Level of Savings

Pussyhands

Padre_Pio wrote: »

790 a month is less than 200 a week for bills and luxuriesnecessities.
Half that could easily go on a car (fuel, maintenance, insurance, tax)

Food, utilities, clothing etc would eat up the rest in no time at all.

How much are you spending on clothing? How are people eating through so many clothes? I'm wearing a pair of runners I must have bought 4 years ago and they're still in good nick.

At christmas I get trousers, tops as gifts. I can't remember the last time I went out spending a hundred or more on clothes.

70/80 euro a month would cover utilities if house sharing.

I just can't believe how much people spend. Too many people waste money. I'd love for people to sit on my shoulder and see what I spend my money on because I save very well.

biko

I remember an old mentor of mine that said as an adult you should have enough cash in the bank to last you at least one year.
So a year's salary.

Padre_Pio

Pussyhands wrote: »

How much are you spending on clothing? How are people eating through so many clothes? I'm wearing a pair of runners I must have bought 4 years ago and they're still in good nick.

At christmas I get trousers, tops as gifts. I can't remember the last time I went out spending a hundred or more on clothes.

70/80 euro a month would cover utilities if house sharing.

I just can't believe how much people spend. Too many people waste money. I'd love for people to sit on my shoulder and see what I spend my money on because I save very well.

Like everything it depends on circumstances. It's easy to say "well I don't spend money on this, so why do other people?" or "too many people waste money".

It's also easy enough to see that you're probably mid 20's, male, single, renting and have no large outgoings. I've said this before on threads like this; the stage of your life you're in now is the cheapest. No wife, no kids, no mortgage, no school fees, no uniforms, no weddings to attend every other weekend, no car you're keeping on the road, no medical conditions, no creche fees, no care home fees.

Enjoy it, seriously, enjoy it, because things get more expensive when (or if) you move into the next stage of life.

Pussyhands

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Like everything it depends on circumstances. It's easy to say "well I don't spend money on this, so why do other people?" or "too many people waste money".

It's also easy enough to see that you're probably mid 20's, male, single, renting and have no large outgoings. I've said this before on threads like this; the stage of your life you're in now is the cheapest. No wife, no kids, no mortgage, no school fees, no uniforms, no weddings to attend every other weekend, no car you're keeping on the road, no medical conditions, no creche fees, no care home fees.

Enjoy it, seriously, enjoy it, because things get more expensive when (or if) you move into the next stage of life.

Well you'd hardly be house sharing if you have kids...

Padre_Pio

Pussyhands wrote: »

Well you'd hardly be house sharing if you have kids...

Could be house sharing with your partner

You're not wrong in what you say, but people's living standards usually match their income.
I used to live on 170 a week when I was a student and had plenty of cash for holidays and pints.
But I drove 15 mins out of my way to avoid the toll booth and bought the cheapest food in Lidl and clothes from Penneys.

I could choose to still do this, but I'm beyond living like a student. I wouldn't class spending money on luxuries as a waste. I would imagine that a lot of people sitting on your shoulder would shudder at your frugality.

Aldi and Lidl are objectively cheaper supermarkets, but twice as many people shop in Dunnes and Supervalu.

Pussyhands

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Could be house sharing with your partner

You're not wrong in what you say, but people's living standards usually match their income.
I used to live on 170 a week when I was a student and had plenty of cash for holidays and pints.
But I drove 15 mins out of my way to avoid the toll booth and bought the cheapest food in Lidl and clothes from Penneys.

I could choose to still do this, but I'm beyond living like a student. I wouldn't class spending money on luxuries as a waste. I would imagine that a lot of people sitting on your shoulder would shudder at your frugality.

Aldi and Lidl are objectively cheaper supermarkets, but twice as many people shop in Dunnes and Supervalu.

I'm not frugal. Buying Lidl own brand milk is the same product as Avonmore.

I don't even try to save, it just builds up. No one gives me easy money, so I'm not going to give anyone easy money either.

Yyhhuuu

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Like everything it depends on circumstances. It's easy to say "well I don't spend money on this, so why do other people?" or "too many people waste money".

It's also easy enough to see that you're probably mid 20's, male, single, renting and have no large outgoings. I've said this before on threads like this; the stage of your life you're in now is the cheapest. No wife, no kids, no mortgage, no school fees, no uniforms, no weddings to attend every other weekend, no car you're keeping on the road, no medical conditions, no creche fees, no care home fees.

Enjoy it, seriously, enjoy it, because things get more expensive when (or if) you move into the next stage of life.

Why has everybody in this country ( especially media) suddenly referred to nursing homes as care homes, which is so English.

I agree your savings rate depends on stage in life or outgoings. I can save the vast majority of my income if I want to as I have little outgoings. In fact I calculated I spend on average €3.25 per day on food and drink during the lockdown as nowhere to spend money. By the way I eat very healthily all on reduced to clear food. I enjoy looking for bargains.

Incidentally, as regards price of meat and fish I would regard Aldi and Lidl as not particularly cheap.

I just hate throwing money away as I see how hard it is to come by and I see how some poor people are treated like dirt. I get a great kick out of getting a bargain.

