So why is the FTSE 100 nearly at a 52w high?

[bad company]

sidicks said:

avinalarf said:

I'm very happy for you.
I'm doing ok too.
Oops......forgot for a minute about all the other people out there whose pensions have been punished, oap' s not financially savvy that can't get a decent return on their bank savings account,key workers that can't afford to buy and have to rent in a rising market,etc.etc.
The inflationary effect of QE.
But let's not concern ourselves with all that tosh,we're OK.

'Whose pensions have been "punished" and how?

I was wondering about that. Most pensions seem to be doing well.

[walm]

bad company said:

sidicks said:

avinalarf said:

I'm very happy for you.
I'm doing ok too.
Oops......forgot for a minute about all the other people out there whose pensions have been punished, oap' s not financially savvy that can't get a decent return on their bank savings account,key workers that can't afford to buy and have to rent in a rising market,etc.etc.
The inflationary effect of QE.
But let's not concern ourselves with all that tosh,we're OK.

'Whose pensions have been "punished" and how?

I was wondering about that. Most pensions seem to be doing well.

Perhaps he is referring to the fact that anyone without a DB pension will have seen the income potential of their pension crushed owing to ZIRP, which many blame on the credit crunch/evil bankers etc...

Sure it will have done well in a seven-year bull market but not enough to offset the drop in annuity rates.

Or you know, Philip Green.

[avinalarf]

sidicks said:

'Whose pensions have been "punished" and how?

I meant to say pension annuities,I was tired ,not concentrating......

Four of Britain's biggest insurers have slashed payouts since the rate cut
Aviva, Legal & General, LV= and Just Retirement have all axed the top deals
Insurers blame falling interest rates for wiping up to 8 % off annuity rates


Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/articl...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Soov535]

walm said:

bad company said:

sidicks said:

avinalarf said:

I'm very happy for you.
I'm doing ok too.
Oops......forgot for a minute about all the other people out there whose pensions have been punished, oap' s not financially savvy that can't get a decent return on their bank savings account,key workers that can't afford to buy and have to rent in a rising market,etc.etc.
The inflationary effect of QE.
But let's not concern ourselves with all that tosh,we're OK.

'Whose pensions have been "punished" and how?

I was wondering about that. Most pensions seem to be doing well.

Perhaps he is referring to the fact that anyone without a DB pension will have seen the income potential of their pension crushed owing to ZIRP, which many blame on the credit crunch/evil bankers etc...

Sure it will have done well in a seven-year bull market but not enough to offset the drop in annuity rates.

Or you know, Philip Green.

So don't buy an annuity.

Take the money in a tax efficient way and invest it!

[bad company]

Soov535 said:

So don't buy an annuity.

Take the money in a tax efficient way and invest it!

Yes income drawdown is a better bet but many people are frightened of the idea and want the safety of an annuity.

[walm]

Soov535 said:

So don't buy an annuity.

Take the money in a tax efficient way and invest it!

Isn't the problem simply that at that stage in life, you are trying to take less risk not more.
And you genuinely need the income!

[Jockman]

walm said:

Isn't the problem simply that at that stage in life, you are trying to take less risk not more.
And you genuinely need the income!

Not sure I understand you, walm.

Income drawdown can come in a variety of risk profiles from bonds / gilts to Nigerian Oil Fields.

Plus, you can start this sort of thing at 55, so only two thirds of your way through life.

[avinalarf]

walm said:

Isn't the problem simply that at that stage in life, you are trying to take less risk not more.
And you genuinely need the income!

Exactly......Let them eat cake.....

[bad company]

avinalarf said:

walm said:

Isn't the problem simply that at that stage in life, you are trying to take less risk not more.
And you genuinely need the income!

Exactly......Let them eat cake.....

And your solution is?

[Ozzie Osmond]

Soov535 said:

So don't buy an annuity. Take the money in a tax efficient way and invest it!

^^ This. Like everything in the world of finance it just takes a bit of bottle. "Safety" and "poor returns" generally go hand-in-hand, which is a high risk approach with life expectancy in retirement now around 25 years.

[sidicks]

avinalarf said:

I meant to say pension annuities,I was tired ,not concentrating......

Four of Britain's biggest insurers have slashed payouts since the rate cut
Aviva, Legal & General, LV= and Just Retirement have all axed the top deals
Insurers blame falling interest rates for wiping up to 8 % off annuity rates


Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/articl...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

If you were expecting to retire in the next 5 years, why weren't people holding a significant proportion of their assets in government bonds (or credit) to recognise the exposure to interest rates?

Being heavily invested in equities close to retirement is a massive (deliberate) investment risk, so people only have themselves to blame!

