Do you have a pension?

osarusan

How much is the non contributory state pension?

kazamo

Greentopia wrote: »

And? There are old people on the State pension who can't afford basics like being able to heat their house properly in winter or pay for medicines, and now with water charges they're being asked to find money for another bill.
I don't begrudge them an extra €5. In fact I'd raise it a lot more than that paid for it with a tax on financial services or a wealth tax.

I agree it should be more than an extra fiver.
These pensioners were around when tax rates were a hell of a lot higher than they are now.

How to fund it......apply BIK to employer pension contributions.
If BIK is applied to other employer paid benefits such as cars, health insurance etc, would only seem fair to apply it to pensions also.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Greentopia wrote: »

Nope, no pension and don't ever intend to pay into one.
Studying for something that's my passion and would do if I wasn't paid for it so intend to work in that area plus another creative field until I drop dead or get sick and can't work any more. Then I'll just live on any savings I have plus the state pension, will do me fine.

Greentopia wrote: »

And? There are old people on the State pension who can't afford basics like being able to heat their house properly in winter or pay for medicines, and now with water charges they're being asked to find money for another bill.
I don't begrudge them an extra €5. In fact I'd raise it a lot more than that paid for it with a tax on financial services or a wealth tax.

So you want additional pension without contributing yourself?

Greentopia

boobar wrote: »

Set one up in my 20s....

Would not like to live out my old age on the state pension, that would be grim.

Having said that, I intend to work for as long as I can....the idea of retirement fills me with dread.

When my father retired at 63, he really struggled...no hobbies and completely lost.

There's a way around your father's fate- do something that makes you happy then you won't want to retire.
Most of my friends work in jobs they love- one is a guitar luthier, a few more artists, photographer, Permaculturists and gardeners...If you love your work and it's your passion you won't want to retire.

Greentopia

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

So you want additional pension without contributing yourself?

I wasn't advocating it for myself. But I do contribute already with taxes and charges I pay. Not income tax at the moment as I'm a student right now but that will change when I do work.
And I'll look into making a PRSI contribution if I'm self employed.

Greentopia

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Rabble rabble tax the rich rabble rabble

Yes, tax the super wealthy who have gotten richer during austerity while avoiding paying taxes (Denis O Brien doubling his wealth in the past five years) while working class people have been screwed to the wall with cuts, extra taxes and charges.

Diamond Doll

I've one set up but there's feck all in it so far.

Currently I pay 3% of salary (the minimum contribution on our company scheme), and the company pays 5% of salary.

I'm currently just about under the threshold for the higher rate of tax, so I guess the tax efficient thing to do will be to increase the pension as/when/if my salary increases, so that I don't actually end up paying tax at the higher rate at all.

FURET

There are no reputable pension plans where I live, so I don't have one. But every month I invest around 80% of my income into stock and bond market index-tracking ETFs:

• FTSE Developed Europe (520 European businesses; 40% of portfolio)
• S&P 500 (500 US businesses; 22% of portfolio)
• FTSE Emerging Markets (1000 businesses in emerging markets; 8% of portfolio)
• US Short-Term Bonds (thousands of bonds, gov. and corporate; 7% of portfolio)
• European short term corporate bonds (hundreds of bonds; 23% of portfolio)

The total cost of this self-managed investment is 0.13%. If the past hundred years of market data is anything to go by, I can expect it to grow by around 7 to 8% per year over 20-30 years.

I am highly diversified, owning a huge number of great businesses as a result. I don't plan on relying on any tax-payer or state cheque to fund my retirement. I'll do it myself.

Bubbaclaus

Greentopia wrote: »

Yes, tax the super wealthy who have gotten richer during austerity while avoiding paying taxes (Denis O Brien doubling his wealth in the past five years) while working class people have been screwed to the wall with cuts, extra taxes and charges.

So you want DOB to pay for your retirement essentially?

zl1whqvjs75cdy

FURET wrote: »

There are no reputable pension plans where I live, so I don't have one. But every month I invest around 80% of my income into stock and bond market index-tracking ETFs:

• FTSE Developed Europe (520 European businesses; 40% of portfolio)
• S&P 500 (500 US businesses; 22% of portfolio)
• FTSE Emerging Markets (1000 businesses in emerging markets; 8% of portfolio)
• US Short-Term Bonds (thousands of bonds, gov. and corporate; 7% of portfolio)
• European short term corporate bonds (hundreds of bonds; 23% of portfolio)

The total cost of this self-managed investment is 0.13%. If the past hundred years of market data is anything to go by, I can expect it to grow by around 7 to 8% per year over 20-30 years.

