Cut old people's benefits, they'll die soon anyway

Cut old people's benefits, they'll die soon anyway

Author
Discussion

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
Why should I have detailed understanding? Should it not just work because I pay for it to work? Or is that too much to ask?
Two questions:

Does the high profile incompetence witnessed in certain areas of the NHS mean that incompetence is rife within other areas of the public sector?

Does working in the financial services sector make you a 'regulated finance professional'?

Edited by sidicks on Thursday 8th October 12:02

Andy Zarse

10,868 posts

246 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Andy Zarse said:
legzr1 said:
I have expertise - I can see who is answering questions and who is dodging, squirming and speaking at length without saying anything.

Attempting to shut me up, remove me from the thread or 'bully me into leaving Lolz!!!' isnt going to change the fact you'd rather concentrate on my single post than give honest answers to points made by V8.

I suggest you ignore my post and use your expertise where it's needed.

smile
. . .

The point made by V8, unless I am mistaken, is that the pensions industry does not know what it is doing, and by implication that it is unprofessional.
It's possible you may be mistaken.

V8 Fettler said:
sidicks said:
V8 Fettler said:
There's nothing quite as dangerous as a professional working in the financial sector who has the utmost belief in the competence of his profession.
To question the competence of the profession you'd need to provide some evidence to support that criticism...
You're inviting me to criticise the competence of the financial sector? That's a big target!
No specific mention of the pensions industry but two specific mentions, one in each post, of 'the financial sector'. In which case any element is fair game.

Can't see any defence worthy of the name as there's incompetence in any sector, regulated or not.
Other than the fact we were all discussing pensions and how the pensions industry was dealing with mortality factors - and not endowments or bank take overs or anything else - no specific mention of pensions at all! wink

turbobloke

103,747 posts

259 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Andy Zarse said:
turbobloke said:
Andy Zarse said:
legzr1 said:
I have expertise - I can see who is answering questions and who is dodging, squirming and speaking at length without saying anything.

Attempting to shut me up, remove me from the thread or 'bully me into leaving Lolz!!!' isnt going to change the fact you'd rather concentrate on my single post than give honest answers to points made by V8.

I suggest you ignore my post and use your expertise where it's needed.

smile
. . .

The point made by V8, unless I am mistaken, is that the pensions industry does not know what it is doing, and by implication that it is unprofessional.
It's possible you may be mistaken.

V8 Fettler said:
sidicks said:
V8 Fettler said:
There's nothing quite as dangerous as a professional working in the financial sector who has the utmost belief in the competence of his profession.
To question the competence of the profession you'd need to provide some evidence to support that criticism...
You're inviting me to criticise the competence of the financial sector? That's a big target!
No specific mention of the pensions industry but two specific mentions, one in each post, of 'the financial sector'. In which case any element is fair game.

Can't see any defence worthy of the name as there's incompetence in any sector, regulated or not.
Other than the fact we were all discussing pensions and how the pensions industry was dealing with mortality factors - and not endowments or bank take overs or anything else - no specific mention of pensions at all! wink
Sure but the 'challenge' involved the financial sector. No mention of pensions at all smile

Andy Zarse

10,868 posts

246 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
Andy Zarse said:
V8 Fettler said:
Andy Zarse said:
sidicks said:
V8 Fettler said:
There's nothing quite as dangerous as a professional working in the financial sector who has the utmost belief in the competence of his profession.
To question the competence of the profession you'd need to provide some evidence to support that criticism...
Precisely. For example he'll have no problem explaining the relevance of critical yield, within the context of asymmetrical market movements across a spectrum of asset classes, to achieving a targeted return within preset risk parameters (and if anyone thinks this sounds poncy, well I'm sorry but it isn't, it's core).

We're all ears...
You're using jargon as a smokescreen to disguise guesswork and incompetence. I've taken professional financial advice over the years from advisers who used similar phrases, the end results have ranged from benign to catastrophic. To put this into context, the very best financial advice I've received in several decades was when I advised me to buy some elderly motorcycles.
There's no jargon there, they are all perfectly understandable English words. Maybe try to read them and digest to understand?

