I'm 51yrs old. $40,000 weekly and *I'm retired, this video have inspired me greatly in many ways that I remember my past of how I struggled with many things in life to be where I am today!!!!* ❤️
Same here waking up every 14th of each month to 210,000 dollars it's a blessing to l and my family... I can now retire knowing that I have a steady income❤️Big gratitude to Maria Frances Hanlon
This is why I've spent decades learning how to invest and manage my money. I retired at 44 years old, 10 years ago. I have a diverse portfolio of global investments. The UK pension providers are charging you a lot of money for crappy returns. Most people have zero clue where their pension money is invested.
*Amazing video, you work for 40yrs to have $1M in your retirement, meanwhile some people are putting just $10K into trading from just few months ago and now they are multimillionaires*
After I raised up to 325k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states 🇺🇸🇺🇸 also paid for my son's surgery (Oscar). Glory to God.shalom.
Good day all👍🏻 from Australia 🇦🇺. I have read a lot of posts that people are very happy with the financial guidance she is giving them ! What way can I get to her exactly ?
I manage my own money so I'm not relying on what a fund manager does. I do think though that it is dangerous for most people to make guesses at what is likely to rise in value due to preconceived ideas of the future (and the timing of when those ideas will bear fruits). For most people, broad index funds are probably better.
Good analysis Richard, the commercial nature of our society exposed, the only thing that matters is short term profit. If you come up with a way to fix that you will be doing well, something like a new type of company formed under government that has a social mandate and any excess profit must be invested for the future. Some of this investment could be used to provide loans to startups etc as the current funding methods would not be available.
@@eaglebeagle1408 Who said they could, I advocated for a ban on ltd etc that legally have to seek maximum profit no matter the cost socially or environmentally. Max profit companies could still exist just without the benefit of being an ltd subsidised by government when it goes wrong which is what max profit tends to do, just look at banking.
I used to tell colleagues that our pensions depend on succeeding generations playing their part in the economy. This was particularly a discussion with those without children who became annoyed at child friendly employment policies.
You have been basically slagging off the whole reliance on banking system and it's laziness to invest into things that are not materially helpful in the future. And that is completely true, sadly. When you think of it, young people get almost nothing in development, in making their life better, safer. Young won't care about a billionaire not being able to drill the next oil field, they will care about not having a home, not having a good safe life due to huge rent, unprecedented weather conditions and so on.
Flooding is just one example. It’s of course not the full picture and I recommend to viewers to research climate change impacts on the UK beyond 2050. It is not exciting reading, mostly scientific papers, but the conclusions will provide enough “thrill” it’s worth it Fun fact: recent extreme weather events (relatively mild) impacted wheat farming in uk reducing yields by 17%. According to the 2050 forecasts this “extreme event” will be a norm by then, a typical occurrence. Flash floods overwhelming current sewage systems will become a norm. Heatwaves of 44 degrees Celsius will be regular events, prolonged periods of high pressure (cold domes) will be a norm, and so on…
@@user-xu5vl5th9n How is it that you people even find these videos on YT? I thought the algorithms keep you in some kind of social media tin foil bubble.
So a passive index ETF does not care which companies are winners or losers it just makes adjustments when values move up and down. You appear to think pension hold individual stocks in perpetuity?
A passive index is always buying in a rising market, and selling in a falling one. Not optimum. (companies fall out of the index because their price has already fallen, and enter because it has already risen.)
I don’t bother saving for a pension. With how apocalyptically bad climate change is going to get in the next 25 years or so I think it’s extremely likely money I paid into a pension either wouldn’t be there or would have inflated away to be worth very little. I don’t earn much but I’d rather put money into tangible things and if I don’t get to retire ever and just die if I can’t look after myself past a certain old age then so be it.
Some days my pension makes more than I do and some days it loses as much or more. Mr Murphy discounts the role markets play. Pension fund investments are constantly changing and the underlying investments by companies are constantly changing as the market dictates. Nothing stays the same.
Just save in a passive tracker fund and live off the dividends paid by the top x listed companies during your retirement. Since the composition of the indexes that are being tracked changes over time, there is no need to second guess what future generations might or might not find useful. You are by definition always invested in the top listed companies. By all means, stick your money into sustainable housing, but the humble S&P500 will out perform you any day.
Oil is used for so much more than just running vehicles and heating houses without oil most of the mordern products would disappear from electronic appliances to footwear to clothes etc etc.
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.
@@tlangdon12 How about we stop the production of useless governments using draconian means and continue with all the benefits of oil until we finally realise that humans have no impact on the planet. By using this comment space my carbon foot print is Zero. Have a nice day
I recall Greenspans comment to Paul Ryan, that the Fed can create as much money as it want to pay pensioners, but the challenge is the creation of goods and services available for purchase when those pensioners want to spend it. We're not growing the economy sufficiently.
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.
I saw you interviewed earlier about farming and inheritance tax and oh boy you didn’t like your opinions being challenged as you were furious and almost lost control of yourself. I mean this sincerely don’t let yourself get so worked up in future when someone challenges your opinion because it’s not personal.
@@Skylark_Jones predictions are difficult, especially about the future. The pension industry and governments got burnt by offering guarantees in the past.
If there is public misunderstanding here then, like so many other principles in the national economy, it is the failure of government to correct the narrative (Like money creation and the household economy analogy). Most people assume the money they pay into a pension is guaranteed to retain it value over the long term as it is invested wisely, if this is not true then it's a fraud.
Hydrogen production..it's another nonsense..not because the idea is good or the emissions are zero but because the mathematical ROI is off the scale wrong....even if you make free electricity to create the hydrogen..it simply not efficient in any meaningful way..but billions is poured into this elephant by pension funds with zero chance of any commercial ROI..