I am highly diversified, owning a huge number of great businesses as a result. I don't plan on relying on any tax-payer or state cheque to fund my retirement. I'll do it myself.

This type of plan seems the way to go, the only issue being if there is another global financial melt down. But your money isn't safe anywhere if that happens do its a moot point I suppose.

FURET

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

This type of plan seems the way to go, the only issue being if there is another global financial melt down. But your money isn't safe anywhere if that happens do its a moot point I suppose.

Not worried about that at all. It's happened before (1929, 2000, 2008) and it will happen again. The thing is, investments are not just numbers on a screen. When you own stocks, you own something as real as the ground you're standing on.

Take Coca-Cola. The share price of Coca-Cola fell around 50% in 2008/2009. But did Coke as a business lose 50% of its customers and profits during that six-month period? No. Investors need to be prepared to see periodic falls of 50%. If you can't handle it, you deserve to lose. Prudent long-term investors don't fear and fret when the market tanks. Instead, they recognize it for the wonderful buying opportunity that it is. A 50% stock market crash should really be thought of as a 50% sale and an excuse to load up on cheap stocks.

We often hear of billionaires (Buffett, Gates) who have doubled their wealth in the past five years. Sure they did - because they are predominantly invested in stocks, and global stocks have more than doubled in the past five years. Filipino stocks are up 500% since 2009 lows. US stocks are up 230%. And anyone can buy stocks and see their money double (or halve!). As you get older, you reduce your stock holdings and increase your bond holdings, so you will not experience the 2008-like volatility that all young investors should cheer, not fear.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Greentopia wrote: »

I wasn't advocating it for myself. But I do contribute already with taxes and charges I pay. Not income tax at the moment as I'm a student right now but that will change when I do work.
And I'll look into making a PRSI contribution if I'm self employed.

Do you know what you are talking about at all? There's no looking into making a contribution to PRSI [PHP][/PHP]if self-employed, you will have to.

Greentopia

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

So you want DOB to pay for your retirement essentially?

Don't be absurd, I never said that.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Greentopia wrote: »

Yes, tax the super wealthy who have gotten richer during austerity while avoiding paying taxes (Denis O Brien doubling his wealth in the past five years) while working class people have been screwed to the wall with cuts, extra taxes and charges.

OK, define super rich. Denis O'Brien is exceptional as a billionaire. Who are these super rich residents you will get all this much needed funding for pensions from? As for working class - another vague overused term. We work, so we are working class.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Greentopia wrote: »

Don't be absurd, I never said that.

In effect you did.

Greentopia

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

Do you know what you are talking about at all? There's no looking into making a contribution to PRSI [PHP][/PHP]if self-employed, you will have to.

I meant look into it as in find out what I'll be expected to pay if I have to pay it. I'll have more than one source of income, being both self employed and P/T working for someone else so it's not so clear cut as yet as I don't know how much I will earn from my creative job.

I've worked as an artist and crafts person and so do lots of my friends. Some pay no income tax because of artists exemption and PRSI doesn't kick in until after income exceeds €5000 which is nearly half the average income for an artist in this country (sadly).

So it's not as simple as "you will have to".

Greentopia

osarusan wrote: »

How much is the non contributory state pension?

Depends on means of course but maximum rate is €229 if you're +80

Greentopia

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

In effect you did.

Expecting a multi billionaire to contribute a fair share in income tax is not expecting him to pay for my pension any more than anyone else who pays taxes to the state finances and social welfare expenditure.

Greentopia

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

OK, define super rich. Denis O'Brien is exceptional as a billionaire. Who are these super rich residents you will get all this much needed funding for pensions from? As for working class - another vague overused term. We work, so we are working class.

Rather going off topic of pensions. We all know who many of these people are who pay little or no taxes here.

"We all work so we're all working class?" 😠you need to read up on what the definition of working class is.
That's actually scarily ignorant if you really think that.

Greentopia

FURET wrote: »

Not worried about that at all. It's happened before (1929, 2000, 2008) and it will happen again. The thing is, investments are not just numbers on a screen. When you own stocks, you own something as real as the ground you're standing on.

