waspi women

[FallingAwake]

3 hours ago, Sackboii said:

Ginger biscuit too I suspect.

A hob nob.

[MARTINX9]

I always love those titles of organisations who actually support the opposite of what they claim to.

Women against state pension inequality?!

They support women getting state pensions for 10 years longer than men - getting it 5 years earlier and living five years longer? Just because of their gender. How was that more equitable?

If actuaries were involved men would actually get a higher state pension than women and/or get it earlier as they typically die younger.

Women born before 1941 still inherit 100 per cent of their husband’s state pension when they die - terribly sexist and old fashioned in modern day terms but great for those women. For women who or whose husband’s retire today it will zero. That is equality - coming right at you!

 

 

Edited March 21 by MARTINX9

[opt_out]

 

3 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

Women born before 1941 still inherit 100 per cent of their husband’s state pension when they die - terribly sexist and old fashioned in modern day terms but great for those women. 

My Father died last year, and I was surprised when Mother's pension went up 50%.  I've had a quick look and think she might be entitled to even more, 90% maybe for being born in 1937. Must get onto DWP soon.

[markyh]

4 hours ago, opt_out said:

 

My Father died last year, and I was surprised when Mother's pension went up 50%.  I've had a quick look and think she might be entitled to even more, 90% maybe for being born in 1937. Must get onto DWP soon.

Grab it mate, the more the old duffer gets in and doesn't spend, the more will be left over you to inherit eh. 

[Nick Cash]

8 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

I always love those titles of organisations who actually support the opposite of what they claim to.

Women against state pension inequality?!

They support women getting state pensions for 10 years longer than men - getting it 5 years earlier and living five years longer? Just because of their gender. How was that more equitable?

If actuaries were involved men would actually get a higher state pension than women and/or get it earlier as they typically die younger.

Women born before 1941 still inherit 100 per cent of their husband’s state pension when they die - terribly sexist and old fashioned in modern day terms but great for those women. For women who or whose husband’s retire today it will zero. That is equality - coming right at you!

 

 

Equality in pensions also means equality at work. Nothing wrong with that idea. Except maybe society is worse if traditional family structures are dismantled as a result. Back in the fifties most women were expected to be “home makers” with kids. The male was the breadwinner and paid the bills. No surprise therefore that the husbands pension would be higher than the wife’s. 
 

Todays equality means far more women can out earn men. It’s a function of intelligence and perseverance.

[winkie]

Why did women get a state pension at 60 and men 65, historically how much was that pension was it less than what men got......many women then didn't work and if they did they were paid less, and if they did work they were not allowed into their work pension schemes....making pensions equal was good 65 for both sexes as long as the amount, terms and conditions equal as well, like for like.......just drawing a line and dropping or removing five years of pension without notification in writing to all affected people was wrong, perhaps giving suggestions on how to make up the loss. It should have been tapered over the years to now 66 and 67......70? till nobody gets a state pension because the country can't afford it?.......don't expect a thing from them, then anything do get will be a bonus.

[Si1]

There's very very little love here for a generation that pulled up the drawbridge. Sad. But if they hadn't been the poster children for super individuality, screw your neighbour and NIMBYism there might have been some sympathy.

[msi]

11 minutes ago, Si1 said:

There's very very little love here for a generation that pulled up the drawbridge. Sad. But if they hadn't been the poster children for super individuality, screw your neighbour and NIMBYism there might have been some sympathy.

we need to use that to charge them for Social Care and stop them expecting LA's and Central Government to be funding them and keeping their precious pwoperdee...

Hell, lets go for IHT too

[msi]

10 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

I always love those titles of organisations who actually support the opposite of what they claim to.

GB News

The Conservative Party

All Lives Matter

Mid East Peace Envoy

[scottbeard]

18 hours ago, Pebbles said:

These women were stupid for not knowing the change in retirement age you shouldnt be compensated for having ones head in the sand. 

I don't have any sympathy at all for the retirement age being equalised at 65 - women live longer than men on average so even with an equal starting age women still end up on average getting the state pension for longer than than men do.

I do have SOME sympathy regarding the communication of it.  The pensions system is ridiculously over-complicated, and the state pension is not treated the same as workplace pensions.  Workplace pensions cannot be changed without informing members of what their new benefits are, and generally cannot be retrospectively worsened.  Yet the state pension was retrospectively worsened, and women were expected to just generally pick that up from newspapers etc.  No 24/7 media in 1995.

 

[Si1]

11 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

I don't have any sympathy at all for the retirement age being equalised at 65 - women live longer than men on average so even with an equal starting age women still end up on average getting the state pension for longer than than men do.

I do have SOME sympathy regarding the communication of it.  The pensions system is ridiculously over-complicated, and the state pension is not treated the same as workplace pensions.  Workplace pensions cannot be changed without informing members of what their new benefits are, and generally cannot be retrospectively worsened.  Yet the state pension was retrospectively worsened, and women were expected to just generally pick that up from newspapers etc.  No 24/7 media in 1995.