I used to really enjoy spending my money on experiences such as cheap trips abroad.

Jim2007

Pussyhands wrote: »

I just can't believe how much people spend. Too many people waste money. I'd love for people to sit on my shoulder and see what I spend my money on because I save very well.

Many would probably not be very impressed... and a lot of has to do with society and perception as well not just the math.


I've had people tell me they can't save on food because they need to buy organic products for health reasons. The fact that food quality has become an issue for everyone and food companies have had to up their game, is no appreciated.


In Ireland, getting on the property ladder is considered a wise move. But here in Switzerland, it's considered to one of the dumbest things you can do! They consider spending money on a 3/4 bedroom house for most of your life when you only need it for a short period while the kids are at home, to be a waste of money and a very high risk approach from a financial point of view.


People's perception of a waste of money differs greatly.

Padre_Pio

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

Why has everybody in this country ( especially media) suddenly referred to nursing homes as care homes, which is so English.

Care home is a catch all term for dependent and semi dependant care, including home help.

Yyhhuuu wrote: »

I just hate throwing money away as I see how hard it is to come by and I see how some poor people are treated like dirt. I get a great kick out of getting a bargain.

I used to really enjoy spending my money on experiences such as cheap trips abroad.

I understand your point, but it's not shared by the majority. Again, SuperValu and Dunnes are the most popular supermarkets and also the most expensive.
Not a lot of people will eat food (especially meat) at the sell-by date. More for you and me though.

The J Stands for Jay

pwurple wrote: »

Rule of thumb I go by... this is for pension savings.

By the time you are 30 you should have at least the equivalent of your annual income saved for retirement. By 40 it should be three times your annual income; by 50, six times; by 60, eight times and by retirement 10 times.

25 times annual expenditure saved at retirement is what you should be aiming for.

The J Stands for Jay

biko wrote: »

I remember an old mentor of mine that said as an adult you should have enough cash in the bank to last you at least one year.
So a year's salary.

If you're saving a year's salary, you'd be spending less than your salary, so you should be saving your your annual expenditure, not salary.

Jim2007

McGaggs wrote: »

25 times annual expenditure saved at retirement is what you should be aiming for.

This kind of thing is very subjective, if you read consumer articles here in Switzerland, they typically suggest you aim for an accumulated wealth on retirement of:

(Current Salary * 0.60) / 0.04

Best sit down before you do this calculation;-)

Buddy Bubs

Jim2007 wrote: »

This kind of thing is very subjective, if you read consumer articles here in Switzerland, they typically suggest you aim for an accumulated wealth on retirement of:

(Current Salary * 0.60) / 0.04

Best sit down before you do this calculation;-)

Gotta love the Swiss. Why didn't they just say 15 times salary. Or 25 times expenditure

Louis Friend

Buddy Bubs wrote: »

Gotta love the Swiss. Why didn't they just say 15 times salary. Or 25 times expenditure

It also makes no sense.

My income requirement in retirement will be far lower than it is now, even lower that 0.6.

When you strip out mortgage costs, kids, working costs, pension provision itself, and savings, there not much left.

It’s 0.33 as it happens.

Xaniaj

Jim2007 wrote: »

This kind of thing is very subjective, if you read consumer articles here in Switzerland, they typically suggest you aim for an accumulated wealth on retirement of:

(Current Salary * 0.60) / 0.04

Best sit down before you do this calculation;-)

Isn't that the exact same statement as 25 times annual expenditure?

OEP

Jim2007 wrote: »

Many would probably not be very impressed... and a lot of has to do with society and perception as well not just the math.


I've had people tell me they can't save on food because they need to buy organic products for health reasons. The fact that food quality has become an issue for everyone and food companies have had to up their game, is no appreciated.


In Ireland, getting on the property ladder is considered a wise move. But here in Switzerland, it's considered to one of the dumbest things you can do! They consider spending money on a 3/4 bedroom house for most of your life when you only need it for a short period while the kids are at home, to be a waste of money and a very high risk approach from a financial point of view.


People's perception of a waste of money differs greatly.

Does that depend on the canton? I'm guessing you're probably Zurich if you work in the finance/investment/banking industry. I work in pharma for a Swiss company, so Basel, and they seem pretty keen on getting onto the property ladder

Pussyhands

The whole pension thing seems like a marketing thing to me.

All the pensioners around today and around for the last 10-20 years, vast majority of these didn't have any pension outside the state pension and they're doing fine.

I saw some site on about pensions and calculations and they were saying the state pension might not even exist when you retire! Eh, there's no way someone will be left with 0 income.

The only reason I'm contributing to a pension is because it's matched by my employer.

The J Stands for Jay

Jim2007 wrote: »

This kind of thing is very subjective, if you read consumer articles here in Switzerland, they typically suggest you aim for an accumulated wealth on retirement of:

(Current Salary * 0.60) / 0.04

Best sit down before you do this calculation;-)

It's similar to the advice here, 2/3 of salary is what you are told to aim for as retirement income, which always seemed odd to me. Firstly as your expenditure is what should be considered, rather than income, and the 2/3 just seems like an arbitrary number.

