Comments by "Tony L" (@tlangdon12) on "Will your pension provide for your old age?" video.

  1. I think Richard's point still holds for public pensions - unless the public services of tomorrow are the services that the younger generations want, then there will be no funding to pay public pensions.
    3
  2. It falls to the investment managers to make sure that the money is invested wisely. Richard's point is that, while many try to do so, the world and local economies are likely to be changing so rapidly in the near future that even these experts cannot adjust their portfolios swiftly enough. They need to be able to sell asset A to buy asset B, and if they are late trying to sell asset A they will not realise enough money to buy asset B. Part of the answer is diversification. In reality, different economies will change at different rates, and different asset classes will become stale at different rates. This creates a real value to the work of the professional investment managers, something Richard seems to ascribe little value to, as well as providing hope that the transition can be managed well enough for the majority of pensioners to continue to receive income from their pension savings.
    2
  3. I think Richard understands that pension assets are dynamic, but he is suggesting a far greater dynamism will be needed to ensure that pension funds remain invested in assets that are capable of producing a return in the future. He is also concerned about the assets that are being superseded - who will buy them if they clearly have a very limited life left - the price of them will reflect the limited life and the loser will be the pensioner whose pension fund has hung onto the asset for too long.
    2
  4.  @downshift4503  Agreed. The motivation to create the goods and services that sustain life has to be maintained. If a Universal Income would destroy the motivation to create these goods and services, we can't have it.
    2
  5. But it doesn't have to be. There are sustainable alternatives to most of the uses of oil, but there will probably always be a requirement to produce some oil. However, if people won't stop burning plastics at the end of their life, then governments might have to prevent the production of oil using more draconian means.
    2
  6. Richard suggested that we would not have a use for oil. This is not correct. Some uses of mineral oil are unlikely to ever be replaced, such as plastics manufacturing, and certain lubricants. These uses don't require the oil to be burned unless we fail to recycle the plastics and burn them carelessly. One interesting question is what will happen to the petrol that is necessarily produced as a by-product of refining crude oil, when we no longer want to burn it as fuel.
    1
  7. The core message is that saving for your pension is only possible if you can buy assets that will remain valuable. If all the assets you can buy don't remain valuable for very long, then you can't easily save for your retirement. Richard is asserting that many assets that pension funds currently invest in do not have a long-term viability, and he is questioning why pension funds are not investing in assets that are more likey to be viable in the long-term.
    1
  8.  @CecilJRhodes  Only someone who hates the society they live in would rather spend money on things they don't need (causing waste and pollution) rather than pay it in tax to benefit their fellow citizens.
    1
  9. Sorry to hear you are struggling. Your comment is the strongest recommendation for people to learn more about how their pensions work.
    1