflation linked pension. Every year they are getting guaranteed increases in retirement. Try building that into an annuity or a drawdown pension.3 -
I agree. I don't see it working properly. Certainly not with equity based. Maybe like a corporate bond, but even then would have to be guaranteed by the government to convince pension trustrees it's sensible. As a trustee for a pension scheme that's my take anyway.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Depends of course what part of the private sector you compare to and how you calculate averages- by band and then mean, median etc.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.Lies, damned lies and statistics and all that - but assumptions can be false as well as true.Snippet:Trends in public sector pay
In April 2023, median weekly earnings for full-time employees in the public sector were 8% higher than those in the private sector. The gap had been narrowing prior to the pandemic, but increased again in 2020, partly because of greater use of furlough in the private sector. It has been narrowing since 2021.
My broad point is that the majority of public sector workers likely don’t get ‘big’ bonuses and significant wage growth opportunity as you might get elsewhere especially the likes of teachers and health workers.Historically at least the public sector has offered / advertised the pension as a genuine element of the remuneration package.0 -
Not forgetting at all. It’s part of the overall package.golfaddick said:
I think a lot of that is a fallacy. Especially when it comes to teachers, nurses & doctors. Not sure where else they can work on a comparable job where they would get an annual bonus.valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.
And you forget the inflation linked pension. Every year they are getting guaranteed increases in retirement. Try building that into an annuity or a drawdown pension.But I take your point about finding direct or like for like comparisons.Surely there are a lot of relatively average paid civil servants who might do better in a private sector role in more generic roles - finance, HR, marketing etc?0 -
You mean not like the automatic pay scales that doctors & nurses are on. Pay scales that mean they get pay rises every couple of years due to just being in the job. This is above any CPI or pay award body increases. And no real fear of redundancy either.valleynick66 said:
Depends of course what part of the private sector you compare to and how you calculate averages- by band and then mean, median etc.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.Lies, damned lies and statistics and all that - but assumptions can be false as well as true.Snippet:Trends in public sector pay
In April 2023, median weekly earnings for full-time employees in the public sector were 8% higher than those in the private sector. The gap had been narrowing prior to the pandemic, but increased again in 2020, partly because of greater use of furlough in the private sector. It has been narrowing since 2021.
My broad point is that the majority of public sector workers likely don’t get ‘big’ bonuses and significant wage growth opportunity as you might get elsewhere especially the likes of teachers and health workers.
1 -
valleynick66 said:
Depends of course what part of the private sector you compare to and how you calculate averages- by band and then mean, median etc.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.Lies, damned lies and statistics and all that - but assumptions can be false as well as true.Snippet:Trends in public sector pay
In April 2023, median weekly earnings for full-time employees in the public sector were 8% higher than those in the private sector. The gap had been narrowing prior to the pandemic, but increased again in 2020, partly because of greater use of furlough in the private sector. It has been narrowing since 2021.
My broad point is that the majority of public sector workers likely don’t get ‘big’ bonuses and significant wage growth opportunity as you might get elsewhere especially the likes of teachers and health workers.Historically at least the public sector has offered / advertised the pension as a genuine element of the remuneration package.It would seem the figures are across all public sector versus all private sector and would presumably come from HMRC data. It also says very clearly 'median'.Of course there would be some roles where public sector pay lagged behind private and vice versa - that's the nature of averages.Also, the vast majority of private sector employees do not get 'big' bonuses - don't be swayed by the bonuses paid to FTSE 100 CEO's - there's only 100 of them!Yes - no surprise that DB pensions, index linked forever, are a pretty good recruitment tool.4 -
Depends how you define big.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
Depends of course what part of the private sector you compare to and how you calculate averages- by band and then mean, median etc.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.Lies, damned lies and statistics and all that - but assumptions can be false as well as true.Snippet:Trends in public sector pay
In April 2023, median weekly earnings for full-time employees in the public sector were 8% higher than those in the private sector. The gap had been narrowing prior to the pandemic, but increased again in 2020, partly because of greater use of furlough in the private sector. It has been narrowing since 2021.
My broad point is that the majority of public sector workers likely don’t get ‘big’ bonuses and significant wage growth opportunity as you might get elsewhere especially the likes of teachers and health workers.Historically at least the public sector has offered / advertised the pension as a genuine element of the remuneration package.It would seem the figures are across all public sector versus all private sector and would presumably come from HMRC data. It also says very clearly 'median'.Of course there would be some roles where public sector pay lagged behind private and vice versa - that's the nature of averages.Also, the vast majority of private sector employees do not get 'big' bonuses - don't be swayed by the bonuses paid to FTSE 100 CEO's - there's only 100 of them!Yes - no surprise that DB pensions, index linked forever, are a pretty good recruitment tool.Anything when you get nothing in public sector seems ‘big’.Within that report it does also say this:Skills/occupation: The public sector employs a higher proportion of upper-skilled employees than the private sector. Many of the lowest paid occupations (for example, elementary sales occupations, bar and restaurant staff, hairdressers) are largely found in the private sector. However, high earners in the private sector tend to be paid more than high earners in the public sector.