I'm asking you to explain (and it applies equally to established collective schemes as well as individual pension pots under the new regime) is how best would you go about managing different assets (basically bonds/equities/property and their many sub-classes) to match your required returns in a situation of non-correlated market movements to provide an income stream with limited capital depletion.

As a classic bike owner too, I somehow never discovered how to make my Triumph Thunderbird create a steady income stream (except for the owner of BritBits! wink )
When you switch your electric lights on at home, you rightly expect the power generation and transmission industry to function competently and effectively because that's what you pay for. You need zero knowledge of the various theories dealing with rotating electrical machines or the transmission of electricity, it should just work. My view of the financial sector is similar.

You might have to sell the Thunderbird to realise a profit, and then buy another couple of bikes at the bottom of the J curve. Alternatively, keep the Thunderbird and buy another couple of bikes as well.
All I know about electricity is it's bloody dangerous to mess with, and so call in a professional if I need help... I've seen plenty of people stick a screwdriver in the socket of pensions with financially disastrous consequences.

As to selling bikes, really you've hit the nail on the head. It's kind of how pensions work. But what happens if the J curve is actually an I and the future value is much less than I paid plus the cost of restoration. Where does that leave my fleet of lovelies? Let's say sold the Tbird and bought a couple of absolute duffers (such as the CZs apparently favoured by Jeremy Corbyn) and the value actually falls due to inflation? Jesus, I'd have to sell my Commer camper van just to pay for insurance on the Norton Commando! God, what a mess I'd have gotten myself into!






And by the way you're talking to the man who actually sold his Commer van three years ago because he was bored with it and watched its value go up five fold since rofl What an utter idiot, maybe you're right about experts! wink

Hackney

6,811 posts

207 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
So it's not run by you or provided for you but it's not exactly what you need? Imagine that.


Andy Zarse

10,868 posts

246 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Sure but the 'challenge' involved the financial sector. No mention of pensions at all smile
I wouldn't presume to speak for other professions within the sector, about which I know little more than a layman. I would consider to do so lacking in professional courtesy.

In any event, his widening the criteria of debate takes matters pointlessly away from the nub of our discussion.

Hackney

6,811 posts

207 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You said yourself though, it's provided for pensioners, so why would they run it when they won't be able to get on it because it's full (rush hour)? They can use it at other times - off peak - therefore making it easier for them selves to get around and reducing stress on peak time transport

There are parts of the country crying out for services like this, a lack of daytime bus service effectively means some people are housebound. Be thankful your area is thinking to provide this kind of service. These PENSIONERS have retired from a lifetime of TAX PAYING, so they already paid for it, no?
Not to mention that they could STILL be paying TAX.

Edited by Hackney on Thursday 8th October 14:07

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Andy Zarse said:
sidicks said:
V8 Fettler said:
There's nothing quite as dangerous as a professional working in the financial sector who has the utmost belief in the competence of his profession.
To question the competence of the profession you'd need to provide some evidence to support that criticism...
Precisely. For example he'll have no problem explaining the relevance of critical yield, within the context of asymmetrical market movements across a spectrum of asset classes, to achieving a targeted return within preset risk parameters (and if anyone thinks this sounds poncy, well I'm sorry but it isn't, it's core).

