The Lemon Fool

Lootman wrote:But I can see the argument that anything left over when you expire has, in a sense, been wasted. Or rather, that there were years of working and saving and doing without that ended up not being necessary.

When I first heard about the HYP method the idea of establishing an income producing pot and leaving that to your estate when you expired struck me as a dumb idea. Who wants to be the rich corpse - I have no dependents nor progeny. Trouble is how do you know how long that pot has to last, I have made a plan to run my pot down by the time I'm 100 and will have residual income from a small government DC and the state pension in the unlikely chance I need some cash for hookers and beer.

Lootman wrote:

Gengulphus wrote:

Matchless wrote:When one is old even making new investments getting a 5% dividend doesn’t make much sense unless one wants to die rich ...

Given the choice of dying rich and its opposite, I know which I prefer! ;-)

I know what you are saying of course. But there was a popular bestseller in the 1990s called "Die Broke" by Stephen Pollan that advocated exactly that i.e. making a financial plan that ended up with you dying broke:

https://www.getrichslowly.org/die-broke ... l-the-end/

Not saying I buy into it. But I can see the argument that anything left over when you expire has, in a sense, been wasted. Or rather, that there were years of working and saving and doing without than ended up not being necessary.

I think Pobert Burns hit the nail on the head about that idea: "The best laid schemes o’ mice an’ men gang aft agley". I doubt he had financial plans particularly in mind at the time, but they certainly have lots of ways of going agley!

Gengulphus

As it happens Dove 21 I have 3 children and they have all done very well, and now need nothing from me - having said that I don’t have or want an expensive lifestyle and unless I mess up big time, don’t expect to die with nothing, making more money is not my religion its just an interesting challenge that I enjoy. For what its worth my father who died about 20 years ago had such an aversion to paying death duties that he created a charity, and left his 5m for the education of the masses, quite what the charity commission did with his money I have no idea, not much I would suggest.

Matchless wrote:my father who died about 20 years ago had such an aversion to paying death duties that he created a charity, and left his 5m for the education of the masses

Which immediately brings to mind the quote by Roy Jenkins about inheritance tax, that it is:

"a voluntary levy paid by those who distrust their heirs more than they dislike the Inland Revenue".

Presumably he meant that he did not trust his heirs to help him out if he later ran out of funds.

I am rapidly approaching the age where I regard everything I spend money on as being offered at a 40% discount.

Dove21 wrote:I take it you don't have children

I think it might be more complicated. Some people don't get on with their children. Some children don't get on with their parents. In my case one child has treated me appallingly and (although I probably won't penalise her) doesn't really deserve anything from me at all. All three are (for their age) amazingly rich because of assets they have inherited via their mother). So my post-life contribution will/would be somewhat devalued if you see what I mean. Such are the practical aspects of managing one's HYP. C.

Matchless wrote:As it happens Dove 21 I have 3 children and they have all done very well, and now need nothing from me - having said that I don’t have or want an expensive lifestyle and unless I mess up big time, don’t expect to die with nothing, making more money is not my religion its just an interesting challenge that I enjoy. For what its worth my father who died about 20 years ago had such an aversion to paying death duties that he created a charity, and left his 5m for the education of the masses, quite what the charity commission did with his money I have no idea, not much I would suggest.

This is very much an offshoot from this thread's subject, but if you mean the UK's official Charity Commission, it's a regulator. In the normal course of events, it's the charity's trustees who make the decisions about what the charity spends its money on, and the Charity Commission merely observes, getting annual accounts and various other reports from the charity. It only really steps in if it doesn't get those accounts, reports, etc, or if it detects the trustees spending money in a way that isn't in accordance with charity law - e.g. if the trustees spend it on round-the-world cruises for themselves...

So don't expect the Charity Commission to have done anything with your father's money! But if you want to find out what the charity's trustees did with it (and I realise that you may well not want to do that), you might well be able to find the charity's accounts, reports, etc, on the Charity Commission website.

Gengulphus

Lootman wrote:I am rapidly approaching the age where I regard everything I spend money on as being offered at a 40% discount.

My feelings exactly.

TJH