A case of lies , damn lies and statistics perhaps?
I think we agree that it’s probably fair not to generalise too much. But it may be unfair to imply all public sectors have an advantage in some way.
We make our own choices
For the record I was not a public sector employee so no axe to grind but very aware different employees pay differently and pension benefit is part of the overall remuneration package individuals need consider
2 -
The public v private thing is an interesting one but the more interesting one and will be more as tome goes by is PAYE vs Self employment. For years I'd listen to people in the pub take the piss about what my day rate was compared to them. I didnt give much of a shit as I knew I'd see my money at the end of the month, would not have to save up to cover lost wages when off work as well as pay for a holiday and didn't have to be looking over my shoulder for the tax man to finally strangle some honesty out of me. However, these guys were all demonstratably materially wealthier than me, working as PAYE in the private sector.
One of the trade offs people make choosing to work in the public sector is the promise of a better pension at the expense of not having a dynamic wage increase each year.
The more I think about pensions and CGT, inheritance tax, tax on investment properties the more I think genuinely the powers that be desire us not to have retirements. It should be a goal to have saved and invested prudently to be able to give up work early and enjoy life but at every turn the doors slam shut. Pensions are now basically endowment policies, and any type of aspirational investment success is taxed so much it is barely worth it1 -
I disagree.Carter said:The public v private thing is an interesting one but the more interesting one and will be more as tome goes by is PAYE vs Self employment. For years I'd listen to people in the pub take the piss about what my day rate was compared to them. I didnt give much of a shit as I knew I'd see my money at the end of the month, would not have to save up to cover lost wages when off work as well as pay for a holiday and didn't have to be looking over my shoulder for the tax man to finally strangle some honesty out of me. However, these guys were all demonstratably materially wealthier than me, working as PAYE in the private sector.
One of the trade offs people make choosing to work in the public sector is the promise of a better pension at the expense of not having a dynamic wage increase each year.
The more I think about pensions and CGT, inheritance tax, tax on investment properties the more I think genuinely the powers that be desire us not to have retirements. It should be a goal to have saved and invested prudently to be able to give up work early and enjoy life but at every turn the doors slam shut. Pensions are now basically endowment policies, and any type of aspirational investment success is taxed so much it is barely worth it
I noticed that from the list of your "investments" you missed out ISA's, the most tax efficient & flexible savings vehicle there is. Compared to investment property which is very illiquid, tax inefficient & not very flexible.1 -
Yeah but you also don't have to do much work so there's swings and roundabouts there too.valleynick66 said:
For which they have likely sacrificed relatively bigger private sector salaries and bonuses.golfaddick said:I'm not sure on this as I origjnally thought when I heard about it last night that they were talking about large public sector schemes.......but they are mostly unfunded - and the ones that are (and are DB schemes) have to keep a certain amount in fixed interest (Gilts) as they have guarantees to cover.
If they are actually talking about DC schemes then that opens up a whole new can of worms. Most are in default funds, which again are usually quite defensive in nature. Imagine finding out that the pension you've been paying into for 20 years has just changed its investment strategy and is now investing into HS2 or the new local prison/hospital/wind farm.
I dont think this will go down well & probably wont get off the ground.
But of course the millions of public sector workers in DB schemes like teachers, nurses & doctors will be just fine as they can retire on their fully funded inflation linked pension.
Swings and roundabouts is my point.4 -
Fair one, but if you are only earning 12k a year the ISA wouldn't be worth a lot would it ;-)golfaddick said:
I disagree.Carter said:The public v private thing is an interesting one but the more interesting one and will be more as tome goes by is PAYE vs Self employment. For years I'd listen to people in the pub take the piss about what my day rate was compared to them. I didnt give much of a shit as I knew I'd see my money at the end of the month, would not have to save up to cover lost wages when off work as well as pay for a holiday and didn't have to be looking over my shoulder for the tax man to finally strangle some honesty out of me. However, these guys were all demonstratably materially wealthier than me, working as PAYE in the private sector.
One of the trade offs people make choosing to work in the public sector is the promise of a better pension at the expense of not having a dynamic wage increase each year.
The more I think about pensions and CGT, inheritance tax, tax on investment properties the more I think genuinely the powers that be desire us not to have retirements. It should be a goal to have saved and invested prudently to be able to give up work early and enjoy life but at every turn the doors slam shut. Pensions are now basically endowment policies, and any type of aspirational investment success is taxed so much it is barely worth it
I noticed that from the list of your "investments" you missed out ISA's, the most tax efficient & flexible savings vehicle there is. Compared to investment property which is very illiquid, tax inefficient & not very flexible.0 -
This concerns me.bobmunro said:
i read this as they will combine all the council schemes, of which the vast majority are DB schemes (the article refers as such) and try to copy the investment style of ones like Canadas.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
You would like to think that before they consider doing any of these things that they will take advice from all manner of financial experts.
The implications of what they are proposing may well prove to be catastrophic.
