This article is a knee jerk reaction and more than a little tongue in cheek. It is in no way constructive.
Her plan is threefold.
First, spurred on by the SSIA scheme, I’m saving my own lump sum and when the world has stabilised a bit, I’ll decide for myself how I might invest that in a flexible way that will suit me.
The charges will be much the same and you will lose the tax relief. With pensions you can invest in a flexible way, a lot of people have moved their pensions into cash temporarily
Secondly, I despise this stereotype of the old as helpless members of society. I fully intend to soldier on productively and cheerfully – just like Garret.
More and more people are living past 90, would you bank on robust health for up to 15 years beyond your 75th birthday?
And finally, I have borne two fine sons and if my husband permits and the Good Lord sees fit, I might get another one. I’m sure that with a careful mixture of indulgence and emotional blackmail, they’re bound to look after me, just as I have looked after them. I can’t trust a pension company, but I can trust my sons. Right?
Surely tongue in cheek and undermines what had to this point seemed like genuine concerns. Women should not bother with pensions as their husband or kids will look after them???!!!
Private pensions have served people very well for years. The protections in place have been second to none and returns on regular contributions over a typical time frame of 30 years cannot be challenged.
I would fully agree that there's been some woeful financial advice given by so called experts over the years, but the analysis here should be able to separate out these shortcomings from the underlying benefits of the product itself.
Time to turn the spot light on the media and the bum steer they constantly give the public on issues such as this