To think the back to 60 campaign is grabby

[Neaoll]

It's been known about for a long time that state pension ages would be equalised.

State pension is just unsustainable, it was never supposed to be something people claim for 20-30 years. Was for people that had a hard time so they didn't starve to death in their last few years. Now it's a top-up to the richest part of society. It should have been linked with life expectancy a long time ago.

I'm in my 40s and dont expect to ever get a state pension. I've been contributing to my private pension ever since I worked to support myself.

Just to add, i have sympathy for women who worked hard, often in manual jobs for many years. they often just can’t do it anymore. as do some men. i have no sympathy for people who worked parttime for many years and still have a pension they can live off

@acciocats
Who said I went part time when I was 31 yrs?? I didn’t have my daughter until I was 37 and it was only then that I went part time, so I don’t know where you are getting your figures from concerning my personal life 🙄.
It would appear from this thread that the only people that don’t think it is a wrong doing to women in the age bracket concerned are people who are obviously not affected.

oh i thought you were saying it was sexism Thats the way it read to me, Sorry if i got that wrong. More to do with very expensive housing.

myself2020
How do you know I’ve had an easy life...do you know me or anything about my life? Don’t make assumptions on things you know nothing about.
I took early retirement aged 57 because it was offered to me at the time. I receive a pension from the Civil Service because I paid (a lot) into it for over 30 years. And yes, I am complaining that I won’t receive my state pension (that I have also contributed to) when I was promised it.

Typo pantry, I meant part time since your 30s not 31s . Point remains exactly the same though. You worked part time for around the last 20 years of your career and chose to retire early at age 56. Why on earth do you expect any sympathy for the fact you have to wait a bit longer to draw the state pension? If you really needed the money presumably you’d have returned to full time work earlier. Or remained in part time work longer

@Ilovemypantry The point we're trying to make is that most of us are paying lots into state pension and occ pens, but we're not going to benefit from them until at least 67 (state pension); they won't be worth as much as previously (occ pens) and we may not be able to retire anyway unless we've managed somehow to get on the housing ladder.

The point isn't that you haven't worked hard, it's that you're wanting to take money from people in a situation that is worse (I will not be retiring at 57 and my civil service pens is likely to be fairly rubbish).

Ilovemypantry -welcome to the world. I pay shed loads into my work pension... I reminisce about the days when it was a single digit percentage of my salary! The contributions have gone up .. and up... and up, without the final payout increasing. That’s the situation the country is in.

As for the state pension - it’s never been promised to anyone. You pay your NI (and yeap , I agree it sucks paying nearly £400 a month into that when I won’t get any more benefit than someone working part time and paying peanuts in) but that’s how it is. I can’t believe you’re complaining when quite frankly having worked part time for around 20 years and then retiring for the last 7, you’ll have paid in a lot less than those of us working full time

Ah sorry @HelenaDove, I was quite rude to you! I should've said "as a single person" - can't remember which the adviser said but I'm sure he didn't give me the impression that if I were a man it'd be different. The problem was the deposit and salary combo wasn't enough. Unfortunately you can keep saving but if the house prices also go up, you don't get very far!

People in manual roles will just have to have a second career.

FFS I have no words.

@acciocats
As I said previously, you are not in the age bracket affected so I don’t think you are in a position to criticise those that are.

Frangipani- but presumably ok for men to change their jobs if they couldn’t cope with a manual career post-60?

@Ilovemypantry Can't ask us to pay for what you want and also not to complain about it, sorry.

@WhoTellsYourStory
We’ve already paid

You paid part time NI contributions for the last 20 years of your career ilovemypantry. Way less than many others yet still you complain...

@Ilovemypantry It'd cost an extra £215 billion, which would fall on taxpayers. It wouldn't come out of all of the individual little pots (which don't exist).

Not to mention that as you've worked part time the majority of your working life, and retired early, you won't pay in nearly as much as others who've worked full time for longer, so you're on a really sticky wicket with this argument in my view.

RhymesWithOrange - My mum and her sisters all worked full-time. They are all now 70 plus.

I think some sectors can always claim they were not encouraged to work. Surely it should come from within though.

It seems odd that anyone who hasn't work should get a pension. If they couldn't work and provide for themselves, I agree then they should be supported.

I understand the moving of the goal posts at short notice was unreasonable though. Unexpected and therefore unfair.

@Ilovemypantry you are the perfect example of the thread title- grabby.
Have a little thought for hard working full time single parents parents, whose taxes you want to pay your pension many years before they will receive theirs!

No worries Story. My 24 yr old niece is in a similar boat

I am confused by @Ilovemypantry I’m afraid (which of the pro-Back to 60 lobby will be next to tell me that I ‘lack comprehension’ or a similar “you must be thick if you don’t agree with me!” insult, I wonder?).

She retires at 57. She is now 63. So she retired seven years ago, AFTER the acceleration of the equal pension age moving her retirement age to (say) 66.

If you were going to retire, and your retirement plans were based on the state pension arriving on the stroke of your 63rd birthday, wouldn’t you, you know, check that you were going to get your pension then?

She worked in the civil service. Ideally placed to find out what her state pension age was, and yet she didn’t. She retired in 2012, a year after the second change to the WASPI pension age. Whose fault is it that she now has less money than she expected (‘just about enough to live on’, although it has apparently been enough for the seven years since she retired)?

As for ‘I paid into my civil service pension for years so I deserve it’: I, too, have a civil service pension. Preserved, because I left years ago. I am under no illusion that what I paid in comes anywhere near covering the cost to the taxpayer of what it will pay out. Do you know what size pot you would need to buy an annuity of the same size as your civil service pension? I don’t know @Ilovemypantry’s financial circumstances, but you would need a TON of money in a pension fund even to pay you an £8k a year annuity.

So excuse me if I don’t have any sympathy. The situation is of her own making.

Also, can we try to be a bit more dignified please? By which I mean, I find it a bit creepy that some posters are trying to prosecute personal vendettas against other posters, including stalking the site for posts made to other threads by the person they want to attack and pasting them into this unrelated thread to show what a rotter the other person is? It’s a bit beneath us, don’t you think?

You don’t see male politicians on Question Time jumping out of their seats and pointing at an opponent shrieking, “well, you should hear what he said about his cleaner last week!”

I just checked annuity rates (can’t get off to sleep so trying anything): a pot of £100k would buy a 55 year old £3,800 a year. If you want that index linked it’s £2.200 a year. Still think you’ve paid so much in that you deserve a state pension of £8k a year, years earlier than your state pension age?

Something that intrigues me about this thread is the assumption that the pension age will continue to rise or even that the state pension will no longer exist.

We’re currently in the worst stage - the clue’s in the term baby boomer - there are fucking loads of us. After 1964 the birth rate decreased rapidly so in future there will be far fewer people claiming pensions. Life expectancy is actually decreasing now.

There’s a lot of predicting the future based on current circumstances. The world will be very different in 20 years time.

@Alsohuman i saw a statistic somewhere that a third of women now over the age of 45 havent had children so that would bear out what you posted.

@iamthewombat Fair point but its a bit galling to see a poster happy to use Group 1 to pit against Group 2 when on previous threads she made her feelings about Group 1 pretty clear. If you look down on a particular group you dont get to use them when it suits.

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/04/nearly-one-in-seven-britons-could-live-alone-2039-study-shows