The /0.04 is just the same as *25, and I agree, sit down first and don't panic. Best to do this calc in your 20s.

OEP

Pussyhands wrote: »

The whole pension thing seems like a marketing thing to me.

All the pensioners around today and around for the last 10-20 years, vast majority of these didn't have any pension outside the state pension and they're doing fine.

I saw some site on about pensions and calculations and they were saying the state pension might not even exist when you retire! Eh, there's no way someone will be left with 0 income.

The only reason I'm contributing to a pension is because it's matched by my employer.

"Doing fine" is very subjective. My parents, before covid, were going on big holidays around the world using their pension. You're not going to do that on the state pension.

The J Stands for Jay

Pussyhands wrote: »

The whole pension thing seems like a marketing thing to me.

All the pensioners around today and around for the last 10-20 years, vast majority of these didn't have any pension outside the state pension and they're doing fine.

I saw some site on about pensions and calculations and they were saying the state pension might not even exist when you retire! Eh, there's no way someone will be left with 0 income.

The only reason I'm contributing to a pension is because it's matched by my employer.

There's a fair few of them have pensions you just don't know about. Anyone who worked as a civil servant, or for a semi state is well looked after, and employer pension schemes were common in the past. Another reason that they are doing ok is that they don't have the same expensive lifestyles that we do. Their levels of expectation were set when Ireland just had less to spend your money on. We, on the other hand, need or 2 cars, semi annual new phones, 2 foreign holidays a year, minibreaks, fast fashion, etc. We'll all need more than €12k a year to keep all our crap going on.

The J Stands for Jay

Xaniaj wrote: »

Isn't that the exact same statement as 25 times annual expenditure?

I suppose it's just an easier rule of thumb to get someone engaged with their pension rather than having to get them figuring out their annual expenditure

Pussyhands

OEP wrote: »

"Doing fine" is very subjective. My parents, before covid, were going on big holidays around the world using their pension. You're not going to do that on the state pension.

You'd hardly be going on these big holidays at 75 anyways?

You're a pensioner, you don't need big holidays.

Xaniaj

Pussyhands wrote: »

You'd hardly be going on these big holidays at 75 anyways?

You're a pensioner, you don't need big holidays.

I 100% expect to be going on holidays when I'm retired.

Pussyhands

McGaggs wrote: »

There's a fair few of them have pensions you just don't know about. Anyone who worked as a civil servant, or for a semi state is well looked after, and employer pension schemes were common in the past. Another reason that they are doing ok is that they don't have the same expensive lifestyles that we do. Their levels of expectation were set when Ireland just had less to spend your money on. We, on the other hand, need or 2 cars, semi annual new phones, 2 foreign holidays a year, minibreaks, fast fashion, etc. We'll all need more than €12k a year to keep all our crap going on.

I just don't see myself caring about new cars or new phones when I'm 70.

OEP

Pussyhands wrote: »

You'd hardly be going on these big holidays at 75 anyways?

You're a pensioner, you don't need big holidays.

I didn't realise there was an age limit on needing holidays.

screamer

I’ve a decent level of savings after saving hard for the past 3 years. As for pensions I just don’t trust the government. Pensions are all oh tax relief at 40% yada yada. Yes, now maybe. There are 4 workers for every pensioner. When I get to retirement age, there’ll be even fewer workers per pensioner. Public sector pensions are far too much as in overpaid compared to contribution, so that’ll continue to eat the national pension funds. By retirement, which I fully expect to be around 70 by the time I get there, I also expect there to be state pensions of less than 100 per week and that private pensions will be fully taxable. Pensions for me, are a gamble, and I’d rather have something more tangible than that to rely on.

The J Stands for Jay

Pussyhands wrote: »

You'd hardly be going on these big holidays at 75 anyways?

You're a pensioner, you don't need big holidays.

Yeah, once I hit 68 (or whatever age the government tell me), I'll only be interested in bingo and trips to the bank and post office.

The J Stands for Jay

screamer wrote: »

I’ve a decent level of savings after saving hard for the past 3 years. As for pensions I just don’t trust the government. Pensions are all oh tax relief at 40% yada yada. Yes, now maybe. There are 4 workers for every pensioner. When I get to retirement age, there’ll be even fewer workers per pensioner. Public sector pensions are far too much as in overpaid compared to contribution, so that’ll continue to eat the national pension funds. By retirement, which I fully expect to be around 70 by the time I get there, I also expect there to be state pensions of less than 100 per week and that private pensions will be fully taxable. Pensions for me, are a gamble, and I’d rather have something more tangible than that to rely on.

Private pensions already are taxable.

Antares35

Pussyhands wrote: »

You'd hardly be going on these big holidays at 75 anyways?

You're a pensioner, you don't need big holidays.

Why not? Surely retirement is a time to do it? Are they meant to just sit by the fire in a rocking chair?

screamer

McGaggs wrote: »

Private pensions already are taxable.

Yes, but not to the point that they will be in future, that’s what I mean by fully taxable. Pension funds are not taxed at the same rate as income for under 66s. Be prepared to hand over a whole lot more of the pension fund to the taxman as the squeeze tightens.