That, and more – the intergenerational contract that, as I’ve said before, is that one generation will create capital which will be used by the next generation who will forgo their income to look after those who went before them now living in old age and unable to look after themselves. So, unless the savings that people make, which have a monetary form, are invested in assets that are actually of real use to the generations to come, then frankly, as a pension savings mechanism, they’re utterly useless.
The vast majority of the money that is now saved through pension funds in things like, for example, stocks and shares, are actually in assets that are going to be of remarkably little value to generations to come.
The Sage of Ely has a unique insight into what will be worth money in 30 and 60 years time.
Which he then uses to insist that your money should be invested in what he wants. Rather than, say, investing his own money in what will be worth money and thereby making his grandchildren as rich as Croesus.
A huge vote in the value of his prognostications there.
Is he actually called Albanese?
This sounds exactly like what Labor intend to do to our Aussie Future Fund.
“… for example, stocks and shares, are actually in assets that are going to be of remarkably little value to generations to come.”
We’re in full on Captain Redbeard Rum mode again. Or maybe trying to make out he hasn’t got any shares because of principle, rather than being a broke loser.
I saw somewhere a while ago that there will be the largest inter generational transfer of wealth in the next ten years as all us old gits pop our clogs……. or doesn’t that count?
The money invested by individuals and pension funds into companies is that which is utilised by them to invest in capital goods (machinery, buildings to house them etc) to produce those goods that we wish to purchase with our pensions in our old age.
This is Econ 101 (the sttuff that Murphy decided wasn’t worth listening to as an university student)
O/T: I’ve just seen an article in the Times about Rachel Reeves and her lies about her career.
What caught my eye, though, was a wonderful measure of how the universities have fallen. Talking of her masters degree course at the LSE a fellow student said “the final exams really were tough. Four papers, three hours each, with only a few days between each.”
Poor wee diddums. I had an older acquaintance who had sat the Cambridge Maths Tripos: ten papers in five days, he claimed. (I admit I replied “Wot, no paper on the Saturday morning? Sissies!)
Addolff
Theeves is well aware – the steal’s already in.
Rather than, say, investing his own money
The ‘say’ will be doing a lot of work in that sentence, methinks.
@dearieme
One of my colleagues at an investment bank had been employed there for many years as a secretary on a long running “temporary” contract. She was very very good at her job and had risen to being the head secretary in the area. Senior management wanted to reduce the number of long term contractors so it became necessary to transition her to a permanent employee. It was at this point that the CV she had submitted years before when she started as a contractor was dusted off for the background check that was mandatory for all permanent employees. It transpired she had fibbed about one of her qualifications. She was dismissed by the end of the day for this lack of integrity.
Secretaries at investment banks would appear to be held to higher standards of integrity than members of the cabinet.
Back in college – 70’s! – damn, I’m old – in the econ department, we’d separate the profs into two camps.
The Real Econs, and the Feels Econs.
Constant war.
Things never change.
Comments asking about his own pension arrangements are as always deleted.
It really is pathetic to see a 66 year old man who has enjoyed a decent professional income for the last 40 years asking for donations on his blog.
Imagine forgoing investing in Google, Apple, Amazon, etc 20 years ago because ‘they won’t be worth anything you can use in 30 years.
Imagine forgoing investments in petrol extraction companies, local businesses, etc because, well, they won’t provide anything you can use in 30 years.
Instead, you should have invested? in bridges? Because that will provide income for the next generation to take care of you in your old age?