Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,361
I think they should have been given more time and the change been more gradual. My mum has lost 40k.
There were 2 separate changes that were handled very differently.
1. The first was announced in 1992 (live on TV) and came into law in 1995, which equalised the state pension age for both men and women at age 65 from 2010. This wasn't an immediate jump but was staggered over 5 years. Women had 15 years to sort out their retirement provision and claims 'they didn't know' doesn't hold much water to me.
2. In 2011 the government decided to accelerate the timescale for the change from age 65 to 66 for both men and women. This was dumb, as it occurred slap bang in the middle of women changing from 60 to 65, so women were doubly penalised. It also gave next to no notice for women (and men) to do anything about.
In my opinion change 1 was reasonable because it gave plenty of notice for people to do something about it.
However change 2 was rushed, ill thought and should have occured after the state pension ages had been shifted to 65 for both.
How has she lost 40k as a direct result of this out of interest?I think they should have been given more time and the change been more gradual. My mum has lost 40k.
Are some people here really advocating the case for compensation where favourable discriminatory practices by the state have been ended?
That's the real principle under discussion here. If you were due to benefit from state mandated discrimination, should you be compensated when the discrimination ends without you getting your extra benefits?
All the emotional and sexist nonsense about women being victims in this is irrelevant appeals to emotion that shouldn't enter into it.
How has she lost 40k as a direct result of this out of interest?
But it only happened to women. That is why they are protesting.Are some people here really advocating the case for compensation where favourable discriminatory practices by the state have been ended?
That's the real principle under discussion here. If you were due to benefit from state mandated discrimination, should you be compensated when the discrimination ends without you getting your extra benefits?
All the emotional and sexist nonsense about women being victims in this is irrelevant appeals to emotion that shouldn't enter into it.
But it only happened to women. That is why they are protesting.
But that doesnt take away why they were protesting. If they suddenly wanted to bump all pensions up by 5-7 years there would have been a lot more than just the women complaining.That's because the discrimination was along gender lines.
What was a women doing in say the 1970s vs a man in the same decade? Were they doing all the housework while the husbando flittered off to some pub to give himself a long-term illness and anger issues? (hyperbole, but it was certainly my experience, not the 70s, but a similar environment)
The WASPI desire to take it back to 60 is dumb and shouldn't happen, i don't know why they're even trying to do it, it's the wrong message. But the social differences they had to live with in adulthood in context with the changes semi-recently is hardly worthless to talk about...
But that doesnt take away why they were protesting. If they suddenly wanted to bump all pensions up by 5-7 years there would have been a lot more than just the women complaining.
But that doesnt take away why they were protesting. If they suddenly wanted to bump all pensions up by 5-7 years there would have been a lot more than just the women complaining.
Why should they give them something? What about the men who have worked years extra over women?I haven't done the calculations but she was 60 least year and she is missing out on 6 years pension.
They should give these women at least something.
Our pension system is one of the worst in the developed world. I think everyone should retire at the most at 65.
I haven't done the calculations but she was 60 least year and she is missing out on 6 years pension.
Why should they give them something? What about the men who have worked years extra over women?