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.
@@tlangdon12 Good reason NOT to use an investment manager- manage investments yourself. Since they do not beat the market, and cost money (charges) not good at the best of times. In risky situations you win- you can sell easily at any time. A fund cannot- it would move the market. Especially any property portfolio!
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.
@@Stuart-f2m It's not gold plated pensions for the vast majority of public sector pension scheme members. The entire capitalist system is unsustainable as it's one big pyramid scheme.
It’s all about tangible assets Richard makes sense investment in the stocks and shares they go up there. Go down investment in old technology is silly inherently the problem is humans you make mistakes how many pensions over the decades people thought they’d be safe to find out the pension didn’t do quite as good as was promised the pension providers okay the person you took out that pension isn’t
They can print all the money in the world to fund the military and wars. They can simply do the exact same thing for retired people who, on average, will only live 10 years thereafter. 🤓
"The Pension Reality" ... the motion of money 💰 and capital flows... ? "Stranded Assets" and the younger generation "pension oversight " "the pension contract"
You seem to be missing the bigger point about reality mattering, rather than abstract, short term financial speculation. Capital matters more than money. Also, Murphy seems to be talking about how and why the public pensions system works over the generations and you're talking about private pensions, which have neither the power nor the responsibility and are based on short term speculation rather than long term national vision
What's the take on the fact annuities, which 5 years or so ago offered a fixed return of around £5K per £100K in the pension pot, now offer around £7.5K to £8K per £100K? What exactly is the reason for this? I was able to work until I was almost 70, for the last 4 years of working, for 3 days a week, while drawing my State Pension, meaning my income didn't fall by much. Now the annuity on offer is much better than it was in 2019, when I reached State Pension Age. Currently many people are using a property portfolio to fund their income in retirement, is Richard suggesting this is a bad idea? Really? Given the inexorable rise in property prices, due to lack of property construction for domestic dwellings, in real terms in the UK since 2000, and the near certainty that action will be taken to prevent flooding in the near future, property values (certainly for domestic dwellings) are going one way and so are rents, upwards, for the foreseeable future. He also seems to miss the fact there are huge areas in the UK, where flooding almost never happens, nor is it ever likely to, I live in one, for 40 years our house has never once come near to being flooded.
"Oil" is a huge resource as a chemical not just for fuel Oil, so guess what we will always use Oil but in different ways. Can this Oil be replaced with something else then yes, the question here is will Oil be replaced as a chemical resource??? Time will tell. As for Pensions, they rely on the companies chosen to run them and the regulatory bodies the oversee them, trust is the word here.
Oil as a chemical feedstock only accounts for about 15% of total usage, improved recycling and alternatives to plastics are expected to reduce that by 60%, so oil demand purely as a feedstock will drop to something like 6% of the current overall oil market.
Oil demonstrators are calling for a stop of new oil wells. Not all oil straight away. Some oil will be needed, but a lot of plastics can be made with other materials such as hemp. Something the oil companies would rather not talk about. Stop oil and stop wars.
Your argument would appear to be based on the assumption that pension assets are static when in fact most pension plans (at least here in North America) have highly dynamic investments. In other words the assets held by many pension plans change constantly.
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.
Many valid points. 1) Unfortunately, Junk food, alcohol and tobacco companies are profitable because people will buy their products, even though they know the effects are detrimental (or even fatal) to them. 2) As birth rates fall and the population ages, the triple lock on the state pension is unsustainable, but no political party will be honest about this because they will loose votes. 3) The Workplace pension has been a success in terms of uptake, but the default funds are one size fits all which leads to poor performance. 4) Some counties such as Ireland and Australia have means tested state pensions.
The term "pension" is a complete misnomer, especially the way we use it in the UK. There is nothing at all that a state pension has in common with a privately invested DC pension
Absolutely. It's outright misleading to conflate the two by giving them the same name. One is an entitlement and the other is a tax friendly personal savings scheme.
I think it's more that they don't LIKE what a pension is. The idea of each succeeding generation funding those who have retired on the understanding that the next generation will fund them is WAY too collectivist for them.
@@charliemoore2551 I think you're right. And yet a public pension is so abstract - what's the problem? - and explicitly wrapped up in the social contract and nationalism - what's the problem? How can a person hate 'collectivism' and yet be a nationalist? Personally, I don't like the word collectivism because it seems to be used as the 'evil other' to individualism. This offends me as a hyper-individualist, civil libertarian socialist
So you have two options , invest in something that does make money for the time being, or invest in hair brained youngster ideas that wont make anything that will just sap your investment . Catcher 22.
There's no catch. We just have to invest long term. And we have to invest in real productive things, social goods that retain their value over the long term
@@WarrenPeaceOG Not when most people aren't interested , investors are like Meerkats they check to see if its safe before moving , as everything is unstable , they dont move.
Thought provoking. However the possibility that this government, and the subsequent ones that will follow it, have the competence to know how best to invest my pension funds seems very remote to me! I think I will stick to my SIPP that allows me to decide where my money is invested.
Apart from a few pension funds (like some local authority funds) the government doesn't 'invest' your payment. Its like a Ponzi scheme in which your payments are used to fund today's pensioners.
Personally, my plan is save money and solar installed on my roof - and if it would be possible, wind turbine(not the huge ones you do see on the fields!). Not because I'm a greenie, but because it is better not to rely on a private company to provide me with the things I need and may need in the future.
For those that don't know, Richard Murphy was involved in a bit of tax avoidance when he actively moved his company to the Republic of Ireland. Have a Google, and learn a lot about hypocrisy.