We're all ears...
I'm always interested in this type of question/remark, most of it is self explanatory to those within the industry or take a keen interest, but what I would like to understand is this :
who sets the targeted return and on what basis / investigatory assumptions.?
Critical yield presume this to be the avoidance of client bankruptcy of the fund?
Spectrum of asset classes! diversity of risk and sector I guess.
Asymmetrical market movements, another guess here movement of indexes comparable within differing sectors.
Putting aside the industry talk, as an investor all I want to know is where my investments are and why.
Expected growth on capital including dividends.
Extent of pro activity within the fund by fund manager(s).
Percentage of green / eco investment.


turbobloke

103,747 posts

259 months

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
I wouldn't be reading any of the publications that you kindly offered a link to regarding any of my investments. Although we can all learn from history it shouldn't stop future investigation for development potential imo.
The point I am making is simple, I want to know about the Companies attitude to the green/eco investment portfolio's. To what extent or level they take risk in those sectors, and where they see strong growth potential for the future.
This obviously applies to all sectors of investment potential and why it is investors pay Companies of course, to invest on behalf of the clients.

turbobloke

103,747 posts

259 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
crankedup said:
turbobloke said:
I wouldn't be reading any of the publications that you kindly offered a link to regarding any of my investments...This obviously applies to all sectors of investment potential and why it is investors pay Companies of course, to invest on behalf of the clients.
Totally understandable. I hope that for your sake your own advisers have gone well beyond the links offered which barely scratch the surface, and take an approach geared to making your investments a success rather than a significant loss. Ideological strategies like the Beeb pension fund are a surefire route to losses, more so as various subsidies are increasingly clawed back by governments joining Fat Ron's wideawake club.

Andy Zarse

10,868 posts

246 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
crankedup said:
I'm always interested in this type of question/remark, most of it is self explanatory to those within the industry or take a keen interest, but what I would like to understand is this :
who sets the targeted return and on what basis / investigatory assumptions.?
Critical yield presume this to be the avoidance of client bankruptcy of the fund?
Spectrum of asset classes! diversity of risk and sector I guess.
Asymmetrical market movements, another guess here movement of indexes comparable within differing sectors.
Putting aside the industry talk, as an investor all I want to know is where my investments are and why.
Expected growth on capital including dividends.
Extent of pro activity within the fund by fund manager(s).
Percentage of green / eco investment.

Essentially you have grasped the issues and constraints in which the industry and clients (whether corporate or individuals) have to work.

Thank you for giving an intelligent answer rather than the previous one of "you're just trying to baffle me with jargon"; I genuinely wasn't.

V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
sidicks said:
V8 Fettler said:
Why should I have detailed understanding? Should it not just work because I pay for it to work? Or is that too much to ask?
Two questions:

Does the high profile incompetence witnessed in certain areas of the NHS mean that incompetence is rife within other areas of the public sector?

Does working in the financial services sector make you a 'regulated finance professional'?

Edited by sidicks on Thursday 8th October 12:02
Decades of experience lead to a wary approach and the assumption of incompetence until proven otherwise, irrespective of whether the other party is public or private sector. Perhaps I should become a recluse.

"Regulated finance professional"? What's one of them then? Do you mean a financial adviser who is regulated? In my experience, there are advisers who are regulated and those who are not. The level of competence doesn't particularly vary when so much guesswork is involved.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
"Regulated finance professional"? What's one of them then? Do you mean a financial adviser who is regulated? In my experience, there are advisers who are regulated and those who are not. The level of competence doesn't particularly vary when so much guesswork is involved.
Again, you seem to be unable to differentiate between:

1) people who work in financial services (who do a vast range of different jobs)
2) people who do jobs in financial services that happen to require some particular upfront training / qualifications
3) people who perform specialist tasks in financial services that require significant training upfront and on an ongoing basis who are members of regulated professional bodies monitoring and implementing the standards of those members.

To confuse the different types of people is a bit like confusing a council planning officer and an NHS surgeon because they are both 'public sector'.

To comment on the examples you provided previously:

V8Fettler said:
1. Failure to addequately manage liquidity leading to the liquidity crisis in 2008
2. Failure to provide good advice re: endowment policies in the 1980s and early 1990s
3. Failure to undertake effective due diligence during acquisition e.g. RBS and ABN Amro
1. No bank in the world could cope with everyone trying to withdraw their money at the same time. But certainly stress tests were inadequate to address this type of situation. In general, the problems originated due to the actions of 'type 1' people above.