So long as the company you have stocks in doesn't go belly up. So really not that solid.

spud_grower

sigh

that most people not only see this as a good thing but see it as not going far enough , makes me depressed , we will never change in this country

giving a raise to the group who suffered least during the recession , disgusting

FURET

Greentopia wrote: »

So long as the company you have stocks in doesn't go belly up. So really not that solid.

What, all 2000 of them?

If that happens, we all have far bigger problems than pensions.

This type of fear and scarcity-driven mentality is one of the key things that prevents people from building wealth.

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

I wasn't advocating it for myself. But I do contribute already with taxes and charges I pay. Not income tax at the moment as I'm a student right now but that will change when I do work.
And I'll look into making a PRSI contribution if I'm self employed.

income tax does not , nor never has contributed to pension provision , only PRSI covers pensions and the level of contribution of PRSI paid by most recipients today doesn't come close to covering what is being drawn down

spud_grower

FURET wrote: »

Not worried about that at all. It's happened before (1929, 2000, 2008) and it will happen again. The thing is, investments are not just numbers on a screen. When you own stocks, you own something as real as the ground you're standing on.

Take Coca-Cola. The share price of Coca-Cola fell around 50% in 2008/2009. But did Coke as a business lose 50% of its customers and profits during that six-month period? No. Investors need to be prepared to see periodic falls of 50%. If you can't handle it, you deserve to lose. Prudent long-term investors don't fear and fret when the market tanks. Instead, they recognize it for the wonderful buying opportunity that it is. A 50% stock market crash should really be thought of as a 50% sale and an excuse to load up on cheap stocks.

We often hear of billionaires (Buffett, Gates) who have doubled their wealth in the past five years. Sure they did - because they are predominantly invested in stocks, and global stocks have more than doubled in the past five years. Filipino stocks are up 500% since 2009 lows. US stocks are up 230%. And anyone can buy stocks and see their money double (or halve!). As you get older, you reduce your stock holdings and increase your bond holdings, so you will not experience the 2008-like volatility that all young investors should cheer, not fear.

the bull market since 2009 should not be viewed as typical , the kind of increase in equity value since 2009 often takes more than two decades

spud_grower

osarusan wrote: »

How much is the non contributory state pension?

219 per week which you get even you never worked a day in your life , some who did not make adequate PRSI contributions but who have assets of a certain value will however not receive 219 per week , nor should they

RayM

Greentopia wrote: »

I don't begrudge them an extra €5. In fact I'd raise it a lot more than that paid for it with a tax on financial services or a wealth tax.

I don't begrudge them either, but I hope they increase all other Social Protection payments too - and by a lot more than €5. Unlike the pension, they were actually cut during the recession.

FURET

spud_grower wrote: »

the bull market since 2009 should not be viewed as typical , the kind of increase in equity value since 2009 often takes more than two decades

I never said it was typical. The point is that stocks go up and down and this movement explains the "doubling of wealth" that is oft-reported over the past few years. The tendency of the global stock market is to always go up over the long-term, because it is comprised of businesses that are always striving to boost their earnings. If a business shrinks dramatically or goes bust, it is removed from the index, and another takes its place.

spud_grower

RayM wrote: »

I don't begrudge them either, but I hope they increase all other Social Protection payments too - and by a lot more than €5. Unlike the pension, they were actually cut during the recession.

pensioners are extremely politically powerful in this country , disabled or other people dependent on the state can be more easily ignored by politicans

its no coincidence that the elderly have several lobby groups ( age action etc ) who earn a very good living potraying all old people as poverty stricken

spud_grower

FURET wrote: »

I never said it was typical. The point is that stocks go up and down and this movement explains the "doubling of wealth" that is oft-reported over the past few years. The tendency of the global stock market is to always go up over the long-term, because it is comprised of businesses that are always striving to boost their earnings. If a business shrinks dramatically or goes bust, it is removed from the index, and another takes its place.

I know all about them , im heavily involved in equities

the key to building wealth is diversification ( index funds , most people should not buy individual stocks ) and patience , you should not invest unless you are prepared to remain invested for at least ten years and preferably much longer

diversification and patience is an absolute guarantee of wealth creation

beeno67

FURET wrote: »

There are no reputable pension plans where I live, so I don't have one. But every month I invest around 80% of my income into stock and bond market index-tracking ETFs:

• FTSE Developed Europe (520 European businesses; 40% of portfolio)
• S&P 500 (500 US businesses; 22% of portfolio)
• FTSE Emerging Markets (1000 businesses in emerging markets; 8% of portfolio)
• US Short-Term Bonds (thousands of bonds, gov. and corporate; 7% of portfolio)
• European short term corporate bonds (hundreds of bonds; 23% of portfolio)

The total cost of this self-managed investment is 0.13%. If the past hundred years of market data is anything to go by, I can expect it to grow by around 7 to 8% per year over 20-30 years.