I can see Universal Basic Income linked to a Central Bank Digital Currency or perhaps some sort of token? The future sounds scary as AI and automation will take away lots of jobs, perhaps some new ones perhaps? I'm concerned about a possible catastrophe. I'm also concerned about less pensions and more assisted dying.
The State Pension is a already form of that and arguably the wider benefits system. Obviously they have criteria rather than being universal, but if poverty increases then more people qualify. It's not a problem to create tokens (ie that is, pounds sterling), but it is a problem to create the goods and services.
You have no idea, how many jobs are gone in the past 200 years. About 200 years ago almost 90% of the population worked as farmers. Today it is about 1-2%. So almost all jobs are gone since then.
@@downshift4503 Also valid points. I put the problem of creating goods and services down to many factors (how much of 'x' a particular market can bear, the courage of new people entering into those markets - or being put off self-employment that might eventually create more jobs, in some cases regulations or acquiring required certification, etc). I think the main reason has been the lack of support for individuals moving into self-employment and the continued lack of support to these one 'man' bands as they reach various points in their business's growth (it seems that neo-liberalism supports the biggest, wealthiest businesses by enabling wealth to accumulate at the top - thus limiting competition - and doesn't care too much for those trying to establish themselves (these would be more likely to create local jobs in any number - taken collectively - than a gigawarehouse with limited staff, as an example). So my belief is that neo-liberal thinking and practice actually stifles growth and reduces local industry (as in activity, as much as busines) regarding goods and services, thus reduces local wealth creation.
@@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.
It is my experience that many, including very well educated people, think that the money they pay in to their pension is ‘saved’ in a little box somewhere with their name on it that they can draw down when they retire. Many don’t even realise it’s invested. This ignorance trickles down through the generations and those working don’t seem to have a clue that they are paying my pension. Probably just as well!
Mainly because of the hysterical rhetoric thrown around by climate fanatics. They are all currently running around trying to delete their postings of 5 years ago because by today we were all supposed to be dead! They did no favours for the climate debate - and still don't. The population needs to be persuaded and enabled to make the necessary changes and not told they must buy a £45,000 electric car (80% of the population have never been able to buy any new car of any type) and get a heat pump - the final cost of which is not £8,000 but more like £15,000 by the time all the house is re-plumbed. Can we please have a sensible transition programme.
Listened through this twice and didn't understand the core message (if there is one). It seems that a lot of people in the comments also did not understand. Can you do again in a simple way?
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.
Nope, mine do- my pension funds are/were in cash. Which is fungible, and my cash cannot be separated out. Does not grow in cash? Not a problem- when you have 'enough' you do not need to put it at hazard to get more. Losses are caused by greed. My spreadsheet says I will never spend all I have. Government oversight? Really? You think governments engage in long term planning? No evidence of it...
@@alecdurbaville6355 Don't worry, I am in gold too. But cash is less at risk than 'investments'. Inflation? Have you examined how they calculate it? I have run a spreadsheet for 35 years- I know exactly what MY inflation is. And returns on cash have far exceeded it. Investments have the possibility of growing more- but I can sleep soundly at night.
@@alecdurbaville6355 Don't worry- I am in gold too. Inflation? Have you examined how they measure it? I have run a spreadsheet for 35 years, and I know MY inflation precisely. And cash has stayed well ahead of it,
Oh dear, what a load of scaremongering. Investment follows the returns. The biggy you haven’t mentioned? The Government changing the rules😡 Brown and now Rachel from accounts! How well have the two green deals worked out? Answer, they didn’t! As with all investments they should be spread. Judging the change over is key, but no way should the gov determine where to invest. Shareholders should lead the way NOT bill payers, perhaps tell Ed!
Depends on your lifestyle. I can live AND do On 200 a week. Thats witha a car and a 2 week greek holiday every year. Our house and cars are paid for and only require the maintenance. Some people spend 200 on supper in a restaurant
I am with you. Perfectly possible to live on a state pension alone. My wife and I pay for all our normal outgoings (incl running two cars) on 50% of our combined state pensions. We add luxury holidays in an attempt to stop it building up too much.
😠 Jolly good for you. Do tell how much your house cost. And your car. And when you bought them. What was the cost of living at those times? What were you earning? Could you afford such expenses on one income? Please help the rest of us, who are living in very difficult financial circumstances NOT of our making 😡!
@@sirmeowthelibrarycat I'm in a similar position to the OP and I'm under no illusion that my ability to live cheaply today is due to buying a house in the 1990s. I didn't know then that house prices would explode without wages following along, though it remains a popular belief that houses will increase in price forever. Housing is, IMO, the single biggest failure of the economy and its not unique to the UK.
@@sirmeowthelibrarycat Over time, the real cost of most things reduce- but more things are made and compete for our money. I was 23 before I lived in a house with central heating. Before that it was a single fire (coal or gas). Now full house heating is regarded as a basic minimum (heat or eat moan). Key methods to be ahead- -never borrow for anything that does not increase in value. -Do as much as possible yourself. Paying someone else (tradesman etc) to do something means that you are paying with money you have paid tax on to someone who will have to pay tax on it. (I built my own house.) -Do not follow fashion, or care about other people's view of what you buy/do. -Practice delayed gratification (If I wanted something, I waited a month before buying it. By then I often no longer wanted it- or had even forgotten that I wanted it). -Do not buy new cars (they are not more reliable). Let someone else pay the huge depreciation. And no, you cannot do it on one income. That was only possible a long time ago. Before central heating, cars, phones (even land line type) televisions and takeaways (except fish & chips, at around 7d per person). That is all you get for free- more I charge for (that is the other side of it).
Depends what you are doing as a job and how life events change , we don't get a great deal of information on pensions ,you pay into it you trust the trustees , but there is not a lot of info given . I thought I would be successful and put money into a fund ,sometimes life hits you with a curve ball , I paid into the NHS , but I thought the overtime I did ,would build up in my pension , I did not have a clue . It was frozen , I get a pittance , and now I'm judged on those savings , so because of Ill planing , I'm going to have to work well into old age with a broken body .😮
Bla bla bla! What a doomsday opinion. Has it not been noticed for example that areas of investments change over time, we do not invest in canals anymore and there is big investment in tech. If we start to see fast changes in sea level rise, adaptions will be made. The chance that we can alter to any significant extent the rise in sea levels is pie in the sky, by all means we should make sensible changes to our way of life but with the world population all aspiring to more ‘stuff’ controlling the climate is not going to work in my opinion we must just adapt to the changing climate if we wish to survive.
Exactly.... he's totally glossed over the fact that the stock market constantly shifts based upon what's in demand, and has always done so. This video presents it as a completely static makeup.
Transfering to a green economy isn't controlling the climate rhat lurerally is adapting. The only people making bogus claims of "controlling the climate" are the people boasting about carbon capture technology.
Not really. Humans are immensely capable of adaptation. We just move if we can't. But the only thing thats real is human overpopulation. The weather is fine Stop this regurgitating sea levels. Do you know for instance that sweden is rising..? Coastal erotion in the UK is not sea lever rising. Did you know that the town of rye used to have the sea 200m away.? Swings and roundabouts The kids are safe if they don't breed like a Bangladesh
😠 Phew! What a rant . . . Now you have calmed down, please offer YOUR version of this issue. I hope it will include closing tax loopholes, and a citizen’s income for a start. There is more than enough money in our domestic economy to cover such, and plenty spare afterwards. Britain has the Xth largest economy, we are told . . . ad nauseum 😡!
All I know is I have been saving for my old age since I was a lot younger and fitter than I am now. HMG have decided to charge IHT on it. Thus I will now have to cash it in and get rid of it. Give it away mostly. I thought Labour were the party of thrift.
But Trump will invest in fossil fuels (and probably so too the next incoming British government when the country decides it’s had enough of Labour) so it’ll be fine Richard.
I'd say his arguments are frequently oversimplifications, with very little in the way of constructive arguments as to how to put things right. It's easy to point out what's wrong with something, rather than to suggest things which would improve the situation. We already have plenty of politicians who make it their life's mission to do this. Witness the utter silence from the Tory benches as to how to replace the billions given away by Hunt in his last budget in the reduction of NI paid by employees, where around £12 billion a year was given away in effective tax cuts, widening the current deficit, currently around £100 billion a year, even further. The silence was there for all to see.
@@paultaylor7082 He explained how the public pension system works: very slowly and long term with one generation paying for the next.👀The problem is our pensions are often invested in short term 'stranded assets' like oil, ie. they are bad investments with little material or social benefit over the long term, ie. for the generation following. Solution: our public pensions must be invested in real productive things, social goods that retain their value over the long term
I'm 51yrs old. $40,000 weekly and *I'm retired, this video have inspired me greatly in many ways that I remember my past of how I struggled with many things in life to be where I am today!!!!* ❤️
Hello how do you make such?? I'm a born Christian and sometimes I feel so down myself because of low finance but I still believe in God
It's Maria Frances Hanlon doing, she's changed my life.
Same here
waking up every 14th of each
month to 210,000 dollars it's a blessing to l and my family... I can now retire knowing that I have a steady income❤️Big gratitude to
Maria Frances Hanlon
I do know Ms. Maria Frances Hanlon, I also have even become successful....
Absolutely! I've heard stories of people who started with little to no knowledge but made it out victoriously thanks to Ms. Maria Frances Hanlon.
This is why I've spent decades learning how to invest and manage my money. I retired at 44 years old, 10 years ago. I have a diverse portfolio of global investments. The UK pension providers are charging you a lot of money for crappy returns. Most people have zero clue where their pension money is invested.
*Amazing video, you work for 40yrs to have $1M in your retirement, meanwhile some people are putting just $10K into trading from just few months ago and now they are multimillionaires*
wow this awesome 👏 I'm 47 and have been looking for ways to be successful, please how??
It's Esther A Berg doing, she's changed my life.
I do know Ms. Esther A Berg , I also have even become successful....
After I raised up to 325k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states 🇺🇸🇺🇸 also paid for my son's surgery (Oscar). Glory to God.shalom.
Good day all👍🏻 from Australia 🇦🇺. I have read a lot of posts that people are very happy with the financial guidance she is giving them ! What way can I get to her exactly ?
I manage my own money so I'm not relying on what a fund manager does. I do think though that it is dangerous for most people to make guesses at what is likely to rise in value due to preconceived ideas of the future (and the timing of when those ideas will bear fruits). For most people, broad index funds are probably better.
Very down to earth and understandable to listen to. Thank you
Good analysis Richard, the commercial nature of our society exposed, the only thing that matters is short term profit. If you come up with a way to fix that you will be doing well, something like a new type of company formed under government that has a social mandate and any excess profit must be invested for the future. Some of this investment could be used to provide loans to startups etc as the current funding methods would not be available.
Government couldn’t run a bath let alone a company 😂
@@eaglebeagle1408 Who said they could, I advocated for a ban on ltd etc that legally have to seek maximum profit no matter the cost socially or environmentally. Max profit companies could still exist just without the benefit of being an ltd subsidised by government when it goes wrong which is what max profit tends to do, just look at banking.