2. Whilst there was clearly misselling that took place, in my view much of this was a) with the benefit of hindsight and b) where investors knew the risks they were taking but have been given a 'free option' to claim otherwise and claim compensation. There was nothing wrong with an endowment mortgage providing the risks are fully explained. (The problem here was 'type 2' people above (and greedy customers!!)).

3. My understanding was that too little due diligence was done, rather than the due diligence that was carried out was of poor quality. Those in charge (type 1 people) made the decision not to instruct appropriate experts (type 3 people) to do the appropriate due diligence. If 'type 3' people had been asked to undertake due diligence which turned out to be of poor quality then they would have been brought to account through their professional body etc.

Does that help clarify things?

Edited by sidicks on Friday 9th October 08:10

V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
Andy Zarse said:
V8 Fettler said:
Andy Zarse said:
V8 Fettler said:
Andy Zarse said:
sidicks said:
V8 Fettler said:
There's nothing quite as dangerous as a professional working in the financial sector who has the utmost belief in the competence of his profession.
To question the competence of the profession you'd need to provide some evidence to support that criticism...
Precisely. For example he'll have no problem explaining the relevance of critical yield, within the context of asymmetrical market movements across a spectrum of asset classes, to achieving a targeted return within preset risk parameters (and if anyone thinks this sounds poncy, well I'm sorry but it isn't, it's core).

We're all ears...
You're using jargon as a smokescreen to disguise guesswork and incompetence. I've taken professional financial advice over the years from advisers who used similar phrases, the end results have ranged from benign to catastrophic. To put this into context, the very best financial advice I've received in several decades was when I advised me to buy some elderly motorcycles.
There's no jargon there, they are all perfectly understandable English words. Maybe try to read them and digest to understand?

I'm asking you to explain (and it applies equally to established collective schemes as well as individual pension pots under the new regime) is how best would you go about managing different assets (basically bonds/equities/property and their many sub-classes) to match your required returns in a situation of non-correlated market movements to provide an income stream with limited capital depletion.

As a classic bike owner too, I somehow never discovered how to make my Triumph Thunderbird create a steady income stream (except for the owner of BritBits! wink )
When you switch your electric lights on at home, you rightly expect the power generation and transmission industry to function competently and effectively because that's what you pay for. You need zero knowledge of the various theories dealing with rotating electrical machines or the transmission of electricity, it should just work. My view of the financial sector is similar.

You might have to sell the Thunderbird to realise a profit, and then buy another couple of bikes at the bottom of the J curve. Alternatively, keep the Thunderbird and buy another couple of bikes as well.
All I know about electricity is it's bloody dangerous to mess with, and so call in a professional if I need help... I've seen plenty of people stick a screwdriver in the socket of pensions with financially disastrous consequences.

As to selling bikes, really you've hit the nail on the head. It's kind of how pensions work. But what happens if the J curve is actually an I and the future value is much less than I paid plus the cost of restoration. Where does that leave my fleet of lovelies? Let's say sold the Tbird and bought a couple of absolute duffers (such as the CZs apparently favoured by Jeremy Corbyn) and the value actually falls due to inflation? Jesus, I'd have to sell my Commer camper van just to pay for insurance on the Norton Commando! God, what a mess I'd have gotten myself into!






And by the way you're talking to the man who actually sold his Commer van three years ago because he was bored with it and watched its value go up five fold since rofl What an utter idiot, maybe you're right about experts! wink
For many decades, if you instructed an electrical design engineer to provide professional advice leading to the purchase of replacement cabling for your offices, and if it then transpires that the design of the new cabling is flawed to such an extent that only 50% of the lights worked then you would have a clearly defined route (probably via the designer's PI cover) to achieve a satisfactory solution.