[Fezzaman]

Simpo Two said:

sidicks said:

rotarymazda said:

Correct. They assess your risk vs return profile for but always ensure they get a return at no risk. Nice work if you can get it.

You pay for their time and expertise - not sure why that is hard to understand?

Why you buy a house, the conveyancer gets his fee regardless of whether the house rises or falls in value.

I think the analaogy is 'When you buy a house, the conveyancer gets his fee regardless of whether the house subsequently collapses or not'

I wonder if these chaps who are.... let's say 'idealistic', have the same concerns with a neurosurgeon operating on a tumour? The surgeon is going to go over the pros and cons of surgery, the possible outcomes which may even put the patient in a worse position after it. No win no fee approach for that as well? Or perhaps a personal trainer that you pay for advice re your diet and training who gets paid regardless of whether you stick to the plan or not? Universities promising you a head start in life for the princely sum of £9000/year for a BSc in Hangover Management at University of TigerTiger?

Or is it just the financial services/banking industry who are all thieving lying **** for apparently no other reason than because the industry by nature pays better?

Anyway getting back on topic, I present for your consideration, the FTSE priced in USD:
https://dwq4do82y8xi7.cloudfront.net/x/Ry6gZxjl/

Obviously if you plan on staying in the UK you're alright, but if you think you've hit jackpot and intend to retire to the US....

[sidicks]

Fezzaman said:

I wonder if these chaps who are.... let's say 'idealistic', have the same concerns with a neurosurgeon operating on a tumour? The surgeon is going to go over the pros and cons of surgery, the possible outcomes which may even put the patient in a worse position after it. No win no fee approach for that as well? Or perhaps a personal trainer that you pay for advice re your diet and training who gets paid regardless of whether you stick to the plan or not? Universities promising you a head start in life for the princely sum of £9000/year for a BSc in Hangover Management at University of TigerTiger?

Or is it just the financial services/banking industry who are all thieving lying **** for apparently no other reason than because the industry by nature pays better?

?????

Fezzaman said:

Anyway getting back on topic, I present for your consideration, the FTSE priced in USD:
https://dwq4do82y8xi7.cloudfront.net/x/Ry6gZxjl/

Obviously if you plan on staying in the UK you're alright, but if you think you've hit jackpot and intend to retire to the US....

If you were planning on retiring to the US, why would you have investment in the FTSE...??

Edited by sidicks on Saturday 13th August 10:59

[Ozzie Osmond]

Fezzaman said:

Or is it just the financial services/banking industry who are all thieving lying **** for apparently no other reason than because the industry by nature pays better?

You were right about the first bit. But no, the financial services/banking industry genuinely does have a long history of thieving lying ****

Nonetheless, it's quite usual to pay for professional guidance irrespective of the eventual outcome. When you go to a surgeon/lawyer/accountant you're dealing with someone who's spent 6 years or so in training. IF I recall correctly it's possible to rattle through IFA training in a matter of months and then settle back to rake in the money with some routine box-ticking. The main skill required to make money as an IFA seems to be massaging clients' egos.

[bad company]

sidicks said:

If you were expecting to retire in the next 5 years, why weren't people holding a significant proportion of their assets in government bonds (or credit) to recognise the exposure to interest rates?

Being heavily invested in equities close to retirement is a massive (deliberate) investment risk, so people only have themselves to blame!

I retired in 2012. My SIPP, ISA and other investments are mainly invested in equities so I live mainly on dividend income. I'm comfortable with that as I have a good spread of risk over several sectors.

Works for me.

[DoubleSix]

Ozzie Osmond said:

You were right about the first bit. But no, the financial services/banking industry genuinely does have a long history of thieving lying ****

Nonetheless, it's quite usual to pay for professional guidance irrespective of the eventual outcome. When you go to a surgeon/lawyer/accountant you're dealing with someone who's spent 6 years or so in training. IF I recall correctly it's possible to rattle through IFA training in a matter of months and then settle back to rake in the money with some routine box-ticking. The main skill required to make money as an IFA seems to be massaging clients' egos.

Maybe for the minimum requirements (lvl 4) but most decent firms require much more.

Feel free to "rattle through" PCIAM and show us all what a breeze it is...

Of course exams are only part of it, experience is what separates the good from the bad and there's only one way to get that: graft!

[Fezzaman]

sidicks said:

Ah the usual ignorant nonsense.

If you were planning on retiring to the US, why would you have investment in the FTSE...??

What was ignorant nonsense? Believe it or not I'm actually on your side of the fence here - point being avinalarf/rotarymazda have a problem with one sector in particular with a generalised attitude to all those individuals.

As for the other part, you wouldn't, just an illustration of the joys of currency wars and the impact of QE junkieism. Trash your own currency, pump up stocks, rinse repeat.