I am highly diversified, owning a huge number of great businesses as a result. I don't plan on relying on any tax-payer or state cheque to fund my retirement. I'll do it myself.

You may be overestimating the 7-8% a year for the next 20-30 years. The bonds (30% of your investment) won't get that. FTSE hasn't earned 7-8% a year over last 25 years. Why should it in the future?Emerging markets are obviously very risky so may make or loose loads but at only 8% of your portfolio are hardly going to make a massive difference. Have you priced in the Bid/Offer spread which won't make a huge difference at present but will effect returns in time.
Also 80% of your income? Really?

FURET

beeno67 wrote: »

You may be overestimating the 7-8% a year for the next 20-30 years. The bonds (30% of your investment) won't get that. FTSE hasn't earned 7-8% a year over last 25 years. Why should it in the future?Emerging markets are obviously very risky so may make or loose loads but at only 8% of your portfolio are hardly going to make a massive difference. Have you priced in the Bid/Offer spread which won't make a huge difference at present but will affect returns in time.
Also 80% of your income? Really?

Nope - even with bonds, this is back-tested to perform like that. The method (stocks to bonds) is to rebalance and take advantage of equity plunges. This is commonly referred to as the Boglehead approach. It works (the future is unwritten; however I err on the side of optimism).

suicide_circus

Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »

In effect you did.

What are you going to spend your extra fiver a week on, Ronnie Worried Workaholic? :P

Greentopia

spud_grower wrote: »

sigh

that most people not only see this as a good thing but see it as not going far enough , makes me depressed , we will never change in this country

giving a raise to the group who suffered least during the recession , disgusting

You should spend a day with a a charity like ALONE who work to ease the suffering of the 1 in 5 older people who are at risk of poverty or suffering deprivation. They are far from the group that has suffered the least during the recession. That would be the top earners.

Greentopia

FURET wrote: »

What, all 2000 of them?

I wasn't being specific to whatever your situation is. Of course it's better if you are going to go down that road to spread your risk at least.

FURET wrote: »

If that happens, we all have far bigger problems than pensions.

Who is this all of us? my livelihood, food on my table or roof over my head doesn't depend on the existence of multi national corporations.

FURET wrote: »

This type of fear and scarcity-driven mentality is one of the key things that prevents people from building wealth.

God forbid. And it's not fear mongering to point out that stocks are not bullet proof investments.

spud_grower

beeno67 wrote: »

You may be overestimating the 7-8% a year for the next 20-30 years. The bonds (30% of your investment) won't get that. FTSE hasn't earned 7-8% a year over last 25 years. Why should it in the future?Emerging markets are obviously very risky so may make or loose loads but at only 8% of your portfolio are hardly going to make a massive difference. Have you priced in the Bid/Offer spread which won't make a huge difference at present but will effect returns in time.
Also 80% of your income? Really?

its a very well balanced portfolio IMO , if anything id go heavier into emerging markets as they have gone nowhere since 2007 effectively , only issue with emerging market funds is they are less fine tuned than developed market funds

Greentopia

RayM wrote: »

I don't begrudge them either, but I hope they increase all other Social Protection payments too - and by a lot more than €5. Unlike the pension, they were actually cut during the recession.

Oh I agree. Cuts to lone parents in particular have been savage.

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

I wasn't being specific to whatever your situation is. Of course it's better if you are going to go down that road to spread your risk at least.



Who is this all of us? my livelihood, food on my table or roof over my head doesn't depend on the existence of multi national corporations.



God forbid. And it's not fear mongering to point out that stocks are not bullet proof investments.

no investment is bullet proof as wealth creation involves risk

the state pension completely falls apart under scrutiny , its built upon future promises which politicans will not be able to keep and besides those currently handing out the goodies will not be around when the whole thing falls apart

beeno67

FURET wrote: »

Nope - even with bonds, this is back-tested to perform like that. The method (stocks to bonds) is to rebalance and take advantage of equity plunges. This is commonly referred to as the Boglehead approach. It works (the future is unwritten; however I err on the side of optimism).

