In a country where savings don’t seem to matter….

[Unap100]

Do you really blame anyone for squandering their retirement fund and expecting the government to pick up the tab?

I’ve been an avid saver. I am not hugely wealthy but through my savings I’ve recently paid my house off of 450k and I’m 39. I have 34k in the bank.

But to what end?

YES of course there are benefits personally and NO I don’t want to be on the bones of my arse with no choices in life.

But seriously… I’ve worked in care homes etc and why the hell should one person have that funded and the next person have worked all their life to fund it? You might get a slightly nicer care home for a bit but they’re all underfunded and barely satisfactory anyway.

Genuinely, where’s the fairness in that? Where’s the incentive to work? It then either goes to a care home or taxed away.

I never thought I’d say this but spending it all while you can doesn’t seem a bad idea. AIBU? What’s your view on this?!

Indeed! There was a 1000 post thread in this exact subject last weekend

if the OP is really that interested they'll be more than happy to read it all

How many times does someone not go to the pub in order to be able to afford to buy a house? Perhaps the price of avocado toast should be added into that. And all those holidays that people take when they could be earnestly saving.

Why the stereotyped example of the pub? Have you seen how much women spend on make-up, toiletries and perfume? And coffee?? tattoos???

There are definitely some people who can both go to the pub as well as buy an house and there are definitely some people who can do neither. This sort of false equivalence is so harmful and destructive. Not everyone who is in the pub is a wastrel.

My incentive to work is holidays, nice house, paying for dd's hobbies and activities, going out for meals, going to a nice gym. Nothing to do with whether I'll have to be in a care home or not. My mum died in her mid 60s, I could very well not make it that far. .
Second thread of this nature in as many weeks that I've read. Are people really suggesting it's better to be poor all your life, have no ambition or motivation, get benefits, never own property or give your kids opportunities, just so you get cheaper care home placement in the small eventuality you end up in one.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5515602-to-think-its-unfair-to-sell-your-home-to-fund-care-when-older-while-others-pay-nothing

thread from last weekend on this exact topic

Spend your money then. Have nice holidays, do your house up, eat out. There’s plenty you can do to legitimately reduce your savings.

@HoppityBun Precisely. Not much has changed has it x

Choice and independence that is what money will buy you. And that is worth a huge amount.

As the baby boom generation move in to inform old age over the next 20 years there is going to be huge strain on social care funds and the NHS and I wouldn't bet on many people needing publically funded care getting that much.

I don’t know how people can live their one and only lives full of bitter and envy at who might get the best care home. My mum also died in her 60s. I’m approaching the age she was. No one in our family has ever been in a care home. No one has a crystal ball. Just enjoy every minute you have. I don’t understand how to live any other way

Exacrly that.

My grandad needed care at the end of his life as he had a disabling stroke at 90 (ironically it would have killed a less healthy man but he lived a further 5 years).

He owned some land that he hoped to pass on to his children , but most of it was sold to pay for his care. We are not bitter. He got good care at a time in his life he needed extra help and we are happy he had the funds to choose where to go

You've worked in care homes and have paid off a 450k mortgage at 39?.....

Sensitive much? Happy for you to swap to any of those examples if it makes you happy.

make sure someone knows where those sovereigns are, or at the very least that they exist and the rough location, otherwise they could very easily be lost when you die.

You are not being unreasonable and no it's not fair. That's the thing though life's not fair.

It's not fair my boomer parents could get jobs for life, have grants pay for their education, afford to raise a family of 4 on one salary, buy a house on that one salary and have 400K sitting in a pension fund they haven't even touched.

Yet here we are. There's nothing anyone's going to do about it because forward thinking doesn't buy votes. If there's one good thing it's that with so many millennials and gen z not having children because sadly children are now a luxury gen alpha & gen beta may be able to right that wrong.

Thats just what we need criminals thinking - older people are gathering huge amounts of silver and gold that nobody knows about.
Can't imagine that resulting in anything fucking terrifying.

There’s no way I would do that.

