Ageism,ignorance, intolerance. class bias on mumsnet re Waspi women

Why?! I'm 64, support the OP and WASPI women, voted Remain and always vote Labour.
What's your point?

Maybe. But they seemed very much in favour of this pre election.

Pre the 2019 election, definitely.

It was removed from the 2024 manifesto, and when asked about it specifically, Reeves said "I have not set out any money for that". I think their position was clear.

Yes, a couple of years ago they have said they supported WASPI women, but it was clear from the election campaign that this wouldn't be paid. You can absolutely accuse them of changing their minds. But I don't think you can accuse them of campaigning for the election by saying that this would be paid. If they were planning on paying it, they'd definitely have made a massive deal of it. Instead they pretty clearly removed it from the manifesto and said no money had been planned for it.

The only parties that said in their manifestos that they'd pay it were parties who would never have to actually follow through (Lib Dems, Greens) so can promise whatever they want.

Perhaps her home is incredibly important to her, as our homes are to most of us. It's one of the most distressing things that can happen to someone, being forced out if their home.

While I'm not directly affected , I'm only just in my sixties - I have to agree on the way everyone under about 35 seems to think we are all absolutely loaded, whining brexiteers. Any other demographic of people sneered at like this would be up in arms, but apparently, we're all living in mortgage free houses muttering about young people and living the life of Riley.
It's absolutely pathetic, and I'm sick of it

I have huge sympathy with the WASPI women.

What I object to, however, is the increasingly infuriating narrative that everything is Starmer/ Labour's fault - after 5 months in charge.

Which government was it that brought in changes sooner than was expected and planned for? That's right - that amazing coalition of 2010.

Which government was it that knew full well prison spaces were maxed out and failed to act? That's right, the wonderful Tory government of the past 14 years.

Who broke our NHS? Our schools? Bankrupted our councils and brought us years of 'austerity' for no gain? And let's not forget the Great Brexit Experiment.

Starmer and Labour have been left with a shit legacy, and are finally making all the unpopular decisions that a succession of spineless Tory PMs were too power greedy to face. Leadership isn't a popularity contest, where you give people what they ask for, no matter what the cost. It's about making hard decisions, despite how unpopular it makes you, for the greater good of everyone. The UK cannot afford £10bn. Want someone to blame? Try Cameron and Clegg.

Of course they were, but when it's your job to actually make the books balance it's a very different story. You have to make hard decisions once you've got the full picture.

The country simply cannot afford this payout at this point.

Maybe. But they seemed very much in favour of this pre election.

Your argument is based on 'fairness' but is a very narrow one. The reality is men and women still aren't equal and life has got fairer in some ways and less far in others for women. House prices, the rising burden of taxation and poor economic growth has meant that many women now will struggle to enjoy anything close to the quality of life that many WASPI women enjoyed. They are guaranteed to retire much later then WASPI women and are expected to save for their retirement whilst also paying extortionate mortgages for many more years, paying towards their children's astronomical tuition fees and with a much higher tax burden than generations of the past.

So were pension arrangements in the past completely fair to women compared to men? No. Does this mean younger women struggling with their own challenges should be forced to pay towards righting this wrong at their own expense? Absolutely not.

You’re quite right OP, women are their own worst enemies sometimes. I don’t know if there’s any research into this…but there should be.

Anecdotally, I’ve seen women rail against other women’s maternity rights at work, I (vaguely) remember how women laughed and insulted ‘dykey’ feminists in the seventies and eighties and there was plenty of female opposition to women getting the vote in the early twentieth century. There are many other examples.

But don’t worry, those women who think all over sixties paid 5 bob for their house in 1977 and retired at 42 will have their own, as yet unknown, battles to fight with the female generations below them.

And the men will continue be quite happy to leave them to it.

I actually think Labour have made the right and brave decision here. I don't say that lightly as I'm not a big fan of Starmer.

The country simply cannot afford to pay this money, its as simple as that. Sometimes it comes down to hard choices and this is one of them.

There are much bigger priorities for the country, such as healthcare and education. The UK must make the books balance as a matter of national priority for all its citizens.

It must be disappointing for the Waspi women but its just not realistic to expect this payout at this moment in time.

I also don't like the calls for women to support women just because you're not agreeing with them and the vitriol that accompanies it if you don't. Women are not a homogeneous group, we're all entitled to hold our own opinions and disagree with each other.

I actually despair.

OP Iam with you. I am not a WASPI either.

What are you talking about? Is this the same idea as giving the winter fuel allowance to millionaires in the hope that they donate it to charity too?

Why on earth would we tax everyone to the hilt and to fund all these blanket payments so that boomers can feel fantastic and benevolent about giving their share to a charity? What about working women that don't need to rely on women's charities but simply want to be able to buy a modest house and pay the bills? Are they just the cash cow in your model that aren't old enough to get blanket payments and aren't poor enough to need charity? What on earth is this country coming to!

I'm 70 and received my state pension at 66 - six years 'late'. We received many years' notice of this so no surprise but that didn't make it any more palatable, after working for 51 years.

FWIW, I was an ardent remainer, vote Labour and didn't expect to receive compensation.

What's done is done.

if a wasp woman was born in 1955, for the first 19 years of her working life any occupational pension was not equal to a man’s occupational pension.

it wasn’t until 1990 that this disparity was made illegal

it’s all very well stating oh the had time to put this right, they where still trying to put right a lot of other inequality they were facing

Women should of course support women but this includes older women not wanting to place yet another burden on struggling younger women that have to face many more challenges than previous generations

Then they can give the money to a women's charity.

What's terrible is seeing people who are struggling turning against each other.

There's terrible wealth inequality in our country:
The richest 10% of households in the UK own 57% of the country's wealth, while the bottom 50% own less than 5%. The top 1% of households own 23% of the wealth. Yet any politician who even raises the question of how to address this is treated as fringe and unelectable.

Many people are really struggling with the cost of living. Some of those people are farmers, some are pensioners, some are millennials. And many are struggling because of systemic failures of society and government - the selling off of affordable housing; legal tax-avoidance schemes; the looting of once nationalised industries.

The most fundamental inequalities cut through these current identity-politics style divisions. Buying into these classifications and framing the fight and between generations and so on, only serves those who are doing very well under the current system.

Personally I think Labour have got this right.

It's all very well complaining about the terrible misogyny of the past and the limited time women had to make adjustments to their pension arrangements, but does this justify a blanket payment being made to women of a certain age who as a population have enjoyed relative prosperity compared to the younger people who will be funding this payment? This is the stalk reality! It won't be the other boomers losing out but young people who are already struggling to forge any kind of lives for themselves, let alone starting to think about a pension that they won't be able to access until they are 70+.

Women should of course support women but this includes older women not wanting to place yet another burden on struggling younger women that have to face many more challenges than previous generations.

@Ritasueandbobtoo9 I’m sure your job is difficult, but you must realise public sector pensions are pretty brilliants compared to those having to build their own private pensions?

Particularly if you’ve been enrolled for many years.

The kinds of pensions new workers today can sign up for are nowhere near as lucrative as in the past - including in the public sector.

I don’t know what to make of it all but recently I was told to “check my privilege” about having a a public sector pension. I would love to have that poster spend one day in my shoes, taking massive decisions about people’s lives all day long at speed, fighting for their rights, making them safe. We live in bizarre times.

This. 100%. A blanket payment to hundreds of thousands of women, most of whom knew what was happening and for those who didn't - what would they have actually done differently anyway? If they actually gave up work on the idea of a pension without checking the details then they're crazily reckless and if not surely they just need to work longer. You know, like everyone else! It's unbelievably selfish. You would literally be taking that money from younger generations.
Id rather it was invested in schools thanks

I don’t really understand why this one group should be compensated for not being able to retire at 60, when most current tax payers will be working to 68+ to claim their own state pensions.

For my age group, I truthfully doubt there will be one, but assume that the retirement age will be over 70 by then.

I am not really clear why these women have been particularly wronged vs every other person coming after them who also has to retire later.

It always seemed bizarre to me that women got their state pension at 60 while men had to wait until 65, given the shorter life expectancy for men and the fact that at that time, more men had back breaking manual jobs such as mining which resulted in health problems long before they reached their retirement age.

I believe that one rationale was that men tended to marry younger women and this meant that they could retire together.

As a Waspi woman myself whose state pension age was increased to 66, I don't think that a blanket compensation scheme could be justified as 90% of women in the relevant age group knew about the pension changes early enough to make provision for this. Unfortunately, this probably means that the 10% who weren't aware of the changes were probably in the sort of jobs without access to company pensions or who left work due to health reasons or caring responsibilities so they have been the hardest hit by these changes.

My Waspi mum is furious about this. But in her case I think it's the right decision. She was on benefits, had been for years, and had to wait an extra year to get her pension. That meant she had to pay bedroom tax on her 4 bed council house as she refused to downsize. Once she got her pension she was exempt from bedroom tax.

For her it was a simple as that. She expects compensation for having to pay to hold onto something she doesn't need but won't release for the benefit of a family who need it.

I don’t think we should be paying blanket compensation to WASPI women, I’m not vitriolic about it nor am I ageist.

Quotes from a UK Parliament Select Committee:

"The economy has become skewed in favour of baby boomers (born 1946-1964) and against millennials (born 1980 - 1995) . Unless governments adapt to these changed circumstances the intergenerational contract that underpins the welfare state is under threat."

"The most recent UK Generational Accounts, published in 2011, estimated the intergenerational budget imbalance to be £7.6 trillion in aggregate terms."

"The 2011 UK Generational Accounts set out future contributions and withdrawals by age group. Without any changes in policy, children currently aged 0–4 would on average contribute around £70,000 more in taxes than they enjoyed in services and benefits. People currently aged 65–69 would on average have a net withdrawal of more than £220,000 over the remainder of their lifetimes."

Personally I'm even more annoyed when older people refuse to accept these simple facts and try to accuse me of ageism or misogyny or sour grapes.

I'm a left wing voter and I don't believe anyone should be in poverty, regardless of age. If there are pensioners who can't afford to put the heating on then that's absolutely wrong and I'm happy to pay my taxes to support them. But a blanket payment to 300,000 women, many of whom are very wealthy? Absolutely not.