hughjass Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/the-waspi-women-living-hand-to-mouth-due-to-pension-and-benefits-double-whammy/ar-BB1iwlIm?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=fc16bab1b22f4fe786de05a61281a8f6&ei=22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maghull Mike Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Where are their husbands? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blobsy Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 3 hours ago, Maghull Mike said: Where are their husbands? Fked them off long ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Roady Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 I know one who had it all...housewife in a beautiful multi bedroomed detached house located in the sticks (but walking distance from a train station), acres of land, gardener (with his own toilet outside), kids in private school, lawyer (partner) husband, her car was a Range Rover, his a Porche 911 whatever. Two to three holidays per year. They would buy a house, spend a fortune paying "workmen" to do it up, then move after a couple of years. Each place was lovely and would have done me and my family for life. However, enough was never enough no matter how much he earned, they borrowed more and more. He married her because she was exceptionally easy on the eye...could have easily been on the front cover of Vogue etc IMPO; she sadly settled into being a typical trophy wife. She married him for...well the obvious. Prior to their babies arriving, they were a very glamorous couple attending all sorts of swanky city dos. When the kids arrived, the cracks appeared and their substance abuse got worse. He was a drinker, I assume that was how he managed the stress of his work life and they both liked the exotic nasal decongestant...the Universes way of letting you know that you have too much money! The wheels started coming off 20 years ago and lets just say that the symptoms could be spectacular! I used to see a lot of them but I never quite knew what I was walking into when I went to their house...it could be a calm and peaceful oasis from my problems for a while, or it could be an utter war zone. Their choice of friends was questionable. Some are now dead, others in prison. The couple are divorced now, she got a nice settlement and he ended up with a criminal record. I think he is now abroad hiding from the UK criminal justice system for some alcohol related spat...getting by as an odd job man somewhere. The next time I hear of him will be his obituary, I am quite sure of that. All of the teachers who ever taught him at school all agreed that he was the brightest kid that they had ever taught. The nice little 3 bed house that she ended up in wasnt good enough for her....all paid for of course. I think she fell prey to this new breed of con men who go after these divorced women for a few hundred thousand quid. Its all gone now, no pension, no savings, no house...nothing for either of them in their late fifties/early sisxtees. He always wanted to be a writer. Had they just stopped and taken a break from their unsustainable lifestyle 15 years ago it could have all been so different. Such a waste. But there you have it, a tragedy from 21st century Britain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) 49 minutes ago, Roman Roady said: e. I think she fell prey to this new breed of con men who go after these divorced women for a few hundred thousand quid. Funnily enough I went to a funeral recently for someone I used to play in in pub quiz with. He appears to have retired at 55 and just drank all day - liver probiems dead at 62. One of the funniest and cleverest guys I ever knew. At the funeral I met another team member I hadn’t heard from in a while. Wealthy builder type. I knew his wife had cleared off with some guy she knew at school who had contacted her from the states were he now lived. Full story after forcing him to sell his house and another one to hand over £1M to her. As soon as the money arrived in ex and boyfriends account he wired it abroad and f****d off. She now lives in council flat. Edited February 20 by debtlessmanc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regprentice Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 im not sure how the waspi women are any different to anyone else. Im 48, ive no idea when i will retire. i always though it would be 65, now its 67, 68 maybe, im seeing articles saying the economics of it all mean my cohort wont retire until 72. At what point can i believe that the state pension age will be "locked" for me and wont change. I believe the "waspi" women cover a 10 year period so the youngest was probably just 2 years older than me, 50 at the oldest, when they found out they weren't retiring at 60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 19 minutes ago, regprentice said: im not sure how the waspi women are any different to anyone else. Im 48, ive no idea when i will retire. i always though it would be 65, now its 67, 68 maybe, im seeing articles saying the economics of it all mean my cohort wont retire until 72. At what point can i believe that the state pension age will be "locked" for me and wont change. I believe the "waspi" women cover a 10 year period so the youngest was probably just 2 years older than me, 50 at the oldest, when they found out they weren't retiring at 60. Women do love a good moan don't they 45 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said: Funnily enough I went to a funeral recently for someone I used to play in in pub quiz with. He appears to have retired at 55 and just drank all day - liver probiems dead at 62. One of the funniest and cleverest guys I ever knew. At the funeral I met another team member I hadn’t heard from in a while. Wealthy builder type. I knew his wife had cleared off with some guy she knew at school who had contacted her from the states were he now lived. Full story after forcing him to sell his house and another one to hand over £1M to her. As soon as the money arrived in ex and boyfriends account he wired it abroad and f****d off. She now lives in council flat. Lmao. Would have been better if the state-robbery welfare system were abolished. There should be no safety net for kooonts like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, Roman Roady said: I know one who had it all...housewife in a beautiful multi bedroomed detached house located in the sticks (but walking distance from a train station), acres of land, gardener (with his own toilet outside), kids in private school, lawyer (partner) husband, her car was a Range Rover, his a Porche 911 whatever. Two to three holidays per year. They would buy a house, spend a fortune paying "workmen" to do it up, then move after a couple of years. Each place was lovely and would have done me and my family for life. However, enough was never enough no matter how much he earned, they borrowed more and more. He married her because she was exceptionally easy on the eye...could have easily been on the front cover of Vogue etc IMPO; she sadly settled into being a typical trophy wife. She married him for...well the obvious. Prior to their babies arriving, they were a very glamorous couple attending all sorts of swanky city dos. When the kids arrived, the cracks appeared and their substance abuse got worse. He was a drinker, I assume that was how he managed the stress of his work life and they both liked the exotic nasal decongestant...the Universes way of letting you know that you have too much money! The wheels started coming off 20 years ago and lets just say that the symptoms could be spectacular! I used to see a lot of them but I never quite knew what I was walking into when I went to their house...it could be a calm and peaceful oasis from my problems for a while, or it could be an utter war zone. Their choice of friends was questionable. Some are now dead, others in prison. The couple are divorced now, she got a nice settlement and he ended up with a criminal record. I think he is now abroad hiding from the UK criminal justice system for some alcohol related spat...getting by as an odd job man somewhere. The next time I hear of him will be his obituary, I am quite sure of that. All of the teachers who ever taught him at school all agreed that he was the brightest kid that they had ever taught. The nice little 3 bed house that she ended up in wasnt good enough for her....all paid for of course. I think she fell prey to this new breed of con men who go after these divorced women for a few hundred thousand quid. Its all gone now, no pension, no savings, no house...nothing for either of them in their late fifties/early sisxtees. He always wanted to be a writer. Had they just stopped and taken a break from their unsustainable lifestyle 15 years ago it could have all been so different. Such a waste. But there you have it, a tragedy from 21st century Britain. Dunno, sounds like one hell of a life to me. Beats the hell out of sitting in front of the telly every night watching coro. What was it George Best said ? I spent a lot of money on booze, fast cars and women. I wasted the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 10 minutes ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said: Dunno, sounds like one hell of a life to me. Beats the hell out of sitting in front of the telly every night watching coro. What was it George Best said ? I spent a lot of money on booze, fast cars and women. I wasted the rest. I prefer "i went back to my hotel room to find the current miss world lying naked on bed covered in banknotes, i thought "George where did it all go wrong?" " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARTINX9 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 They will live on average 4-5 years longer than men - so they will typically get £45,000 more state pension than men from living 4 years longer. Perhaps men should get a higher state pension than women as they won't receive it for as long despite having paid in for the same length of time or pay lower NI contributions. That would at least have an actuarial logic. If people are in poverty in retirement there are pension credits/other support. Many of these women will also own homes - so be far better off than younger people who they expect to pay for their special treatment. In the interests of equality - and inter-generational fairness - sorry but no. Plenty of men in retirement live alone and in poverty too - so address the poverty not have sex discrimination in the state pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual-observer Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) The bottom line for this country is simply this If you're a female and single by 35 it's game over, you're on a one track to loneliness and likely poverty if you're aged 50 and don't have a house paid for or near enough, (either single or couple) then you're staring at poverty in old age. The above point leads to this point, if the majority of your wealth is sitting in one asset, again you're staring at poverty in old age. To stand a chance at having a comfortable life post 55 you need to be accustomed to surviving off a low paid job because that's as good as it's going to get, especially if the state pensions not going to kick in until your early 70's. Men are more adaptable to living frugally, women generally aren't and yes this is why I predict a lot more single western women are likely going to be taken to the cleaners by chancers in the coming years once, especially once pretty privilege has expired and/or the onlyfans incomes gone. Similar principle for divorced women who 'keep the house'. Their hand will be forced to find extra income and it's safe to say if you blew your chance in your twenties to find a good man it's not going to happen in your 40's or 50's. The decline in western living standards is going to make an awful lot of people revaluate their life decisions. Edited February 20 by Casual-observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulip_mania Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 The whole campaign made itself look ridiculous from the outset with their "Back to 60" line. The increase from 60-65 was announced and legislated in the 90s so women had at least 15 years notice (and for the first people it was only a few months change) up to 20 years+ notice for those who would have been retiring at 65. Also, the women affected were aged 15-25 when the equal pay act came into force so all or the vast majority of their working life was covered. If they had just focused on the accelerated increase from 65-66 which applied to men and women they might have had better grounds for complaint. Why the government didn't just delay that slightly and do it in 2020-2022 after the equalisation of men and women I never really understood. They won't get anything and the only people