Pensions Stolen, Hotels Paid: How the State Betrays British Women

[JessieZoo]

So let’s get this straight.
Labour says it would be “unfair” — yes, unfair — to pay British women the pensions they’re rightfully owed. A flat-rate compensation scheme, they argue, would cost up to £10.5 billion. That, apparently, is just too much for the taxpayer to handle. Too heavy a burden. Too expensive. Too inconvenient.
But wait — in the very same breath, they have no issue at all signing off on billions of pounds to house illegal migrants in hotels. Not just hostels or temporary shelters — but full-service hotels, many costing hundreds of pounds per night. Paid for by you. The British taxpayer.

Women who worked all their lives, paid into the system, raised children, supported families — many of them now pensionless, struggling to heat their homes or feed themselves — are told: “Sorry, there’s no money left.” Yet people who entered this country illegally, without contributing a single penny to the public purse, are handed food, shelter, healthcare, and legal aid on a silver platter.
Where is the outrage? Where is the logic? Where is the basic common sense?
Let’s call it what it is: an insult. A slap in the face to every British woman who’s been denied justice. A betrayal of the very people who built this country.

The state is happy to tell working-class women — many of whom were misled, underinformed, or outright ignored when their pension age was quietly raised — that they must simply “get on with it.” But when it comes to those who cross our borders illegally? The red carpet rolls out. No delays. No debates. No “affordability” test.

The message is loud and clear: law-abiding British citizens come last.
Let that sink in.

Because this is no longer just about money. It’s about priorities. It’s about morality. It’s about who this country serves — and who it’s abandoned.
If the government — and Labour in particular — truly cared about fairness, justice, or “proportionality,” then British women would not be fighting tooth and nail for scraps while illegal migrants are put up in comfort using the very taxes those same women paid throughout their lives.

This isn’t a funding issue. It’s a political choice.
It’s not that the country is broke — it’s that those in charge have broken their promise to the people who deserve it most.
And it’s time we said enough is enough.

Yet more guff. There are 70m people in the UK and 4m Muslims - 66m people aren't Muslim in the UK. There isn't a conspiracy to replace white people . There's no white genocide.

Is it guff that Muhammad is the number one boy's name in the UK?

Did I say the words 'white genocide' or 'replace white people'?

I think you're the one spouting guff and making shit up.

It's usual for the 'men of fighting age' propagandists to spout guff about a conspiracy to replace white people with Muslims. It's called The Great Replacement theory or white genocide. You're the one talking about Muhammad, knowing full well that the vast majority of people in this country aren't Muslim. You're making shit up.

I'm confused. I'm definitely not making up the part about Muhammad being the number one boy's name in the UK.

I've definitely not mentioned a Great Replacement Theory and I've definitely not mentioned the words 'white genocide'. I also never said that the majority of people in the country are Muslim.

And yet you accuse me of making stuff up. Hmmmm. I think I see what's going on here.

Well, it's actually noah.

Muhammed was in 2023

Re the "men of fighting age", I'm not worrying massively about replacement. I am worried about terrorism though on the basis that the state don't know who these men are and what their intention is coming here although they do know that many are from countries that we were recently fighting againt.

I'm not 100% confident Keir Starmer is in control of things...

Fair cop, you got me there. Nothing to see here, everyone can move on.

Oh look, more racism. What a surprise. Perhaps the UK has a moral obligation to house refugees seeing as the government never seems to stop actively or being complicit in bombing so many countries across the globe? Fewer wars/genocides = fewer refugees.

I thought we as a society wanted to improve the rapidly falling birth rate? Or no, is it just babies of a certain ethnicity you want?

Things are such that the most urgent terrorist threats are from radical Islam and the far right. Far right agitators are pushing the narrative that the 'men of fighting age' are invading the UK in order to take over. Part of their rhetoric is fundamentalists bringing in weapons and them being a terrorist threat.

Common sense dictates that it's far easier to radicalise people online than pay people smugglers to bring Isis over in inflatables.

Yet again, more inferences being made about what I posted. No, I am not a white supremacist who only wants white babies to be born.

The popularity of the name Mohammed is more a reflection of the relative lack of variation in Muslim boys' names than anything else. The proportion of Muslim boys bearing this name is likely to be much higher than the percentage of white British boys bearing whatever name happens to be popular in any given year, simply because Mohammed is such an obvious choice for many Muslim parents.

Nailed it completely.

If multiple people are “inferring” the same thing from your statements then I’d say there are only one of two possible conclusions: you either need to work on how you are phrasing your point or your point is indeed just racist.

Funny, I knew you were going to say that.

I’m fine with how I phrased things. Maybe people should stop reading things into comments that just aren’t there.

If you’re fine with it then why are you complaining? You carry on with your points and we will continue to call you out on them.

As well as not saying any of the things that I’ve been accused of saying, I’m also not complaining. Merely replying to posters who have responded to my posts.

Not sure what’s going on today. Maybe some Mumsnetters need comprehension lessons.

I disagree with everything in your post OP. I have some sympathy with the WASPI women, but really, why should this specific cohort get £10.5B of taxpayers money? Why not younger women who have to retire later, or men who saw their pension age go from 65 to 67?

Also, I don't agree that Labour want to have to house asylum seekers. Actually, I think Sir Keir would think all of his Christmases came at once if the number of small boat crossings suddenly fell. The only people benefitting are immigration lawyers and Reform.

Yes we are all idiots and you are correct. That must be the conclusion to draw from this. Well done.

Hurrah, we are at last in agreement.

And as fascinating as this back and forth is, I really have to go. Have a good day.

Boils my p*ss.

Work hard and you get nothing but money taken off you. Come in illegally or can't be bothered to work and you get everything.. all paid for by the hard workers 😠 it's time for a serious change.

I stayed in one for a night. Never again, worst hotel experience ever

Do you feel the same way about paying for services you don’t personally access? I for one do not have children so should I be angry about my taxes going towards schools, maternity care, childcare provision etc etc.?

And why should my taxes go towards paying for the pensions of women who get to retire 8 years before I will be able to?

Or, and this is radical, but maybe when you live as a member of society you are obligated to care for your fellow citizens?

It's time for a change if you're on a tenner a week. Have you thought about claiming benefits?