I just love this mans videos he deserves so many more subscribers.
Yep. A left wing academic accountant's view of economics. Great fun!
I used to tell colleagues that our pensions depend on succeeding generations playing their part in the economy. This was particularly a discussion with those without children who became annoyed at child friendly employment policies.
I've had that same conversation...
@@ianbigsand7 Not to mention the rise of the economically inactive and the next generation underwriting the cost of public sector pensions.
@user-xu5vl5th9n I am now one of those economically inactive with a public sector pension.
You have been basically slagging off the whole reliance on banking system and it's laziness to invest into things that are not materially helpful in the future. And that is completely true, sadly. When you think of it, young people get almost nothing in development, in making their life better, safer. Young won't care about a billionaire not being able to drill the next oil field, they will care about not having a home, not having a good safe life due to huge rent, unprecedented weather conditions and so on.
And yet a billionaire would give most of his money to have their youth.
Weather? 😮
The conclusion everyone should come to is plan for the worst. Find ways to invest and build wealth outside of pensions as a fallback.
Flooding is just one example. It’s of course not the full picture and I recommend to viewers to research climate change impacts on the UK beyond 2050. It is not exciting reading, mostly scientific papers, but the conclusions will provide enough “thrill” it’s worth it
Fun fact: recent extreme weather events (relatively mild) impacted wheat farming in uk reducing yields by 17%. According to the 2050 forecasts this “extreme event” will be a norm by then, a typical occurrence. Flash floods overwhelming current sewage systems will become a norm. Heatwaves of 44 degrees Celsius will be regular events, prolonged periods of high pressure (cold domes) will be a norm, and so on…
@@AdamCiernicki those predictions are bs. About as reliable as futurology and sci fi from the 1970s.
It is genuinely tragic that you believe this.
@@user-xu5vl5th9n How is it that you people even find these videos on YT? I thought the algorithms keep you in some kind of social media tin foil bubble.
@@user-xu5vl5th9nalmost every climate scientist > Barry Shitpeas in the comments section of UA-cam
So a passive index ETF does not care which companies are winners or losers it just makes adjustments when values move up and down. You appear to think pension hold individual stocks in perpetuity?
A passive index is always buying in a rising market, and selling in a falling one. Not optimum. (companies fall out of the index because their price has already fallen, and enter because it has already risen.)
I don’t bother saving for a pension. With how apocalyptically bad climate change is going to get in the next 25 years or so I think it’s extremely likely money I paid into a pension either wouldn’t be there or would have inflated away to be worth very little. I don’t earn much but I’d rather put money into tangible things and if I don’t get to retire ever and just die if I can’t look after myself past a certain old age then so be it.
Some days my pension makes more than I do and some days it loses as much or more.
Mr Murphy discounts the role markets play. Pension fund investments are constantly changing and the underlying investments by companies are constantly changing as the market dictates. Nothing stays the same.
Just save in a passive tracker fund and live off the dividends paid by the top x listed companies during your retirement. Since the composition of the indexes that are being tracked changes over time, there is no need to second guess what future generations might or might not find useful. You are by definition always invested in the top listed companies. By all means, stick your money into sustainable housing, but the humble S&P500 will out perform you any day.
Oil is used for so much more than just running vehicles and heating houses without oil most of the mordern products would disappear from electronic appliances to footwear to clothes etc etc.
Nitrogen based fertilisers which are key to global crop yields and food security.
@@user-xu5vl5th9nthere are other sources.
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.
@@tlangdon12 How about we stop the production of useless governments using draconian means and continue with all the benefits of oil until we finally realise that humans have no impact on the planet.
By using this comment space my carbon foot print is Zero. Have a nice day
No, it's value will have been stolen away.
I recall Greenspans comment to Paul Ryan, that the Fed can create as much money as it want to pay pensioners, but the challenge is the creation of goods and services available for purchase when those pensioners want to spend it. We're not growing the economy sufficiently.
Wrong again. If 50% of pension assets are made unviable through flooding, the other 50% will double in value.
This seems to assume that there is equal demand for all assets that a pension is invested in. Do you have any examples?
@@010101110100 Anything non-discretionary. Food, fuel, housing, healthcare, transport.
So systemic collapse?
Many thanks!
Why we would not be using oil in the future is an inconvenient lie.
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.
He's a climate alarmist
I saw you interviewed earlier about farming and inheritance tax and oh boy you didn’t like your opinions being challenged as you were furious and almost lost control of yourself. I mean this sincerely don’t let yourself get so worked up in future when someone challenges your opinion because it’s not personal.
To the question "Will your pension provide for your old age?" Alas, no.
Actual answer- perhaps. No-one knows.
@@Skylark_Jones predictions are difficult, especially about the future. The pension industry and governments got burnt by offering guarantees in the past.
If there is public misunderstanding here then, like so many other principles in the national economy, it is the failure of government to correct the narrative (Like money creation and the household economy analogy). Most people assume the money they pay into a pension is guaranteed to retain it value over the long term as it is invested wisely, if this is not true then it's a fraud.
Always someone else's fault. Why not take responsibility for your own life and future?
Hydrogen production..it's another nonsense..not because the idea is good or the emissions are zero but because the mathematical ROI is off the scale wrong....even if you make free electricity to create the hydrogen..it simply not efficient in any meaningful way..but billions is poured into this elephant by pension funds with zero chance of any commercial ROI..
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.