Many people who bought financial products to support mortgages in the 1980s and early 1990s have had no route to achieve a satisfactory solution:

punter said:
Hello Mr Financial Adviser, please sell me a product suitable for repaying a mortgage. By the way, I have no financial expertise
Financial Adviser said:
Hello Mr Punter (who has no financial expertise), I shall use my professional expertise to recommend that you buy this endowment product, if it tanks ... tough
As I'm sure you recognise, the greatest financial advantage for many pensions is the tax break in and out, the core performance of many pension funds is dismal. If only I could engineer a tax break for the purchase of classic bikes.

There is no "I" curve for classic bikes, even previously worthless Bantams have some worth, but fluctuations may occur. Restoring is not always the most profitable route to take, no need for an expert to tell to you that, simple arithmetic. If you are going to restore then best to ignore the labour cost in the calculations, as per several Saving_a_Classic_Car shows that appear on the haunted fishtank.

Never look at values of classic vehicles you've just sold.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
Many people who bought financial products to support mortgages in the 1980s and early 1990s have had no route to achieve a satisfactory solution:

punter said:
Hello Mr Financial Adviser, please sell me a product suitable for repaying a mortgage. By the way, I have no financial expertise
Financial Adviser said:
Hello Mr Punter (who has no financial expertise), I shall use my professional expertise to recommend that you buy this endowment product, if it tanks ... tough
An advisor's job is to explain the advantages and disadvantages of different products. They cannot be expected to predict the future - that is the biggest and most common misunderstanding - just because, with the benefit of hindsight, the endowment did not perform as well as might have been hoped, does not mean it was the wrong product or it was mis-sold.

The only mis-selling that occurred was where advisors failed to explain the risks, given the requirements of the customer.

V8 Fettler said:
As I'm sure you recognise, the greatest financial advantage for many pensions is the tax break in and out, the core performance of many pension funds is dismal. If only I could engineer a tax break for the purchase of classic bikes.
This is the most often repeated nonsense in relation to pensions! A pension fund is just a wrapper - the performance is directly linked to the underlying investments chosen by the customer (advised, where appropriate). Most pension wrappers have an extensive range of investments that the customer can choose, depending on their risk-return preferences.

This has been discussed numerous times in the Finance forum, and still people come up with the same nonsense!

Edited by sidicks on Friday 9th October 09:06

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
Many people who bought financial products to support mortgages in the 1980s and early 1990s have had no route to achieve a satisfactory solution:
My then fiancee and I took out an endowment policy, £4000 over 25 years, on the express understanding that it would assist in the purchase of a house some 18mnths down the line. The promise was there. We were told that building societies preferred them to mere savings deposits. When this was revealed as BS some five months in by someone else who'd been conned, we stopped payment. I wanted my money returned but this was laughed at. We were told that, given that the salesman had lied - I had witnesses - what they would do was to 'freeze' the money and pay it back at the end of the term, some 25 years later. Or rather 24 years, 7 months. The total amount now owed me is laughable. No interest was to be paid on the sum. Come 1992 I took steps to retrieve the money owed to me but the original company had been taken over, amalgamated with another, and then bought out again. The current company denied all knowledge and then, when presented by documentary evidence, claimed that as it was not an ongoing policy - i.e. had been cancelled - they had not taken on the liability. So who had? In short, not our problem.

As you say, no route to get my money back. Fair enough, it's only a few £10s, but it is my few £10s.

I probably spent more money in phone calls than I was owed. Keep all documents and other records. It makes it easier for financial institutions to come up with an excuse to ignore you.

I was lied to.

I've got the feeling I was lied to 25 years after the original lie.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
My then fiancee and I took out an endowment policy, £4000 over 25 years, on the express understanding that it would assist in the purchase of a house some 18mnths down the line. The promise was there.
An endowment policy was an entirely reasonable method of funding the repayment of a mortgage.

Derek Smith said:
We were told that building societies preferred them to mere savings deposits.
Well, if you had a deposit thhat could meet the cost of your mortgage you wouldn't need the mortgage in the first place...!!