doing well out of this are lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cash Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Another anti women thread. What a hoot. You “men” have never met a successful woman I’d suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiltedjen Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Equality works both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARTINX9 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Nick Cash said: Another anti women thread. What a hoot. You “men” have never met a successful woman I’d suggest. No - a pro equality thread by sex and age. They want special treatment for them - paid for by the taxes of young women (and men) working today who may never be able to afford to buy/own a home and may never get a state pension or die before they reach the much higher qualifying age (probably at least 75 not 60 to 65). If you need extra help in retirement because you are in poverty it should be based on your needs/wealth - not your sex! Seems you on this logic are anti younger women - as they would have to pay for this! Edited February 20 by MARTINX9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 49 minutes ago, Nick Cash said: Another anti women thread. What a hoot. You “men” have never met a successful woman I’d suggest. I am married to one, successful business woman. When I met her she was FD of an SME and earning well into 6 figures. Has held directorships in city in the past. Accomplished pianist and fluent French speaker as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotblack42 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 5 hours ago, Roman Roady said: I know one who had it all...housewife in a beautiful multi bedroomed detached house located in the sticks (but walking distance from a train station), acres of land, gardener (with his own toilet outside), kids in private school, lawyer (partner) husband, her car was a Range Rover, his a Porche 911 whatever. Two to three holidays per year. They would buy a house, spend a fortune paying "workmen" to do it up, then move after a couple of years. Each place was lovely and would have done me and my family for life. However, enough was never enough no matter how much he earned, they borrowed more and more. He married her because she was exceptionally easy on the eye...could have easily been on the front cover of Vogue etc IMPO; she sadly settled into being a typical trophy wife. She married him for...well the obvious. Prior to their babies arriving, they were a very glamorous couple attending all sorts of swanky city dos. When the kids arrived, the cracks appeared and their substance abuse got worse. He was a drinker, I assume that was how he managed the stress of his work life and they both liked the exotic nasal decongestant...the Universes way of letting you know that you have too much money! The wheels started coming off 20 years ago and lets just say that the symptoms could be spectacular! I used to see a lot of them but I never quite knew what I was walking into when I went to their house...it could be a calm and peaceful oasis from my problems for a while, or it could be an utter war zone. Their choice of friends was questionable. Some are now dead, others in prison. The couple are divorced now, she got a nice settlement and he ended up with a criminal record. I think he is now abroad hiding from the UK criminal justice system for some alcohol related spat...getting by as an odd job man somewhere. The next time I hear of him will be his obituary, I am quite sure of that. All of the teachers who ever taught him at school all agreed that he was the brightest kid that they had ever taught. The nice little 3 bed house that she ended up in wasnt good enough for her....all paid for of course. I think she fell prey to this new breed of con men who go after these divorced women for a few hundred thousand quid. Its all gone now, no pension, no savings, no house...nothing for either of them in their late fifties/early sisxtees. He always wanted to be a writer. Had they just stopped and taken a break from their unsustainable lifestyle 15 years ago it could have all been so different. Such a waste. But there you have it, a tragedy from 21st century Britain. I almost feel sorr.. Er, actually no I don't. They sound awful. Money doesn't disappear, it was re-distributed. Most crooks would make better use of it than these specimens, let alone ordinary folk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cash Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 13 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said: I am married to one, successful business woman. When I met her she was FD of an SME and earning well into 6 figures. Has held directorships in city in the past. Accomplished pianist and fluent French speaker as well. And when I look at your comments they are definitely not anti women. Which goes some of the way to explain why you are happily married. But I won’t quote the rest of the nonsense by certain posters because it will just re-hash the same boring arguments of the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Roady Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, hotblack42 said: I almost feel sorr.. Er, actually no I don't. They sound awful. Money doesn't disappear, it was re-distributed. Most crooks would make better use of it than these specimens, let alone ordinary folk. I feel the same...always did but like most HPCers, I was at best ignored. Just call me Cassandra. Still, now the wheels have come right off and I have my "I told you all so" moment, it brings me no joy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual-observer Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 5 hours ago, Nick Cash said: And when I look at your comments they are definitely not anti women. Which goes some of the way to explain why you are happily married. But I won’t quote the rest of the nonsense by certain posters because it will just re-hash the same boring arguments of the past. and in turn you'll rehash the same nonsense in that you equate the average woman's existence to an elite well heeled female in a CEO position earning mega bucks...who CAN afford a superior lifestyle. The average female can't and won't ever reach that lifestyle and alluding to them trying to replicate that lifestyle will guarantee them to abject poverty. The average woman's reality is that pretty privilege has an expiry