Older workers should not be forced to retire at 65. As the country comes out of recession we face a very real threat of not having enough workers. This is the view of Baroness Margaret Prosser, deputy chair of the Equality and and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
Hear, hear, the Rertired Old Blogger cries. Forcing people to retire at a specified age (currently 60 for women and 65 for men, but changing to 65 for both by 2020) is a nonsense and creates problems for the economy. There's a loss of skills and a pending pensions crisis that can only get worse.
Research conducted by EHRC found that 24% of men and 64% of women plan to continue working after they reach the official retirement age. All this has prompted the EHRC to come up with proposals for a complete change to employment practices.
They have woken up to the fact that today's population is moving away from systems established when people pegged out shortly after retiring and wives didn't work.
Nowadays, pensions are barely adequate and have to last a lot longer. The vast majority of people will need to be earning well beyond their 'official' retirement age. Good thing the Retirement Revenue website is their to help them out.
CLICK HERE to go to the Retirement Revenue Website
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
MAGIC BOXES
I had lunch with a friend of mine a couple of weeks back, John. I say lunch, it was a pie and a pint, but welcome for all that. Anyway, John started telling me about this software programme that automated foreign exchange trading. John, being a bit of a punter, thought he'd give it a go and signed up. He opened an account with a respected spread betting company, funded it and loaded up the programme.
"It's magic," he said. "Don't have to do anything. The programme works on a particular currency pair over a specified time frame, analyses loads of data and then decides when to trade. It automatically sets profit limits and stop losses." He went on in full praise, "I've been running it for about 10 days and it's made me about £250. It just creams off a few pips, not big money, but each trade seems to make between £15 and £35."
Now I don't know about you, but I don't like the idea of handing over control of my finances to a black box where I have no real control over what it's doing. The value of a currency can either go up or go down - it rarely stays the same for long. You can win either way, but you can also lose either way. So, to state the blindingly obvious, you need more winners than losers AND your winners should have a higher monetary value than your losers. If this all sounds a bit confusing the Retirement Revenue website had a decent article on the subject the last time I looked and their free eBook also has a chapter on spread betting. It's not rocket science, but it's worth a look.
Anyway, I saw John in the pub again yesterday. He wasn't quite so happy. His programme had continued to make a few pounds on most trades, but then a couple of nights ago it lost the best part of £1,000 on one disastrous trade. He was so emotionally devastated by this that he shut the programme down straight away.
You see, many of these programmes operate by setting the profit target quite close to the original trade price and therefore just take a few pounds per trade. But, they have a stop loss that is miles away 'to give the trade some breathing room'. Trouble is, if the trade goes badly against you and hits the stop loss, you are seriously out of pocket. In John's case, his 'system' had made 17 successful trades at an average of £24 per trade for a profit of £408. However, he had one, just one, loosing trade that cost him the best part of £1,000.
I reckon that if you want to trade currencies, or shares or oil or frilly knickers, you have to have a basic understanding of the market, whether that's the Foreign Exchange market, the Stock Exchange or Petticoat Lane. If someone offers you a 'magic box' with an 80% success rate - think on.
"It's magic," he said. "Don't have to do anything. The programme works on a particular currency pair over a specified time frame, analyses loads of data and then decides when to trade. It automatically sets profit limits and stop losses." He went on in full praise, "I've been running it for about 10 days and it's made me about £250. It just creams off a few pips, not big money, but each trade seems to make between £15 and £35."
Now I don't know about you, but I don't like the idea of handing over control of my finances to a black box where I have no real control over what it's doing. The value of a currency can either go up or go down - it rarely stays the same for long. You can win either way, but you can also lose either way. So, to state the blindingly obvious, you need more winners than losers AND your winners should have a higher monetary value than your losers. If this all sounds a bit confusing the Retirement Revenue website had a decent article on the subject the last time I looked and their free eBook also has a chapter on spread betting. It's not rocket science, but it's worth a look.
Anyway, I saw John in the pub again yesterday. He wasn't quite so happy. His programme had continued to make a few pounds on most trades, but then a couple of nights ago it lost the best part of £1,000 on one disastrous trade. He was so emotionally devastated by this that he shut the programme down straight away.
You see, many of these programmes operate by setting the profit target quite close to the original trade price and therefore just take a few pounds per trade. But, they have a stop loss that is miles away 'to give the trade some breathing room'. Trouble is, if the trade goes badly against you and hits the stop loss, you are seriously out of pocket. In John's case, his 'system' had made 17 successful trades at an average of £24 per trade for a profit of £408. However, he had one, just one, loosing trade that cost him the best part of £1,000.
I reckon that if you want to trade currencies, or shares or oil or frilly knickers, you have to have a basic understanding of the market, whether that's the Foreign Exchange market, the Stock Exchange or Petticoat Lane. If someone offers you a 'magic box' with an 80% success rate - think on.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Pensions Black Hole
There's a stark warning by Steve Webb, Liberal Democrat Shadow Works and Pensions Secretary, that council tax will rise to plug the looming £60 billion (yes, billion) hole in local government pensions. According to a report in the Telegraph, fund managers in charge of local government pensions revealed that 83 out of 87 schemes were in deficit in 2007.
According to the Telegraph, Mr Wbb said that millions of people could be faced with cuts to vital services and council tax hikes, hitting pensioners especially hard.
Apparently, town hall pensions are costing every taxpaying household almost £300 per year. That sounds like a huge amount to me that isn't being spent on cleaning the streets or emptying the bins.
The government claims that the size of the deficit is just speculation and the Unite Union has said that the Liberal Democrats forecast is "far removed from financial reality."
Still, it's food for thought isn't it. Even if the 'black hole' was a smaller percentage of the amount claimed by Mr Webb, the question still remains as to how it's going to be filled. Someone, somewhere is going to have to pay.
For information about supplementing your own pension, visit the Retirement Revenue website.
According to the Telegraph, Mr Wbb said that millions of people could be faced with cuts to vital services and council tax hikes, hitting pensioners especially hard.
Apparently, town hall pensions are costing every taxpaying household almost £300 per year. That sounds like a huge amount to me that isn't being spent on cleaning the streets or emptying the bins.
The government claims that the size of the deficit is just speculation and the Unite Union has said that the Liberal Democrats forecast is "far removed from financial reality."
Still, it's food for thought isn't it. Even if the 'black hole' was a smaller percentage of the amount claimed by Mr Webb, the question still remains as to how it's going to be filled. Someone, somewhere is going to have to pay.
For information about supplementing your own pension, visit the Retirement Revenue website.
Monday, January 4, 2010
What's in Store?
Well, here we are. Not just at the start of a new year, but the beginning of a new decade. 2010 is also the year that we launch the Retirement Revenue website (actually on January 14th). The site is designed to help the baby boomers make the most of their pensions, savings and investments. And for those of us that are a bit short on the income front (who isn't?) there are stacks of ideas about how to make some extra cash. We don't mean the 'Get Rich Quick' schemes, if that's what you're after you need a different site, we mean ideas for earning an extra income to supplement you pension or your savings. This is the sort of information that will be available to you:-
Make sure you check out the website after it goes live on January 14th, 2010. We'll be giving you the link on this blog.
Be well.
- How to set up your own business working from home
- How to write articles (even books) that actually get published
- How to get the best deposit rates
- How to improve investment returns
- Discover safe investment ideas
- Find out about annuities
- How to save money on a raft of everyday expenses
- Where to get the best insurance
- Shop for specially selected goods and services
Make sure you check out the website after it goes live on January 14th, 2010. We'll be giving you the link on this blog.
Be well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
