As we are facing an aging population this article from Wealth Management discusses the issues that may arise if clients start to outlive their financial assets. Two questions not asked are really interesting here. The first is instead of making do with averages - such as the risk that an average client will live into their eighties or nineties quoted in the article, why not get a better idea of this number? The next question not asked, was related to housing. The Economist recently estimated that 60% of Britons who own at home at 50 will not move house before they die... preferring to occupy a three-bedroom house often for a prolonged period when just one person will live in it. That asset could be realised, so why the ready acceptance of the concept 'financial asset'? Aren't they all financial, in the end?