 

True. Yet they're also the generation that preached self responsibility for following generations with less opportunities. In a very big way. In fact this personal responsibility obsessed govt was voted in by them. There's an irony for you.

[onlooker]

13 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Yet the state pension was retrospectively worsened, and women were expected to just generally pick that up from newspapers etc.  No 24/7 media in 1995.

 

Is that because it's not really a pension? As some people here often point out, it is classed as a welfare benefit, and is therefore paid at the discretion of the government.

[Bear Goggles]

As @scottbeard says, this isn’t about the change itself, it’s about how the change was communicated, and so the compensation granted is only a couple of grand max, not the total difference in state pension benefits had the change not taken place. But I think it highlights the difference in pension expectations across the generations. Those over 60 obviously have very different expectations from those under 40. Check out the stories in the BBC article below:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68610680

You retired just before you were 60? Who does that?

You couldn’t pay your mortgage once you’d decided to retire at 60? No shit Sherlock!

Anyone under 40 expecting to retire before they’re 60 is either expecting a large windfall, or they have a very highly paid job.

So I can understand the lack of sympathy for the WASPI women by those under 40, especially as the “I” in WASPI stands for “inequality”. Obviously not inequality across generations.

In the BBC article, some of the quotes are enough to make a millennial’s blood boil:

Quote

"I don't want compensation, I want the money you have stolen from me," she says.

This refers to the state pension she would have got if the change in pension age hadn’t happened.

Quote

Karen says she has missed out on £47,000 due to the change. What she wants to know is: "Where's all that money gone?"

Where’s all the money I thought I was due to receive in state benefits gone? Hmm… It’s a mystery.

Of course all these comments come from the “I’ve paid in all my life, so it’s my money” school of thought, which as we know is false, but is the standard perception from people of that generation. I think millennials might want to give them a reality check!

Edited March 22 by Bear Goggles

[Unmoderated]

20 hours ago, scottbeard said:

No - the compensation is for the change not being communicated, not the change itself

Depends - how well was it been communicated?  Clearly quite well to you because you know exactly what's happening...

I think it's rather selective of them to decide what they think counts as communication. This was in the news for years IIRC?

20 hours ago, desiringonlychild said:

most of the single people are men. 

Check your maths there. Women outnumber men in the UK. Unless there are significantly more lesbian couples than gay couples I don't think that stacks up. 

43 minutes ago, msi said:

we need to use that to charge them for Social Care and stop them expecting LA's and Central Government to be funding them and keeping their precious pwoperdee...

Hell, lets go for IHT too

Amen.

[scottbeard]

30 minutes ago, Unmoderated said:

I think it's rather selective of them to decide what they think counts as communication. This was in the news for years IIRC?

Devil's advocat mode here:

Is it an acceptable situation to say that TV News and Newspapers is the appropriate way to communicate a key state benefit entitlement, as opposed to, say, individual letters to impacted individuals?

I don't think it's clear cut to say "people should just watch TV and plan major life-changing financial decisions around what's said on the 6 o clock news".

As I said, I think there is a point there.

Quote

Karen says she has missed out on £47,000 due to the change. What she wants to know is: "Where's all that money gone?"

This is part of the wider misunderstanding that people have about unfunded DB pensions.  Some people still mis-visualise their DB pension as a pot of money that is just sat out there with their name on it.

So in Karen's mind there was a pot of £47,000 ready to pay here from age 60-64, then someone came and took that pot away and did something with it.

There is a big, big need for more financial education in this country about how things like banks, loans, mortgages, pensions etc actually work.  

 

[MancTom]

32 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Devil's advocat mode here:

Is it an acceptable situation to say that TV News and Newspapers is the appropriate way to communicate a key state benefit entitlement, as opposed to, say, individual letters to impacted individuals?

 

Do they do this every time another benefit changes?

I didn't get a letter telling me my child benefit was increasing this year...nor did I get a letter telling me the rules about who is eligible was changed. It was all in the news though.

Given this I don't see what's special about pension benefits. In some examples shown people have retired from high paid jobs without checking what state pension they are entitled to and then discovered they would not get it for another x years. I can't see why that person should get any compensation - they could and should have checked before making a life changing decision like that.

Edited March 22 by MancTom

[msi]

39 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

There is a big, big need for more financial education in this country about how things like banks, loans, mortgages, pensions etc actually work. 

+1

As you see by the usual types here, they think money comes out of thin air for them because they PaId ThEiR sTaMP or that ImMiGruNtS aNd WoKeTaRdS stole it off them, innit.

[Pebbles]

2 hours ago, scottbeard said:

I don't have any sympathy at all for the retirement age being equalised at 65 - women live longer than men on average so even with an equal starting age women still end up on average getting the state pension for longer than than men do.

I do have SOME sympathy regarding the communication of it.  The pensions system is ridiculously over-complicated, and the state pension is not treated the same as workplace pensions.  Workplace pensions cannot be changed without informing members of what their new benefits are, and generally cannot be retrospectively worsened.  Yet the state pension was retrospectively worsened, and women were expected to just generally pick that up from newspapers etc.  No 24/7 media in 1995.

 

Its pretty bad statistically they will have paid less physical pounds in they will draw the pension for longer. technically they should be expected to retire later. i say that with tongue in cheek because i don't believe in equality i believe in equity, women having a smaller pension because of decisions they and their partners took 30 years ago is as fine as men statistically living shorter lives. you win some you loose some..

[Pebbles]

Also my private pension is retrospectively worsened. The government delay me bing able to take it as access is linked to state pension age and they reduce the lifetime allowance.

[MancTom]

4 minutes ago, Pebbles said:

Also my private pension is retrospectively worsened. The government delay me bing able to take it as access is linked to state pension age and they reduce the lifetime allowance.

I've got the same problem with my private pension.

[winkie]

Some take out well more than they ever put in, others get paid more than they are worth..... entitlement innit.....always those that have plenty more than enough, are those that want plenty more......

 

[PropertyMania]

13 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

I always love those titles of organisations who actually support the opposite of what they claim to.

Women against state pension inequality?!

They support women getting state pensions for 10 years longer than men - getting it 5 years earlier and living five years longer? Just because of their gender. How was that more equitable?

If actuaries were involved men would actually get a higher state pension than women and/or get it earlier as they typically die younger.

Women born before 1941 still inherit 100 per cent of their husband’s state pension when they die - terribly sexist and old fashioned in modern day terms but great for those women. For women who or whose husband’s retire today it will zero. That is equality - coming right at you!

 

 

well said.  modern feminism isn't about equality, but privilege 

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, Pebbles said:

Also my private pension is retrospectively worsened. The government delay me bing able to take it as access is linked to state pension age and they reduce the lifetime allowance.

I realise the devil is in the detail here, but:

- Whilst a delay to taking your pension is a reduction in flexibility it isn't actually a reduction in the value you will receive.  Every £ of your fund is still there (if DC) waiting for you at the later age.  If you have a DB pension it would likely have been reduced if paid early.

- Decreasing the lifetime allowance is technically increasing a tax on pensions and not a reduction in the pension itself.  This is analogous to a rise in NI/Income Tax not being a pay cut, even though both result in less take home pay.

[MARTINX9]

3 hours ago, onlooker said:

Is that because it's not really a pension? As some people here often point out, it is classed as a welfare benefit, and is therefore paid at the discretion of the government.

The comical thing is you would actually get more money via pension credit if you had just rolled up from abroad aged 65 than if you had worked in the UK for 40 years and paid in to a state pension. Pension credit also gives you free council tax, dental care, glasses and more.

Pension credit is of course means tested - but it shows how bad the state pension (£156 maximum basic rate for a single person) is that is nearly £50 a month lower than the subsistence level supposedly guaranteed by pension credit (£201 a month for a single person). For those of working age contributions based JSA is £85 a week - all you would get without means testing if you lost your job even if you paid NI for 20-30 years prior - and after six months it stops.

There literally is no benefit in terms of our welfare system from having worked and paid in - you are no better off than someone who just turns up or never worked a day. No wonder so many think there is no point working at all!

Its also dead mean - my aunt (I was her executor) died a couple of years ago (she had worked as an NHS nurse for 30 years before retiring to Ireland). The DWP actually asked for 6 days state pension to be repaid post her death - she also got an Irish state pension which they generously carried on paying for six weeks post death as its seen there as a way to help families through the first few weeks post bereavement. Wasn't a big deal in money terms - but just came across as unnecessarily brutal for relatives left behind grieving! 

Our whole benefits totally unsustainable - and will all collapse one day - but in some respects it is totally inequitable and doesn't incentivise working.

Hence I am not relying on my state pension.

 

 

Edited March 22 by MARTINX9

[Si1]

4 hours ago, MancTom said:

Do they do this every time another benefit changes?

I didn't get a letter telling me my child benefit was increasing this year...nor did I get a letter telling me the rules about who is eligible was changed. It was all in the news though.

Given this I don't see what's special about pension benefits. In some examples shown people have retired from high paid jobs without checking what state pension they are entitled to and then discovered they would not get it for another x years. I can't see why that person should get any compensation - they could and should have checked before making a life changing decision like that.

I kinda agree with this. Neither was there warning that boomers housing equity and local views would be preserved at the expense if the wider economy and the crushed dreams of later generations.

I'd have no problem with more significant compensation for these waspi people if I'd seen the slightest hint of giving a sh#t about the decimated life chances they left for those following.