Simply untrue. But, hey why not provide evidence that funds such as yours have averaged 7-8% a year over the last 20-30 years. Pick say 25 years (i.e. 1990 - 2015) just to be fair.
For example FTSE August 1990 2162 now 6718. That is nowhere near 7-8% a year growth.

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

Oh I agree. Cuts to lone parents in particular have been savage.

its still higher than it was ten years ago

spud_grower

beeno67 wrote: »

Simply untrue. But, hey why not provide evidence that funds such as yours have averaged 7-8% a year over the last 20-30 years. Pick say 25 years (i.e. 1990 - 2015) just to be fair.

1990 - 2015

the portfolio he details has grown far more than 7-8% per year

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

suicide_circus wrote: »

What are you going to spend your extra fiver a week on, Srameen? :P

I don't draw a state pension. My private pension has served me very well for the past 17 years. I wouldn't get out of bed for an additional fiver.

animaal

kazamo wrote: »

How to fund it......apply BIK to employer pension contributions.
If BIK is applied to other employer paid benefits such as cars, health insurance etc, would only seem fair to apply it to pensions also.

Public sector pension entitlements would also have to be valued by an actuary, and taxed as BIK?

The problem is that not enough people are contributing to their own pensions. Throwing more disincentives at them won't solve the problem.

While it might be tempting to look at those who are preparing for the future, and try to bring them down to the same level as those who don't, it won't solve anything.

beeno67

spud_grower wrote: »

1990 - 2015

the portfolio he details has grown far more than 7-8% per year

OK. Show me

spud_grower

beeno67 wrote: »

Simply untrue. But, hey why not provide evidence that funds such as yours have averaged 7-8% a year over the last 20-30 years. Pick say 25 years (i.e. 1990 - 2015) just to be fair.
For example FTSE August 1990 2162 now 6718. That is nowhere near 7-8% a year growth.

the S + P for example was priced at 339.97 on January 1st 1990 , its closed Friday @ 2080

Greentopia

spud_grower wrote: »

its still higher than it was ten years ago

So is inflation and the cost of living and it's not indexed to the true cost of living in this country. I have a friend who is a lone parent and she has suffered huge cuts this year.

howamidifferent

Greentopia wrote:

You should spend a day with a a charity like ALONE who work to ease the suffering of the 1 in 5 older people who are at risk of poverty or suffering deprivation. They are far from the group that has suffered the least during the recession. That would be the top earners.

So if it's that bad for them why do you aspire to become one of them by relying on the same pension when it's your turn?

Greentopia

spud_grower wrote: »

no investment is bullet proof as wealth creation involves risk

Indeed, none are. Not even so called safe bets like stocks. That was my point.

spud_grower wrote: »

the state pension completely falls apart under scrutiny , its built upon future promises which politicans will not be able to keep and besides those currently handing out the goodies will not be around when the whole thing falls apart

None of us know what the future holds but personally I'm hoping they won't be around either, but not for reasons you would like I'm sure

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

So has inflation and the cost of living and it's not indexed to the true cost of living in this country. I have a friend who is a lone parent and she has suffered huge cuts this year.

inflation has been non existent since 2008 , when your dependent on the charity of the state , you really cant complain too much , lone parents are not special , some make them out to be heroes , they are not

FURET

beeno67 wrote: »

OK. Show me

Taking Canada as an example, www.moneysense.ca/2006/04/05/classic-couch-potato-portfolio-historical-performance-tables/

Taking the US, http://www.uexpress.com/scottburns/index.html?uc_full_date=20090215.

Since 1970, the US index and the international index have performed very similarly, with less than a 1% difference in compounding between the two. There's no saying which will perform better going forward - but the correlation is very tight. So guessing whether Europe, the US or Emerging will do better going forward is pointless. The trend is similar. (David Swensen, Pioneering Portfolio Management, New York Free Press, 2009, p. 170)

spud_grower

Greentopia wrote: »

You should spend a day with a a charity like ALONE who work to ease the suffering of the 1 in 5 older people who are at risk of poverty or suffering deprivation. They are far from the group that has suffered the least during the recession. That would be the top earners.

no pensioner in Ireland is short money to buy essentials for reasons to do with the level of entitlement available to those over 66 , the government cannot manage every single situation , some people are terrible money managers or have expensive substance addictions

219 per week ( the minimum pension ) is more than enough to live on and that's before you list the following benefits

medical card
free transport
fuel allowance
electricity subsidy
phone subsidy ( phone rent allowance was cut I acknowledge )
no dirt tax on savings
living alone allowance