date and once that timelines expired they won't be able to fall back onto a CEO salary and pension. i.e. the very reality many of these waspi women are facing and following them up behind is a generation of millennials and generation z facing an even worse reality of a worsening retirement plan and no long term plan. Spelling out the harsh reality is not anti woman no more than alluding to a fantasy all women can expect a well heeled CEO position on the top board....it's a hyper Islington fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 If both men and women are going to be waiting a lot longer for a full state pension, worked all the necessary years or qualified in other ways, repaid their debts then decide to retire before a state retirement date somewhere in the future they will just not spend into the economy, live a quiet non-consumerist way of living......what is not given in one hand can't be spent in the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual-observer Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) 34 minutes ago, winkie said: If both men and women are going to be waiting a lot longer for a full state pension, worked all the necessary years or qualified in other ways, repaid their debts then decide to retire before a state retirement date somewhere in the future they will just not spend into the economy, live a quiet non-consumerist way of living......what is not given in one hand can't be spent in the other. I think people need to rapidly change their mindset to such a degree that they need to view the state pension as nothing more but a nice bonus if they ever get it, especially for anyone born after 1980. That's the way this is going and they need to start preparing for that gap period between aged 55-70 whereby they can survive on a low income. Fundamentally a lot of people (women notably) have been led down a garden path that they can do it being single forever and it's going to catch them out. It'll be lambs to the slaughter as they are unable to keep up with the cost of living. Problem is it's all been very very reliant on a welfare state with an unsustainable deficit which they're struggling to prop up. You're better off relying on a dual income household in the long run than for example keeping hold of one very expensive asset and being cash poor which is the cardinal sin a lot of divorced women have and are making and beginning to find out. Edited February 20 by Casual-observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cash Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, Casual-observer said: and in turn you'll rehash the same nonsense in that you equate the average woman's existence to an elite well heeled female in a CEO position earning mega bucks...who CAN afford a superior lifestyle. The average female can't and won't ever reach that lifestyle and alluding to them trying to replicate that lifestyle will guarantee them to abject poverty. The average woman's reality is that pretty privilege has an expiry date and once that timelines expired they won't be able to fall back onto a CEO salary and pension. i.e. the very reality many of these waspi women are facing and following them up behind is a generation of millennials and generation z facing an even worse reality of a worsening retirement plan and no long term plan. Spelling out the harsh reality is not anti woman no more than alluding to a fantasy all women can expect a well heeled CEO position on the top board....it's a hyper Islington fantasy. Your problem is that you equate your definition of harsh reality onto every woman. Which is why you are so pathetic. The last time we had this discussion you resorted to calling me emasculated and started using incel vocabulary. Which I think sums you up nicely. Weak minded fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual-observer Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Nick Cash said: Your problem is that you equate your definition of harsh reality onto every woman. Which is why you are so pathetic. The last time we had this discussion you resorted to calling me emasculated and started using incel vocabulary. Which I think sums you up nicely. Weak minded fool. And as I've pointed out I have a long term partner, children and work in the city. Hardly an incel. Fundamentally it's your own insecurity talking Nick when I'm supposed to play up to your fantasy most women would be happy being the breadwinner with a stay at home husband. At no point do I ever meet and talk with the average women who is geared for that mentality. You make out your own lifestyle is common....it just isn't My partner is a sister in the NHS but she's happily advertised she has no desire for much more managerial responsibility. That's the generic view I've found with most women once they're over 40, that's not a criticism it's just the reality. With that in mind it's why I say most single women after the age of 40 are on average staring down the barrel of utter poverty and it's your elitist equality that's going to get them there. Edited February 20 by Casual-observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cash Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 26 minutes ago, Casual-observer said: And as I've pointed out I have a long term partner, children and work in the city. Hardly an incel. Fundamentally it's your own insecurity talking Nick when I'm supposed to play up to your fantasy most women would be happy being the breadwinner with a stay at home husband. At no point do I ever meet and talk with the average women who is geared for that mentality. You make out your own lifestyle is common....it just isn't My partner is a sister in the NHS but she's happily advertised she has no desire for much more managerial responsibility. That's the generic view I've found with most women once they're over 40, that's not a criticism it's just the reality. With that in mind it's why I say most single women after the age of 40 are on average staring down the barrel of utter poverty and it's your elitist equality that's going to get them there. Given your incel comments were aimed at me it’s irrelevant what your personal circumstances are. Have you also forgotten that you claimed women could only get promoted by sleeping their way up the company. You’re an evil small minded bigot. At no point have I claimed my circumstances are common. That’s clearly absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts