To be fed up with the WASPIs' renewed campaign?

[Jane379]

I sympathise with people who genuinely did not know but hiw many was this? And how would we know who to compensate even if the money were available?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/waspi-latest-compensation-legal-challenge-pension-b2976014.html

It’s the sense of grievance that stops the heart from rusting over

Forget the rights and wrongs no government of any party is going to spend billions on this and the idea they have some kind of electoral clout is laughable.

But what difference did it make, though? We all realised that things were getting tougher and we’d have to work longer and longer.

My friends and I used to say that the way things were going, we’d never retire. And, as far as I’m concerned, that really is the point. Young people today have decades of warning that they’re going to have to work into their dotage. That notice makes no difference to them because the reality is: they just have to keep working.

but I still don’t make the connection being to be ‘owed’ anything. My mum is 10 years old than you and was always planning and looking at finances and working out how she was going to provide for the future. When she found out about the change in the 1990s she changed her plans accordingly. She is honestly baffled by the fact she would be owed anything. It was just one of those things. She doesn’t feel robbed just as when NI went up by a % a few years ago we all had to take on the chin even though we’re paying more than the generation before.

After a cancer battle my mum was able to retire at 60. This was back in 2006 a friend of hers she worked with was a few months younger than her and wasn’t able to retire for a few more years. Just because of when she was born.

My mum died in 2007 after her cancer returned. She would be spinning in her grave if she knew this campaign was still happening. So yeah damm right they have the right to campaign.

Once the state pension was introduced it should always been the policy that the age for it would rise as life expectancy increased.

I agree. In my lifetime I have narrowly missed out on things that previous generations benefitted from. The full student grant ended the year before I started uni, this was also the year after they stopped students being allowed to claim unemployment benefits in the summer holidays. MIRAS ended just after I bought my first flat. Married Couples allowance stopped the year I got married. There was a £500 payment in pregnancy that I missed by weeks. Child Benefit rules changed when my daughter was 2. Free childcare was introduced in the year my daughter left nursery. I became a higher rate tax payer the same year ScotGov decided we should pay more than our English counterparts.

I don’t see why I should complain about any of this, because it is all about protecting the future economy for the next generations, living within our means, and with each change, I have simply understood more that my financial future cannot rely on the government. I’ve had opportunities previously denied to women, and understand the privileged situation I am in, that it’s my responsibility to give something back, not to insist on taking just because I feel it’s owed to me.

Well, my generation had this with the introduction of student loans, taking education from free to us leaving with thousands of pounds of debt at the start of our working lives. Money that previous generations could have put into a house deposit or similar.

I await my compensation.

This.

I remember those. It was at the very time I was buying a house, and started my pension. The 1995 act was all about more regulation. If people felt it was better to trust a government they didn’t know in 20 years time, than a regulated financial company, that’s a wild take.

Nobody stole anything from you and having to work til 65 sounds pretty fucking good to me and those younger than me (which is most of the working population).

have you read my post?

Of course they knew, there's absolutely no way it got past anyone. It was everywhere and people were informed personally.

Quite agree. Often women were working part time and now expect to have a full pension.

You should be more concerned about young people being skint. It is your fight because they are paying your pension. It isn’t a separate pot of money, set aside that you paid in to, it is the longest running, biggest Ponzi scheme which is starting to fail.

And when those young people do fight, they are accused of being lazy and entitled so they can’t win.

Maybe you don’t have children or grandchildren so think you have no skin in the game, but when the economy fails, and young people are out of work or underpaid, it is as much your problem as it is theirs.

I'm actually in the age group that expected to retire at 60 (just)

I do not agree with WASPI aims at all. It was always unfair that women retired 5 years younger than men. Its obvious that as life expectancy goes up so should the state retirement age.

The country simply cannot afford for people to get a state pension pension at 65, and its not fair to expect the young people of today, many of whom cannot afford to buy their own house and are putting off having children, to pay for the early retirement of their parents generation.

My state retirement age is now 67, I'm a bit miffed, but I can see that this is fairer.

I can also see that I was in a privileged position of growing up in a time when plenty of good council housing existed, it was possible to live on one wage when my children were small, and when I went back to work I was able to contribute to a decent works pension.

I only wish these things were possible for all of my children's generation, not just a lucky few.

How is this meant to garner sympathy for your cause?

They are so so selfish. I would like to see them protest on behalf of young people who have been saddled with the debt created by their generation, saddled with crazy student debts and who have no hope of getting a mortgage, due to no fault of their own.

I don’t have a particular case. It’s factually true that many women were paid less than men for similar work before the Equal Pay Act which logically wouldn’t have been needed if that were not the case.

Please show me where I’ve stamped my feet or expected compensation for anything. I’ll wait.

It actually blows my mind that 1 average wage could buy a fairly nice 3 bedroom house in an average area, and sustain a 2 child family without being utterly skint 24/7

Indeed. My older SIL aligns with this. She is 14 years older than me.
My take is that she actually stopped working before 60, paid the extra years of NI and then took a post 2016 pension based on the new state pension rate.
I can't figure how she has missed out. I will get state pension at 67 if I live long enough and thank God I'm in a Lucky position to likely to be able to retire at 63 ish. I think the campaign is on a hiding to nothing to be honest

If your mum was born in 1948 she got her pension at 60 so she didn’t need to change anything. The changes didn’t affect her.

I'm in that age group and I knew, accepted it and got on with my life.

The reality was when there was a challenge on the different retirement ages for men and women, it may not have meant the retirement age for men going down. The reality was it went the wrong way. However, women have been fighting for equal rights for years until it wasn’t in their favour! We cant have it both ways, we either want equality or we don’t, we can’t cherry pick the bits we want!

Agreed. Most of these people profited hugely from soaring house prices.