@@tlangdon12much more sensible take than the actual video
@@tlangdon12 Good reason NOT to use an investment manager- manage investments yourself. Since they do not beat the market, and cost money (charges) not good at the best of times. In risky situations you win- you can sell easily at any time. A fund cannot- it would move the market. Especially any property portfolio!
No it won't
Public sector pensions are deferred salaries.
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.
Gold plated public pensions are unsustainable.
@@Stuart-f2m It's not gold plated pensions for the vast majority of public sector pension scheme members.
The entire capitalist system is unsustainable as it's one big pyramid scheme.
It’s all about tangible assets Richard makes sense investment in the stocks and shares they go up there. Go down investment in old technology is silly inherently the problem is humans you make mistakes how many pensions over the decades people thought they’d be safe to find out the pension didn’t do quite as good as was promised the pension providers okay the person you took out that pension isn’t
They can print all the money in the world to fund the military and wars.
They can simply do the exact same thing for retired people who, on average, will only live 10 years thereafter. 🤓
17 years currently. When the UK state pension system was established it was minus two years. Oops!
🤔 Isn’t that what happened during the Covid pandemic . . . ?
"The Pension Reality"
... the motion of money 💰 and capital flows... ? "Stranded Assets" and the younger generation "pension oversight "
"the pension contract"
This seems quite naive. For example the price of oil stocks already prices in ESG considerations.
You expect him to know anything about trading?
You seem to be missing the bigger point about reality mattering, rather than abstract, short term financial speculation. Capital matters more than money. Also, Murphy seems to be talking about how and why the public pensions system works over the generations and you're talking about private pensions, which have neither the power nor the responsibility and are based on short term speculation rather than long term national vision
I disagree. He doesn't say, but he seems to be talking as much about private pensions as public.
Assets such as farmland for food production, which you state elsewhere has no value🤨🤨
What's the take on the fact annuities, which 5 years or so ago offered a fixed return of around £5K per £100K in the pension pot, now offer around £7.5K to £8K per £100K? What exactly is the reason for this? I was able to work until I was almost 70, for the last 4 years of working, for 3 days a week, while drawing my State Pension, meaning my income didn't fall by much. Now the annuity on offer is much better than it was in 2019, when I reached State Pension Age. Currently many people are using a property portfolio to fund their income in retirement, is Richard suggesting this is a bad idea? Really? Given the inexorable rise in property prices, due to lack of property construction for domestic dwellings, in real terms in the UK since 2000, and the near certainty that action will be taken to prevent flooding in the near future, property values (certainly for domestic dwellings) are going one way and so are rents, upwards, for the foreseeable future. He also seems to miss the fact there are huge areas in the UK, where flooding almost never happens, nor is it ever likely to, I live in one, for 40 years our house has never once come near to being flooded.
The reason is that the interest rate went up
Remigration should help problems regarding British people seeking domestic dwellings.
"Oil" is a huge resource as a chemical not just for fuel Oil, so guess what we will always use Oil but in different ways. Can this Oil be replaced with something else then yes, the question here is will Oil be replaced as a chemical resource??? Time will tell. As for Pensions, they rely on the companies chosen to run them and the regulatory bodies the oversee them, trust is the word here.
Oil will run out at the rate we consume it. Fossil fuel take millions of years to form.
Oil as a chemical feedstock only accounts for about 15% of total usage, improved recycling and alternatives to plastics are expected to reduce that by 60%, so oil demand purely as a feedstock will drop to something like 6% of the current overall oil market.
@@garysmith5025 Oil used for other purposes is because so much is needed for fuel, it can be used for other things it is a choice.
Oil demonstrators are calling for a stop of new oil wells. Not all oil straight away. Some oil will be needed, but a lot of plastics can be made with other materials such as hemp. Something the oil companies would rather not talk about. Stop oil and stop wars.
its ironic that someone who is so carefully picky in his use of terminology and language doesnt understand money vs currency
Your argument would appear to be based on the assumption that pension assets are static when in fact most pension plans (at least here in North America) have highly dynamic investments. In other words the assets held by many pension plans change constantly.
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.
Many valid points.
1) Unfortunately, Junk food, alcohol and tobacco companies are profitable because people will buy their products, even though they know the effects are detrimental (or even fatal) to them.
2) As birth rates fall and the population ages, the triple lock on the state pension is unsustainable, but no political party will be honest about this because they will loose votes.
3) The Workplace pension has been a success in terms of uptake, but the default funds are one size fits all which leads to poor performance.
4) Some counties such as Ireland and Australia have means tested state pensions.
The term "pension" is a complete misnomer, especially the way we use it in the UK.
There is nothing at all that a state pension has in common with a privately invested DC pension
Absolutely. It's outright misleading to conflate the two by giving them the same name. One is an entitlement and the other is a tax friendly personal savings scheme.
Having said that, both require a productive income stream from others in the future to pay for them, even if indirectly.
Neoliberalism don't know what a pension is
I think it's more that they don't LIKE what a pension is. The idea of each succeeding generation funding those who have retired on the understanding that the next generation will fund them is WAY too collectivist for them.
@@charliemoore2551 I think you're right. And yet a public pension is so abstract - what's the problem? - and explicitly wrapped up in the social contract and nationalism - what's the problem? How can a person hate 'collectivism' and yet be a nationalist?
Personally, I don't like the word collectivism because it seems to be used as the 'evil other' to individualism. This offends me as a hyper-individualist, civil libertarian socialist
So you have two options , invest in something that does make money for the time being, or invest in hair brained youngster ideas that wont make anything that will just sap your investment . Catcher 22.
There's no catch. We just have to invest long term. And we have to invest in real productive things, social goods that retain their value over the long term
@@WarrenPeaceOG Not when most people aren't interested , investors are like Meerkats they check to see if its safe before moving , as everything is unstable , they dont move.
Most illuminating and educational.
💚
Thought provoking. However the possibility that this government, and the subsequent ones that will follow it, have the competence to know how best to invest my pension funds seems very remote to me! I think I will stick to my SIPP that allows me to decide where my money is invested.
Apart from a few pension funds (like some local authority funds) the government doesn't 'invest' your payment. Its like a Ponzi scheme in which your payments are used to fund today's pensioners.
Personally, my plan is save money and solar installed on my roof - and if it would be possible, wind turbine(not the huge ones you do see on the fields!). Not because I'm a greenie, but because it is better not to rely on a private company to provide me with the things I need and may need in the future.
For those that don't know, Richard Murphy was involved in a bit of tax avoidance when he actively moved his company to the Republic of Ireland. Have a Google, and learn a lot about hypocrisy.
Any link? I tried searching and found nothing.
I can see Universal Basic Income linked to a Central Bank Digital Currency or perhaps some sort of token? The future sounds scary as AI and automation will take away lots of jobs, perhaps some new ones perhaps? I'm concerned about a possible catastrophe. I'm also concerned about less pensions and more assisted dying.
Valid points, I think!
The State Pension is a already form of that and arguably the wider benefits system. Obviously they have criteria rather than being universal, but if poverty increases then more people qualify. It's not a problem to create tokens (ie that is, pounds sterling), but it is a problem to create the goods and services.
You have no idea, how many jobs are gone in the past 200 years. About 200 years ago almost 90% of the population worked as farmers. Today it is about 1-2%. So almost all jobs are gone since then.
@@downshift4503 Also valid points. I put the problem of creating goods and services down to many factors (how much of 'x' a particular market can bear, the courage of new people entering into those markets - or being put off self-employment that might eventually create more jobs, in some cases regulations or acquiring required certification, etc). I think the main reason has been the lack of support for individuals moving into self-employment and the continued lack of support to these one 'man' bands as they reach various points in their business's growth (it seems that neo-liberalism supports the biggest, wealthiest businesses by enabling wealth to accumulate at the top - thus limiting competition - and doesn't care too much for those trying to establish themselves (these would be more likely to create local jobs in any number - taken collectively - than a gigawarehouse with limited staff, as an example).
So my belief is that neo-liberal thinking and practice actually stifles growth and reduces local industry (as in activity, as much as busines) regarding goods and services, thus reduces local wealth creation.
@@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.
So the emperor has no clothes.
It is my experience that many, including very well educated people, think that the money they pay in to their pension is ‘saved’ in a little box somewhere with their name on it that they can draw down when they retire. Many don’t even realise it’s invested. This ignorance trickles down through the generations and those working don’t seem to have a clue that they are paying my pension. Probably just as well!
❤❤❤❤❤
Only if you move to a better place. It helps if you can sell the house.
Wow, that was pompous.....clearly smart but has no interest in teaching anyone.
You point out the inconvenient truth about climate change and people get so angry
Yes. But most of them are trolls who work for lobbying companies.
@@charliemoore2551or watchers of certain tv channels funded by them
It is more a convenient lie.
😠 Indeed, but few people listened to Al Gore, preferring stupidity to knowledge.
Mainly because of the hysterical rhetoric thrown around by climate fanatics. They are all currently running around trying to delete their postings of 5 years ago because by today we were all supposed to be dead! They did no favours for the climate debate - and still don't. The population needs to be persuaded and enabled to make the necessary changes and not told they must buy a £45,000 electric car (80% of the population have never been able to buy any new car of any type) and get a heat pump - the final cost of which is not £8,000 but more like £15,000 by the time all the house is re-plumbed. Can we please have a sensible transition programme.
Listened through this twice and didn't understand the core message (if there is one). It seems that a lot of people in the comments also did not understand. Can you do again in a simple way?
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.
I'm not sure those were ultra-processed foods.
Is your spending sustainable and low carbon footprint as possible ? Surely is the only question in a climate catastrophe .
It’s that time of year when spud has just received his pension statement.
Don’t worry! The politicians will save us.
Nope, mine do- my pension funds are/were in cash. Which is fungible, and my cash cannot be separated out. Does not grow in cash? Not a problem- when you have 'enough' you do not need to put it at hazard to get more. Losses are caused by greed. My spreadsheet says I will never spend all I have.
Government oversight? Really? You think governments engage in long term planning? No evidence of it...
Cash is always at risk. Put it in gold coins. No counter party risk, inflation proof and no CGT.
@@alecdurbaville6355 Don't worry, I am in gold too. But cash is less at risk than 'investments'. Inflation? Have you examined how they calculate it? I have run a spreadsheet for 35 years- I know exactly what MY inflation is. And returns on cash have far exceeded it. Investments have the possibility of growing more- but I can sleep soundly at night.
@@alecdurbaville6355 Don't worry- I am in gold too. Inflation? Have you examined how they measure it? I have run a spreadsheet for 35 years, and I know MY inflation precisely. And cash has stayed well ahead of it,
Jokes on you… i invested in a farm to make sure i can eat in my old age… oh wait
You’ll still eat. Your kids won’t.
Oh dear, what a load of scaremongering. Investment follows the returns. The biggy you haven’t mentioned? The Government changing the rules😡 Brown and now Rachel from accounts! How well have the two green deals worked out? Answer, they didn’t! As with all investments they should be spread. Judging the change over is key, but no way should the gov determine where to invest. Shareholders should lead the way NOT bill payers, perhaps tell Ed!