If what's being proposed is such a good idea then why hasn't it been done before?0 -
Very unlike a labour government to do things that guarantee a bought vote and to hell with the wider consequences0
-
Good point made on Newscast last night. Even if they do get this idea off the ground & amalgamate the pensions into 6 mega pensions (that's the number I believe they are talking about), who's to say they will invest into UK infrastructure anyway ? They may find that better returns are to he had elsewhere......and surely the pension trustees mandate must be for the betterment of their members. Unless Labour make certain restrictions on non-UK investments or say you have to invest x amount into the UK.Rob7Lee said:
This concerns me.bobmunro said:
i read this as they will combine all the council schemes, of which the vast majority are DB schemes (the article refers as such) and try to copy the investment style of ones like Canadas.1 -
I think that’s exactly what they are saying. They want ,I think I read, 5% minimum in UK infrastructure stuff I believe.golfaddick said:
Good point made on Newscast last night. Even if they do get this idea off the ground & amalgamate the pensions into 6 mega pensions (that's the number I believe they are talking about), who's to say they will invest into UK infrastructure anyway ? They may find that better returns are to he had elsewhere......and surely the pension trustees mandate must be for the betterment of their members. Unless Labour make certain restrictions on non-UK investments or say you have to invest x amount into the UK.Rob7Lee said:
This concerns me.bobmunro said:
i read this as they will combine all the council schemes, of which the vast majority are DB schemes (the article refers as such) and try to copy the investment style of ones like Canadas.Hard to see this will evolve very quickly to kick start economic growth plans.0 -
We’re in very dangerous territory if government dictates where pension funds should invest. Hope the trustees of said funds have good Trustees insurance!!1
-
I can understand some concerns until the detail is fully known, but surely we should be trying to emulate the best ways in which to manage these funds and Canada (and Australia) have led the way for some time. Canada have the world’s 3rd largest share of pension wealth in the world, despite being 38th in terms of population size. It has to be right that we learn from their successes (and failures) and make the billions held work for us…the same way we should have done with North Sea oil revenues.Rob7Lee said:
This concerns me.bobmunro said:
i read this as they will combine all the council schemes, of which the vast majority are DB schemes (the article refers as such) and try to copy the investment style of ones like Canadas.1 -
AFAIK none of those sited (such as Ontario) have any restriction or government dictate as to what they can/should invest in.TelMc32 said:
I can understand some concerns until the detail is fully known, but surely we should be trying to emulate the best ways in which to manage these funds and Canada (and Australia) have led the way for some time. Canada have the world’s 3rd largest share of pension wealth in the world, despite being 38th in terms of population size. It has to be right that we learn from their successes (and failures) and make the billions held work for us…the same way we should have done with North Sea oil revenues.Rob7Lee said:
This concerns me.bobmunro said:
i read this as they will combine all the council schemes, of which the vast majority are DB schemes (the article refers as such) and try to copy the investment style of ones like Canadas.
up until the early 90’s they only invested in government bonds.
pension funds should be free to invest as they see fit (within the realms of their authority etc). I wouldn’t want to see a government say you have to invest x amount into y.3 -
I agree with you on freedom to invest and that certainly seems to be the case with the Canadians. It also now seems to be the thinking in Government if the latest updates are true. Any pension fund should be diverse and that should allow scope, within a larger pooled fund, to invest in infrastructure and smaller tech/pharma businesses, for example. It’s a criticism of the Canadian funds that they don’t do enough investment in-country and something we should learn from too. After all, overseas governments, pension funds have, largely done well out of investing here.Rob7Lee said:
AFAIK none of those sited (such as Ontario) have any restriction or government dictate as to what they can/should invest in.TelMc32 said:
I can understand some concerns until the detail is fully known, but surely we should be trying to emulate the best ways in which to manage these funds and Canada (and Australia) have led the way for some time. Canada have the world’s 3rd largest share of pension wealth in the world, despite being 38th in terms of population size. It has to be right that we learn from their successes (and failures) and make the billions held work for us…the same way we should have done with North Sea oil revenues.Rob7Lee said:
This concerns me.bobmunro said:
i read this as they will combine all the council schemes, of which the vast majority are DB schemes (the article refers as such) and try to copy the investment style of ones like Canadas.
up until the early 90’s they only invested in government bonds.
pension funds should be free to invest as they see fit (within the realms of their authority etc). I wouldn’t want to see a government say you have to invest x amount into y.
Ironically though Thames Water seems to be proving a dud for the Canadians, although they’ll have had some large dividends along the way.
https://www.cppinvestments.com/for-canadian/the-success-of-the-canadian-pension-fund-model/#:~:text=%E2%80%9C%255BCanada%255D%2520has%2520only%2520the,that%2520sets%2520us%2520apart%2520globally.0 -
Correct me if I'm being overly simple, but isn't the idea here to get pension funds to invest in infrastructure to save the government having to do it and lay out the cash?
Not sure how that will work in reality..2 -
The article is a little contradictory. It does state that it’s hoped this will see billions invested into infrastructure, but does later say that administrators will not be obliged to invest in the UK. This should be no different to any good pension fund administrator. They have to put together a diverse portfolio, which can boost long term returns. That may well include the UK and our infrastructure, if there are returns to be made.1