And Ozzie for Chartered status you'll need a fair few more exams + 5 years experience

[sidicks]

bad company said:

I retired in 2012. My SIPP, ISA and other investments are mainly invested in equities so I live mainly on dividend income. I'm comfortable with that as I have a good spread of risk over several sectors.

Works for me.

Indeed - nothing wrong with that, but anyone planning to purchase an annuity should be investing accordingly, close to retirement.

[avinalarf]

Fezzaman said:

I wonder if these chaps who are.... let's say 'idealistic', have the same concerns with a neurosurgeon operating on a tumour? The surgeon is going to go over the pros and cons of surgery, the possible outcomes which may even put the patient in a worse position after it. No win no fee approach for that as well? Or perhaps a personal trainer that you pay for advice re your diet and training who gets paid regardless of whether you stick to the plan or not? Universities promising you a head start in life for the princely sum of £9000/year for a BSc in Hangover Management at University of TigerTiger?

Or is it just the financial services/banking industry who are all thieving lying **** for apparently no other reason than because the industry by nature pays better?

Anyway getting back on topic, I present for your consideration, the FTSE priced in USD:
https://dwq4do82y8xi7.cloudfront.net/x/Ry6gZxjl/

Obviously if you plan on staying in the UK you're alright, but if you think you've hit jackpot and intend to retire to the US....

Several apposite analogies here,that deserve comment.
The banking crisis of 2008 brought the financial sector into the media headlights,where it has remained on and off and still does so.
Undoubtedly that crisis has affected most of us,and arguably made life more problematical.
The more financially literate have rode it out adjusting their investments accordingly,the large majority have been left struggling,there is advice out there,but who to trust,and fear of the unknown and unfamiliar is a stressful problem for them to resolve.
I think we have several different debates going on......
1) The fall out from the crisis and how it affects the "man in the street"
2) How the crisis has affected the economies Worldwide,although for the "mits" let's focus on the U.K.
3) The perception that the top tier of bankers get paid an unusually large amount of money.
For the mits the machinations of banking and the financial industry are not intimately understood,and why would one expect otherwise?
The information a mits receives is either via newspapers or TV or nowadays through the Internet.
This information is often biased according to the agenda of the agency or person concerned,by biased I mean a point of view,it need not have a sinister intent.
The media especially newspapers are a business that want to sell newspapers ,so we get banner headlines that promotes a viewpoint which they think will sell more papers,so by their nature they have a populist agenda.
Therefore we have " Time to Bash the Bankers " or "The head of Goldman Sachs pockets $28million".
This promotes envy,mistrust and an easy target for the mits to kick,especially if he's having a tough time making ends meet.

Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 13th August 10:22

[sidicks]

avinalarf said:

Several apposite analogies here,that deserve comment.
The banking crisis of 2008 brought the financial sector into the media headlights,where it has remained on and off and still does so.
Undoubtedly that crisis has affected most of us,and arguably made life more problematical.
The more financially literate have rode it out adjusting their investments accordingly,the large majority have been left struggling,there is advice out there,but who to trust,and fear of the unknown and unfamiliar is a stressful problem for them to resolve.

Yes and no. Calling it a 'banking crisis' can lead people to believe that it was caused entirely be the banks, when the truth is much more complicated and would assign a large degree of blame to governments and individuals too.
Certainly the after effects of the banking crisis can be blamed much more on government policy in the run up to the crisis.

avinalarf said:

I think we have several different debates going on......
1) The fall out from the crisis and how it affects the "man in the street"
2) How the crisis has affected the economies Worldwide,although for the "mits" let's focus on the U.K.
3) The perception that the top tier of bankers get paid an unusually large amount of money.

The top people in lots of industries get paid a lot of money. Bankers also pay a lot of tax. Why focus on bankers and not other high earning industries?
What is to stop other people joining banks an working their way up, if that is what they want to do?

avinalarf said:

For the mits the machinations of banking and the financial industry are not intimately understood,and why would one expect otherwise?
The information a mits receives is either via newspapers or TV or nowadays through the Internet.
This information is often biased according to the agenda of the agency or person concerned,by biased I mean a point of view,it need not have a sinister intent.
The media especially newspapers are a business that want to sell newspapers ,so we get banner headlines that promotes a viewpoint which they think will sell more papers,so by their nature they have a populist agenda.
Therefore we have " Time to Bash the Bankers " or "The head of Goldman Sachs pockets $28million".
This promotes envy,mistrust and an easy target for the mits to kick,especially if he's having a tough time making ends meet.

Agreed - headlines can be misleading and people can have a mistrust of things they don't understand.

Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 13th August 10:22