But how will you stitch the continents back together? 😂
Depends on your lifestyle.
I can live AND do On 200 a week.
Thats witha a car and a 2 week greek holiday every year.
Our house and cars are paid for and only require the maintenance.
Some people spend 200 on supper in a restaurant
I am with you. Perfectly possible to live on a state pension alone. My wife and I pay for all our normal outgoings (incl running two cars) on 50% of our combined state pensions. We add luxury holidays in an attempt to stop it building up too much.
😠 Jolly good for you. Do tell how much your house cost. And your car. And when you bought them. What was the cost of living at those times? What were you earning? Could you afford such expenses on one income? Please help the rest of us, who are living in very difficult financial circumstances NOT of our making 😡!
@@sirmeowthelibrarycat I'm in a similar position to the OP and I'm under no illusion that my ability to live cheaply today is due to buying a house in the 1990s. I didn't know then that house prices would explode without wages following along, though it remains a popular belief that houses will increase in price forever. Housing is, IMO, the single biggest failure of the economy and its not unique to the UK.
@@sirmeowthelibrarycat Over time, the real cost of most things reduce- but more things are made and compete for our money. I was 23 before I lived in a house with central heating. Before that it was a single fire (coal or gas). Now full house heating is regarded as a basic minimum (heat or eat moan). Key methods to be ahead-
-never borrow for anything that does not increase in value.
-Do as much as possible yourself. Paying someone else (tradesman etc) to do something means that you are paying with money you have paid tax on to someone who will have to pay tax on it. (I built my own house.)
-Do not follow fashion, or care about other people's view of what you buy/do.
-Practice delayed gratification (If I wanted something, I waited a month before buying it. By then I often no longer wanted it- or had even forgotten that I wanted it).
-Do not buy new cars (they are not more reliable). Let someone else pay the huge depreciation.
And no, you cannot do it on one income. That was only possible a long time ago. Before central heating, cars, phones (even land line type) televisions and takeaways (except fish & chips, at around 7d per person).
That is all you get for free- more I charge for (that is the other side of it).
Depends what you are doing as a job and how life events change , we don't get a great deal of information on pensions ,you pay into it you trust the trustees , but there is not a lot of info given .
I thought I would be successful and put money into a fund ,sometimes life hits you with a curve ball , I paid into the NHS , but I thought the overtime I did ,would build up in my pension , I did not have a clue .
It was frozen , I get a pittance , and now I'm judged on those savings , so because of Ill planing , I'm going to have to work well into old age with a broken body .😮
Sorry to hear you are struggling. Your comment is the strongest recommendation for people to learn more about how their pensions work.
So, MMT doesn't work for pensions....
MMT is all about economic reality, as is my video. what are you talking about?
Another load of Morphy's nonsense
Why is it?
Bla bla bla! What a doomsday opinion. Has it not been noticed for example that areas of investments change over time, we do not invest in canals anymore and there is big investment in tech. If we start to see fast changes in sea level rise, adaptions will be made. The chance that we can alter to any significant extent the rise in sea levels is pie in the sky, by all means we should make sensible changes to our way of life but with the world population all aspiring to more ‘stuff’ controlling the climate is not going to work in my opinion we must just adapt to the changing climate if we wish to survive.
Exactly.... he's totally glossed over the fact that the stock market constantly shifts based upon what's in demand, and has always done so. This video presents it as a completely static makeup.
Transfering to a green economy isn't controlling the climate rhat lurerally is adapting. The only people making bogus claims of "controlling the climate" are the people boasting about carbon capture technology.
Not really. Humans are immensely capable of adaptation. We just move if we can't.
But the only thing thats real is human overpopulation.
The weather is fine
Stop this regurgitating sea levels.
Do you know for instance that sweden is rising..?
Coastal erotion in the UK is not sea lever rising.
Did you know that the town of rye used to have the sea 200m away.?
Swings and roundabouts
The kids are safe if they don't breed like a Bangladesh
😠 Phew! What a rant . . . Now you have calmed down, please offer YOUR version of this issue. I hope it will include closing tax loopholes, and a citizen’s income for a start. There is more than enough money in our domestic economy to cover such, and plenty spare afterwards. Britain has the Xth largest economy, we are told . . . ad nauseum 😡!
All I know is I have been saving for my old age since I was a lot younger and fitter than I am now. HMG have decided to charge IHT on it. Thus I will now have to cash it in and get rid of it. Give it away mostly. I thought Labour were the party of thrift.
But Trump will invest in fossil fuels (and probably so too the next incoming British government when the country decides it’s had enough of Labour) so it’ll be fine Richard.
I mean apart from the whole mass migration and crop failures and flooding due to climate change
This is your 2nd rubbish video. Your opinions dont st well with me .
Seems you just love the sound of your voice and opinions
What specifically do you disagree with?
I'd say his arguments are frequently oversimplifications, with very little in the way of constructive arguments as to how to put things right. It's easy to point out what's wrong with something, rather than to suggest things which would improve the situation. We already have plenty of politicians who make it their life's mission to do this. Witness the utter silence from the Tory benches as to how to replace the billions given away by Hunt in his last budget in the reduction of NI paid by employees, where around £12 billion a year was given away in effective tax cuts, widening the current deficit, currently around £100 billion a year, even further. The silence was there for all to see.
@@paultaylor7082 He explained how the public pension system works: very slowly and long term with one generation paying for the next.👀The problem is our pensions are often invested in short term 'stranded assets' like oil, ie. they are bad investments with little material or social benefit over the long term, ie. for the generation following. Solution: our public pensions must be invested in real productive things, social goods that retain their value over the long term