[pjc50]

> its your responsibility to build a nest egg

In the time of negative bond yields?

It doesn't actually change the quantity of economic output needed by old people whether their pension is private or public. Either it's routed through taxation or dividend payments, but the end result - diverted from accumulation/investment into consumption - must be the same.

Unless, of course, the move to push people into private pensions is so their value can be reduced without anyone in particular having to take responsibility for that. Philip Green passim.

[lbotos]

I'm not sure why negative bond yields means that you shouldn't be living below your means and trying to secure a positive financial future?

[pjc50]

Do you want moral homilies or financial advice?

Sure, living below your means is generally good advice; but my point was that as interest rates go down that affects the discount rate, and the amount of income required to achieve a particular nominal income in retirement increases dramatically.

(Also, there's quite a lot of people who are barely able to get over the first financial hurdle of paying rent, let alone buying a house, both of which are more important than pension saving. Being a renter even with a big pension is much worse than being a homeowner with a small pension.)