Derek Smith said:
When this was revealed as BS some five months in by someone else who'd been conned, we stopped payment.
So you believed them?!

Derek Smith said:
I wanted my money returned but this was laughed at.
You'd had the life cover for the period, for a start.

Derek Smith said:
We were told that, given that the salesman had lied - I had witnesses - what they would do was to 'freeze' the money and pay it back at the end of the term, some 25 years later. Or rather 24 years, 7 months. The total amount now owed me is laughable. No interest was to be paid on the sum. Come 1992 I took steps to retrieve the money owed to me but the original company had been taken over, amalgamated with another, and then bought out again. The current company denied all knowledge and then, when presented by documentary evidence, claimed that as it was not an ongoing policy - i.e. had been cancelled - they had not taken on the liability. So who had? In short, not our problem.

As you say, no route to get my money back. Fair enough, it's only a few £10s, but it is my few £10s.

I probably spent more money in phone calls than I was owed. Keep all documents and other records. It makes it easier for financial institutions to come up with an excuse to ignore you.

I was lied to.

I've got the feeling I was lied to 25 years after the original lie.
Seems like the Unions lied to you about your pension too...

Edited by sidicks on Friday 9th October 09:31

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
sidicks said:
Seems like the Unions lied to you about your pension too...

Edited by sidicks on Friday 9th October 09:31
What is it with you an pensions? Didn't you take one out and now feel resentful of others who had the sense to protect their family and retirement?

As I pointed out, my gross was reduced by around 20% pa for my pension. I've paid more for my pension that the vast majority of people. Get over it.

And I was conned by the insurance salseman. No matter how much you dislike me enjoying my pension, I was conned. The company admitted that he had lied, or rather they called it something like over-enthusiasm, so why can't you accept it? Me having a pension doesn't stop me being conned. In those pre FSA and ombudsmen days I had no way of taking it further and had to accept being bullied.

The life insurance died when I cancelled the policy.

So the company rep lied, the company accepted this and not only for me but for others. But they refused to pay back the money they had accepted under false pretenses. Nice.

Is it so difficult to understand?


sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
What is it with you an pensions? Didn't you take one out and now feel resentful of others who had the sense to protect their family and retirement?
You may have forgotten, but the thread topic is about pensions and we had to spend some time refuting your false claims!

Like most people I have to pay for my own, I don't have the luxury of taxpayers to subsidise mine!!

Derek Smith said:
As I pointed out, my gross was reduced by around 20% pa for my pension. I've paid more for my pension that the vast majority of people.
Indeed, you've paid more (but are getting massively more than most people) and yet are still requiring taxpayer subsidy, something that you have desperately been trying to deny up until now, until the facts have been laid out in front of you and your claims shown to be false!

Derek Smith said:
Get over it.
You continue to bleat about how 'hard done by' the police have been, failing to recognise the massive value of the pension benefit received.

As I said previously I'm sure you deserve the pension for doing a difficult job, but if you're going to deny the economics of the situation in here, then 'experts' will show you up!

Maybe you should 'get over it'!

Derek Smith said:
And I was conned by the insurance salseman. No matter how much you dislike me enjoying my pension, I was conned. The company admitted that he had lied, or rather they called it something like over-enthusiasm, so why can't you accept it? Me having a pension doesn't stop me being conned. In those pre FSA and ombudsmen days I had no way of taking it further and had to accept being bullied.

The life insurance died when I cancelled the policy.

So the company rep lied, the company accepted this and not only for me but for others. But they refused to pay back the money they had accepted under false pretenses. Nice.

Is it so difficult to understand?
As I've stated before - some (many) people were lied to, and there is no excuse for that. But to treat that as evidence for incompetence across the entire finance sector is just ignorant nonsense.

Does this mean all police are corrupt?
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/30/pol...
http://www.policebrutality.co.uk

Etc

Edited by sidicks on Friday 9th October 10:10