If you’ve paid off your mortgage and need to focus on your pension then do that as aggressively as you can, or downsize and move the spare money, but I would not take out another mortgage. The security of owning the bricks and mortar is too important.

Of course savings matter. Your entire assumption and basis for argument is flawed.
Currently living off mine until pension age...

I find so much of the sentiments on these sort of threads so depressing.
While I appreciate that it feels unfair for people to have to sell assets etc to fund their care in old age the idea that those who don't pay are all feckless and should only be entitled to some kind of basic, Dickensian type of support is sickening.
My mother who at 78 is about to move into a nursing home due to having dementia and being completely bed bound due to arthritis/said dementia and shall be fully state funded.
My parents worked all their lives, from 14 and 16, in low paid but vital jobs. My father was, before his death 14 months after retiring, a cleaner in a hospital (working 12 hour days as he effectively had 2 jobs coverng the day shift and evening). My mother also worked in the hospital giving out the dinners, plus being a cleaner in people's homes whilst also volunteering at our primary school while all of us attended. Their only 'fecklessness' was having 5 kids - and Dad smoked until his early 40s and liked a few pints on a Saturday evening. We lived in a cramped council house and went on holiday every couple of years to a caravan. We did not receive benefits other than standard child benefit. There wasn't loads of money to be feckless with but also certainly not enough to save or buy our council flat in London in order to have an asset to fund their old age (they would not have agreed with buying council property anyway). All 5 of their children have also always worked and all work in the public sector.
As with those struggling today I get the impression that many would think my parents should have 'bettered' themselves i.e done evening classes, retrained to earn more and to become more financially literate but without appreciating not all are capable of that. I think it is so depressing that that there is so much moral judgement surrounding around 'poorer' people.
So due to not having been able to save more than the potential costs of her funeral should my mother, who may have helped your mother to eat her dinner in hospital, cleaned your neighbours house or potentially listened to your children read be placed into a basic, "hostel-type" (as mentioned in a previous post) accommodation? Why? As some type of punishment?
Is it fair I won't recieve any inheritance while some shall recieve funds from grandparents and parents? No it is just life. What I do feel is unfair is how care for certain illnesses, like Dementia, do need to be paid while others don't. That doesn't really make sense to me.

It astounds me that within 80 years we've gone from no obligation to provide/pay for care, to people being grateful that care is provided, to people being so jealous of others who are less fortunate than them that they would deliberately deprive themselves.

@Lougle but demographics have changed hugely in that time period.

Well OP, by my calculation you've paid off around 40k a year for your mortgage and savings, plus EXISTING I assume, so you must be raking in a small fortune in terms of your job.

Are you not enjoying life?

Op you’ve already paid off a house with a mortgage that a HUGE amount of people can’t afford PLUS you have savings? How on earth are you not wealthy? And why are you even thinking about this? You will have a financially worry less life, why do you care age 39 about the end game part of it all?

I don’t know. I don’t want to be 40 with a paid up house and low savings.

I honestly would feel more comfortable if it was 50:50 at 40. Most people these days don’t buy their own first home until 35! So we are way ahead atm with 300k equity. But also massively behind on pension. (I have 6k!) I don’t want to lose out on the compounding anymore than I already have.

You can actually enjoy yourself in your retirement, if you have savings. You don't go from working to a care home. You could save and then retire early and do all the things you never had time for. You're not saving for care home fees are you?

Put your money in ISAs tax free or pensions where you get tax relief on contributions and tax free lump sums. Look at the benefits of saving.

You could downsize when you retire (or move to a cheaper area) and invest the difference for income.

I do remember thinking this when my dad went into sheltered accommodation. Of c. 40 people living there he was one of two that were self funding. He’d only earned a low wage but had always saved. However that aside earning more gives you huge freedom. I’d argue that you are wealthy - being mortgage free on a property worth £450k in your 30s is considerably better off than most people. Seeing my parents scrimp and save all their lives only to be too ill to enjoy their savings when they retired does make me think you need to take a balanced approach between saving and spending to enjoy life.