Govt considering u-turn on WASPI compensation

Precisely. So why should your generation be footing the bill in addition to all that for a blanket compensation payment that won't even be means tested?

Hear hear. I’m mid 30s and always been fully aware that NI is paying for the benefits (including pensions) and NHS today. It’s not for ‘my’ pension pot. MY pension pot is a separate fund I pay into from my salary every month.

I doubt there will be a state pension when I get there , I have no illusions I will live my whole life again and not be receiving a state pension. Any state support in 30+ years will depend on the future government at the time, and will come from workers who are not even born yet. And there won’t be enough of them when we look at the current birth rates - we will need more and more immigration to plug the gap (and that will create even more future pensioners…)

Governments should have seen this all coming during the baby boom years, but it was always tomorrow’s problem.

Thought I'd clicked on a thread about WASPI but somehow ended up in the Four Yorkshiremen sketch.

But it won't BE 'their turn', will it? State pensions will never be, for under 30s, what they are for over 65s today. IF they get anything it will likely not be until 70 at the earliest.

This it what young people are faced with. They know it. So surely you can understand why they might feel aggrieved that, on top of the fact that they are contributing towards a pension pot they will either not benefit as much from or not receive at all, their tax money is potentially now footing the bill for something they had no part in.

I'm old enough to be confident I'll get state pension, though it won't be until I am 68. 3 years later than the Waspis. If I wasn't, rest assured, if it's still an option, I'd be contracting out of SERPS.

It's not a reciprocal arrangement any more. People under 30 know if they want a pension worth anything, they've got to do it themselves. A chunk taken out of their salary for a WPP PLUS a chunk taken out to pay for other people's pensions. People who gave in the knowledge it would one day be 'their turn' even if later than expected.

Today's under 30s have no such expectations.

I'm nearly 50 and I reckon the state pension will be means tested by the time I get there.

But it won't BE 'their turn', will it? State pensions will never be, for under 30s, what they are for over 65s today. IF they get anything it will likely not be until 70 at the earliest.

This it what young people are faced with. They know it. So surely you can understand why they might feel aggrieved that, on top of the fact that they are contributing towards a pension pot they will either not benefit as much from or not receive at all, their tax money is potentially now footing the bill for something they had no part in.

I'm old enough to be confident I'll get state pension, though it won't be until I am 68. 3 years later than the Waspis. If I wasn't, rest assured, if it's still an option, I'd be contracting out of SERPS.

It's not a reciprocal arrangement any more. People under 30 know if they want a pension worth anything, they've got to do it themselves. A chunk taken out of their salary for a WPP PLUS a chunk taken out to pay for other people's pensions. People who gave in the knowledge it would one day be 'their turn' even if later than expected.

Today's under 30s have no such expectations.

This is pensioners though. You lot carry on not giving a shit about them until you get there. Then it will be, oops “I wasn’t careful what I wished for”!

I made this point up thread.
This pitting generation against generation is a sneaky way of getting younger people to vote against todays pensioners then it will be " but that's what you wanted" when it's their turn.
Once those rights are gone they are gone.

It's taken an immature turn now with people who should know better calling each other whiners so Im off .

Not sure the OP was wanting help (unless I missed that?) Just doesnt want to end up paying for compensation for the 'waspi' women.

I can see why that would cause prices to double. Except they haven't, they've trebled.

This proves the point I tried to explain to you earlier. Houses cost 3 times 1 salary when that was all you could borrow. When you could borrow based on 2 salaries the price doubled.

Those figures are for borrowing. Paying the mortgage is more affordable with lower interest rates.

Well by that token we, as higher rate tax paying 70 year olds shouldn't be funding a pay out for childcare for working families with two incomes. Everyone in every generation has paid for the pensions of those older than them. It's taken the current generation to whine about it. (Or got their mothers to whine on their behalf)

accept every time has had its problems but post 2010 is much much worse than any decade before, with the exception of pre-1950
You were born in 1992
How on earth would you know?

Please educate yourself about the economic crisis of the 1970s
It lasted the whole decade.
Tax and inflation was crippling, families could barely afford to eat, the conditions we all lived would be considered poverty now.
Women were sexually assaulted at work and sacked if they got pregnant so no pension.
Families barely managed to scrape by with one salary not enough the pay the rent or mortgage, women worked but it had to be around their families, so cleaning jobs, cash in hand.
Home ownership was 40%
There was no credit , welfare carried a huge stigma
Domestic violence was normal, if women complained they were told they deserved it.
Marital rate was only made illegal in 1992

Women who were abused by their husbands were put onto valium and became addicted

Shall I go on?
You are clueless
We get it, you hate your MIL but very few women of that era were like her or a fortunate

Just possibly because there is absolutely nothing that they should be compensated for? The Financial Ombudsman recommended that the Waspi women should be compensated. Labour in opposition were all for it. Now not so much.

This is being quoted because Starmer said. Financial experts have said it would be nowhere near this figure. This is happening because new evidence has come to light and the case will be coming to court will a likelihood that the Government wouldn’t have a case against it and would lose. Compensation for past injustices always cost a lot of money. The way to save that money is to ensure that things are done without injustice.

This is pensioners though. You lot carry on not giving a shit about them until you get there. Then it will be, oops “I wasn’t careful what I wished for”!

Just possibly because there is absolutely nothing that they should be compensated for? The Financial Ombudsman recommended that the Waspi women should be compensated. Labour in opposition were all for it. Now not so much.

I mean if we're going to talk about entitled whiners the waspi women win hands down. I don't see the current generation demanding compensation.

Well by that token we, as higher rate tax paying 70 year olds shouldn't be funding a pay out for childcare for working families with two incomes. Everyone in every generation has paid for the pensions of those older than them. It's taken the current generation to whine about it. (Or got their mothers to whine on their behalf)

Good, who knows it there will even be a pension for our youngest workers? My 19 year old son shouldn’t be funding a payout for a group who have been treated very generously when it comes to pensions.

I was born in the early 1960s, so I'm just outside the WASPI age group. I don't think they should get compensation, for reasons I explained in an earlier post.

But in response to the question of intra-generational comparison, I do think my generation has in general terms had an easier ride than my daughters' (born in the early 90s) generation. I grew up without aspiration, my parents didn't see the need to educate a daughter and I worked in low-paid jobs until my kids were born. My marriage broke down when DD2 was a baby, leaving me a single parent with two small children, in low-paid jobs prior to the national minimum wage. That was very tough, and I'll never forget the constant worrying about being able to afford basics. However, when my DDs reached secondary school age, I was able to go to university making use of various grants and funding opportunities, including free after-school care. I was then able to get a "job with prospects" on what felt to me like a very comfortable salary, maybe about two-thirds of the national median salary. On that salary I was able to afford a deposit on a large flat and comfortably manage the mortgage repayments, as well as start saving and paying into a private workplace pension. I don't think women now in their 30s/40s would get a second chance anything like as easily, and two-thirds of the median salary is now about £25,000 which wouldn't be enough for someone without considerable savings to get onto the property ladder, so they'd still be paying exhorbitant rents. My salary then went up, not to anything lavish, but I earn just over the national median now: I've finished paying my mortgage off, and neither of my daughters need any more help from me financially so I've been maxing out my pension savings so that I can hopefully avoid being a burden to them as I get older. I can't imagine a woman following the same trajectory thirty years later being in the fortunate position I'm in now. Yes, there are younger women who went to university at 18 and straight into professional jobs who've been able to get on the housing ladder, but like-for-like, I do think things are harder now. I also think the world of work has got harder, less satisfying and more anxiety-ridden. I'm glad I'm coming to the end of my time as a worker, and I wouldn't want to be starting out or even mid-career in my sector as it is now, with decades still to go.