MSE News: ’Women's state pension petition secures second Parliamentary debate

zagfles

Scotswimmen wrote: »

bmm78-you seem to be more capable on the Internet Forum than me-I'm not sure how to post quotes like you as new on here. And yes I did read the rules/netiquette before I 'shot from the hip' like someone else said! I thought I was expressing my view, not shooting anyone! As you are so experienced. a quick Internet search can reveal hundreds of reputable sites re: how Government paid Shills & Trolls are manipulating Social Media, with “psychology-based influence techniques”especially when anything Political is being debated. I have also seen other people,wearing the mask of Anonymity, making comments ranging from cheeky to vile (I see one on another thread re: this that my generation are grasping baby boomers)and it's that bile I don't want to engage with.

This board does not consist of trolls, paid or not. Sometimes people are a little forthright with their opinions, but nearly all the posters on this and the other threads on the pensions board are long term MSE forum members who post regularly about all aspects of pensions, and understand them pretty well.

There is no bias towards govt policy, there are parallel debates about other issues here including the same posters who are highly critical of govt policy. Even on this issue, there appears to be a majority here who think something should be done about the short notice period of the 2011 act. So the idea any of us are govt paid shills or trolls is frankly laughable.

But the majority here do not agree with the WASPI aim of rolling back the 1995 act, to give all women born in the 50's a state pension age of 60. While those born a couple of years after the 50's, in 1961 onwards, would have a state pension age of 67.

Goldiegirl

jem16 wrote: »

Scotswimmen - could we please move on?

We would like to debate the Waspi aims and what you hope to achieve from the campaign. Would it be possible to answer the questions we have asked as we are genuinely interested?

Hear, Hear:T

Scotswimmen

I'm not a WASPI Spokeswoman-there is plenty information on their site and a huge amount in the media-as far as I can see, supportive of what is in the petition -that is very concise (whatever else is written to discredit them)-that's what 136,370 (at present) have signed.I have already spoken about my experience & was lambasted, including by someone alleging I'd deleted posts (when I clearly hadn't) & someone else saying I am 'wrong' (which is, as far as I can see, against the etiquette on this site). I enjoy debating but to be personally attacked that I 'shame all women' for expressing my views, with such venom-by someone (Missbiggles1)who doesn't know anything about my life (I want Equal Pension Age for my partner/children) is not someone being a bit 'forthright' with their views (as another poster has minimised). This has put me off engaging with this site so yes....I agree...please move on (but without me)....

Goldiegirl

zagfles wrote: »

But the majority here do not agree with the WASPI aim of rolling back the 1995 act, to give all women born in the 50's a state pension age of 60. While those born a couple of years after the 50's, in 1961 onwards, would have a state pension age of 67.

This is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to hear a WASPI supporter comment on, in a calm and rational manner.


Has it crossed their minds that, if they got their 'ask', they'd create a situation where women born up to 31/12/59 would be treated as if they had a retirement age of 60, whereas people born from 1/1/60 still have a retirement age of 66, and from DOB April 1960 onwards, the pension age begins to rise to 67. I'd like to know their views about this, and if they realise they'd be creating a situation which another group of people would feel as if they were being treated unfarly

Goldiegirl

Scotswimmen wrote: »

I'm not a WASPI Spokeswoman-there is plenty information on their site and a huge amount in the media-as far as I can see, supportive of what is in the petition -that is very concise (whatever else is written to discredit them)-that's what 136,370 (at present) have signed.I have already spoken about my experience & was lambasted, including by someone alleging I'd deleted posts (when I clearly hadn't) & someone else saying I am 'wrong' (which is, as far as I can see, against the etiquette on this site). I enjoy debating but to personally attacked that I 'shame all women' for expressing my views, with such venom-by someone who doesn't know anything about my life (I want Equal Pension Age for my partner/children) is not someone being a bit 'forthright' with their views (as another poster has minimised). This has put me off engaging with this site so yes. please move on without me....

This is the thing - I've tried asking my questions on the WASPI Facebook page, but they are deleted without answer.


I know you aren't a WASPI spokes person, but as an apparent WASPI supporter, I'd really appreciate your input on the questions that we are raising on this thread

saver861

jem16 wrote: »

I would not be so naive as to think that Martin Lewis lending his support accounted for anywhere near 30,000 signatures.

On the contrary I think you would be. How else do you explain the surge of signatures the week MSE put its shoulder behind it. Do you put that down to pure coincidence? The precise figures would never be possible to work out but I would hazard a guess that a big percentage of that 30,000 came from the MSE exposure.

Pollycat

saver861 wrote: »

On the contrary I think you would be. How else do you explain the surge of signatures the week MSE put its shoulder behind it. Do you put that down to pure coincidence? The precise figures would never be possible to work out but I would hazard a guess that a big percentage of that 30,000 came from the MSE exposure.

I have to agree that I read the thread on here about the petition and signed it - regretfully with hindsight.

saver861

Daniel54 wrote: »

I don't see how what we have done with our lives in adulthood should impact on the equalisation of SPA

If any age group was going to move towards equalisation,surely it should be ours?

I think that is the one thing that just about everyone agrees on. Equalisation should occur - nobody is saying it should not.

The relative rapidity of the 2011 changes means certain groups have been disadvantaged in relation to the majority. That's the issue.

bmm78

Scotswimmen wrote: »

bmm78-you seem to be more capable on the Internet Forum than me-I'm not sure how to post quotes like you as new on here. And yes I did read the rules/netiquette before I 'shot from the hip' like someone else said! I thought I was expressing my view, not shooting anyone! As you are so experienced. a quick Internet search can reveal hundreds of reputable sites re: how Government paid Shills & Trolls are manipulating Social Media, with “psychology-based influence techniques”especially when anything Political is being debated. I have also seen other people,wearing the mask of Anonymity, making comments ranging from cheeky to vile (I see one on another thread re: this that my generation are grasping baby boomers)and it's that bile I don't want to engage with.

Thanks. While I don't want to get involved in any disagreements you have had with other posters, I think it's very far-fetched to suggest that the government would infiltrate the MSE forum using a cabal of anti-WASPI posters (particularly when said posters have in most cases been active well before WASPI was even created).

jem16

Scotswimmen wrote: »

I'm not a WASPI Spokeswoman-there is plenty information on their site and a huge amount in the media-as far as I can see, supportive of what is in the petition -that is very concise (whatever else is written to discredit them)-that's what 136,370 (at present) have signed.

That's a real shame that you won't engage with us as to what YOU hope to achieve from the Waspi campaign.

I have asked these questions on Facebook but as Goldiegirl has said, the questions are swiftly deleted with no answer forthcoming.

I do not agree that the aim of the petition and what is written as the Facebook "ask" is clear and concise. There are many people on various forums and Social Media who are asking similar questions and answers are never forthcoming, especially from the Waspi Campaign itself.

The petition stated that Waspi wished to see "fair transitional arrangements" - many have signed the petition as they agreed with that.

Later it became clear that Waspi's idea of fair transitional arrangements is for every 1950s woman to have their state pension at age 60 regardless of circumstances. Many do not agree with that.

I find it very sad, but unfortunately I'm not surprised, that you don't wish to clarify how you view the campaign. Unfortunately you seem to just want to present your views and have no-one question them.