Nursing care benefit and 'giving away' money

Errata

7DW, I'm glad it's just not me that can't figure out why people couldn't understand what was explained very clearly to them.
My mum, who worked in a grocers before the war, earning the princely sum of £1.50 a week and then worked in a greengrocers from the early fifties until she retired always paid a full stamp and got a full SRP when she retired.
I can't think of more badly paid jobs than those, so not earning enough to pay NI never applied to her.
Anyways, it's all water under the bridge. But that won't stop me feeling very agrieved about what my tax is funding.
I know I must sound like Ghengis Khan's close cousin about this and it's quite odd in a way as I'm a card carrying member and a firm believer in social justice !

margaretclare

Errata wrote: »

Sorry 7DW, every married woman who chose to pay a small stamp was advised by the national insurance people it would NOT provide them with a pension. That information was given to them so they could make an informed judgement about their future. Some women now regret the choice they made but they can't say they were never informed.

No, Errata, must disagree with you there.

I recall going into the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance (later DSS) office in Dartford a few days after my first marriage in February 1957 and I made that change. At no time was I informed that making that change - to pay the 'small stamp' - would result in my accruing no pension. I was so, so lucky the way things turned out. Within weeks my marriage had broken down and I was on my way home. I went into the Ministry of Labour and National Service in my home-town, York, to sign on for unemployment benefit, and it was there that former colleagues of mine explained the difference to me. I changed back PDQ, and when we got back together again 2 years later, when I was half-way through 3 years of nurse training, I never changed back again. It was sheer luck really. There was just a general assumption that it was what you did, and I have talked to many women since who did not know and were never told.

Anyone who had the options, advantages and disadvantages clearly explained to her was very fortunate. Mostly it was just an assumption that everybody made. I would have been in that boat too were it not for the fact that I couldn't stand living with in-laws, left within weeks and had it all explained to me by former colleagues - I used to work in the Ministry of Labour (now JobCentre) so I knew them all well.

Sometimes it's just chance, how things work out.

Margaret

seven-day-weekend

Errata wrote: »

7DW, I'm glad it's just not me that can't figure out why people couldn't understand what was explained very clearly to them.
My mum, who worked in a grocers before the war, earning the princely sum of £1.50 a week and then worked in a greengrocers from the early fifties until she retired always paid a full stamp and got a full SRP when she retired.
I can't think of more badly paid jobs than those, so not earning enough to pay NI never applied to her.
Anyways, it's all water under the bridge. But that won't stop me feeling very agrieved about what my tax is funding.
I know I must sound like Ghengis Khan's close cousin about this and it's quite odd in a way as I'm a card carrying member and a firm believer in social justice !

I worked for around twelve years as a lollipop lady. This was to fit in with our family situation. I never earned enough to pay NI, even though this was a permanent job. Luckily this time was covered by HRP, so I didn't lose out in that way, but not everyone earning a small wage will be in that position. So the new ruling will help people like that. They will only have to clock up 30 years worth instead of 39. It's not fair that they should get nothing.

Errata

Sorry guys, I try to be civilised about things, but I can't be about this so I shall now go into purdah on this topic.

EdInvestor

I must say I find it a bit of a mystery why people are embittered that society has advanced over the years.My mother died of cancer many years ago in her early 50s: if she was alive today with the same problem it's very likely it would be spotted and treated earlier, and she would live on for many years due to improved medical knowledge, technology and drugs.

I don't feel angry that people of my generation are surviving longer as a result of better nutrition, housing, education, medical treatment, working conditions etc than my parents.That's progress.The whole point of Government surely is to provide growth and prosperity, to improve conditions for the people, and that's what all parties have all done in the last 30 years.


It's surely not a matter for regret.

seven-day-weekend

EdInvestor, I agree with you. It is good that people who, usually through no fault of their own, (family circumstances, low wages, part-time or temporary work), could not contribute to NI, are to benefit from these revised plans. I for one would gladly have paid had I been allowed to (I didn't realise until years later that, in my case, those years were covered by HRP - I was one of the lucky ones.).

I must admit I feel a bit iffy about those who chose to pay the 'small' stamp, but if it is true that many of them didn't realise that they were not clocking up a pension by making that choice, I suppose that that is not their fault either. I still find it difficult to believe they didn't know it, but people have come on here and said they didn't and I've no reason to disbelieve them.

margaretclare

EdInvestor wrote: »

I must say I find it a bit of a mystery why people are embittered that society has advanced over the years.My mother died of cancer many years ago in her early 50s: if she was alive today with the same problem it's very likely it would be spotted and treated earlier, and she would live on for many years due to improved medical knowledge, technology and drugs.

I don't feel angry that people of my generation are surviving longer as a result of better nutrition, housing, education, medical treatment, working conditions etc than my parents.That's progress.

I agree with this.

When I remember the kind of lives my grandparents, my mother and my aunt led, I'm grateful for progress, for medical and other advantages. The 1944 Education Act...before then, we went to the village school from 5 to 14, the boys went into farm work, the girls into domestic service. It had always been that way. I was the first of my family to go to grammar school (from secondary modern school), the first to have a 'profession' as opposed to a job, the first to buy our own home, the first to buy my own car. I wouldn't have been able to walk, I'd have been in agony from my late 40s if it hadn't been for the invention of hip replacements. My elder daughter had both hips replaced age 35. We've raised healthy children....

I've just had my second cataract operation, Monday morning this week. It's just 4 weeks after the first one. Now I have 20/20 vision for the first time in my life. Cataract surgery not only deals with the cataract, but by implanting a new lens, it deals with a lifetime of short-sightedness. At the start of the Welfare State in 1948 everyone was promised 'free teeth and glasses' - well, the 'free' part of that didn't last very long, and over the years I've spent a fortune on glasses - now I don't need them any more! DH had his done April/May, I've had mine done Sept/Oct, total of 120 years between us wearing glasses - no longer!

I've had a lot of surgery since the early 1980s, and even the ones I had in the private sector had benefited from research and development funded from public money.

About the 'small stamp', I don't think planning for one's retirement pension is going to be at the forefront of any new bride's mind. And it was an assumption generally made in those days. It may not always have been so. Maybe later, during the 1960s/70s, there was more awareness, and it was pointed out to women. I'd like to think so. Certainly I've never understood, when that option was removed for women marrying after April 1978, why it wasn't removed altogether, but perhaps that was difficult politically - there might have been a big outcry if women were suddenly forced to pay at the full rate. They could have chosen to change at any time, but many didn't - most didn't, because it's only 30% of women who retire on full state pension. When I worked in the NHS in the 1970s/1980s I was laughed at many times for paying full NI and paying into the NHS pension scheme. Many colleagues deliberately kept their hours below full-time to avoid joining the NHS scheme. So it was a deliberate choice for some, and they're the ones I don't feel sorry for. I do feel sorry for some who say they weren't told or were misled - but how can one be sure whether that really was the case?

To some extent I understand Errata's point of view. There's a lot happening in my country today that I'd prefer not to be happening, and there's very little I can do about it. I belong to a small new political party called the English Democrats because I'd rather get involved, be active, than just sit and whinge, but we have no influence at the moment. Our conference in September wasn't even mentioned in the media, and it was our 5th annual conference - not even that snippet got a mention.

However, I do think I've had my money's worth out of the NHS and I have a good life compared to what life was like when I was growing up.

Just my tuppence.

Margaret

mary43

I was one of those who paid the 'married woman's stamp' all those years ago. The general belief at the time seemed to be that as hubby paid the full stamp both our retirements would be secure. Unfortunately hubby died in 1974 -I wasn't working then due to having small children at home so a full stamp didnt get paid until I went back to work in the early 1980's. By the time I really sat back and though about pensions and such like my age went against me and I really couldn't have afforded it. To me the whole pensions system is a minefield. But, like Margaret, I assumed free teeth, free specs etc. only to find that isn't the case. (Having just paid out £231 for a new pair of varifocals !)
At least health treatment is free.................so far.

EdInvestor

Have you seen this thread Mary?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=570703

You may be missing out on state pension you're entitled to.

mary43

Thanks EdInvestor. Sorry ...........don't think I made myself very clear. I do get a pension though not as much as if I'd paid in more. Asit happens hubby is younger than me and still working so it's no major problem and I do get free eye tests, free travel, and other concessions so it ain't all bad.
It's just frustrating in a way that pensions weren't really discussed in any major way when I was so much younger and private pensions shemes seemed to be unheard of.
I'm a foster carer for teenagers and one of them has just started work for the local council and received pension information. He just laughed and said he was no way ready to think about that..............oh if only I could make him understand and believe me I've tried. But at 17 thinking about what he'll be doing at 65 is the last thing on his mind. I'm afraid sadly he's not on his own in the younger generation who don't seem to see further ahead than next week. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule.