WASPI Campaign .... State Pensions

missbiggles1

Pollycat wrote: »

OK.
I've read and re-read post #55 and I really can't see where that poster called you a 'liar'.

I agree.

Well, I'm not sure if missbiggles 'spoke' on my behalf but I do agree with her point.

I was just going by who'd thanked which posts but I am prone to exaggeration.:)

jamesd

Ladies and gentlemen, there's a good reason why it's considered bad form to speak ill of the dead or raise controversies involving them: it's unseemly to argue at the funeral and wake.

A woman who seems to have been eminently worthy of respect has been murdered. We should be remembering that with sadness not discussing or arguing about the things she advocated, some of which which seem to have provided the motive for her murder.

There's plenty of time to discuss the policies she liked in the future, not in the context of her death.

mgdavid

Jeff, for clarity I was, as politely as I could, trying to give guidance (we don't use the 'advice' word on the finance forum) based on my opinion formed from your previous post in this thread. If I was too blunt and terse for your sensitivities then please accept my apology.

Why you seem so intent on taking up the cudgels on behalf of a poster who appears to hold a minority opinion puzzles me. It can't be because you support the same cause as you said you hadn't even heard of it at that time.

It's usual at this point to agree to disagree, to say it's no big deal, nobody died, let's move on. However in this case somebody did die, and that takes us right back to why several people found the OP inappropriate.

uk1

mgdavid wrote: »

Jeff, for clarity I was, as politely as I could, trying to give guidance (we don't use the 'advice' word on the finance forum) based on my opinion formed from your previous post in this thread. If I was too blunt and terse for your sensitivities then please accept my apology.

Why you seem so intent on taking up the cudgels on behalf of a poster who appears to hold a minority opinion puzzles me. It can't be because you support the same cause as you said you hadn't even heard of it at that time.

It's usual at this point to agree to disagree, to say it's no big deal, nobody died, let's move on. However in this case somebody did die, and that takes us right back to why several people found the OP inappropriate.

Thanks,

I would not describe telling someone that they are either playing dumb or being stupid and in either event to keep "shtum" as very far up,the "polite" scale.

To answer your question. I simply felt that she was paying tribute to Jo for her work and was treated harshly for doing so. I saw no more or less than that. I have a tendency to defend people when I feel they are being treated unfairly, and when no one else is doing so. Because apparently that explanation wasn't accepted motives were then falsely ascribed to me that were untrue.

On your wider question, although it will probably draw fire I will be explicit.

I have always felt that I have very little to learn from people that agree with me. i believe we only learn from those that have different views. People with the same views may provide more often the comfort and reassurance of feeling "right" but they offer very little opportunity to adjust ones views and learn. I am told that one of my worst faults is an ability to argue until I have fully understood, and then change my mind when I prefer someone else's view to my own people sometimes find it unnerving. I have no embarrassment whatsoever about changing my mind. I find that most people do not share the same "fault".

It was clear to me that several people took exception to the OP writing her thanks to Jo, and I could not see why. Intelligent people are inquisitive people. It seemed to me that as several objected, then the most likely explanation was that I was simply wrong and missing something in the opposing view. So I asked questions.

I do not feel that I was taking up the cudgels on her behalf but felt that the number and tone was bullying. It was nothing at all to do with WASPI, now I know what it is. I feel very strongly that the general tone on threads can sometimes feel oppressive, and I include myself in part as sometimes being the cause. In the end we get forums that we all make. I feel that the OP should have been given the benefit of the doubt.

I have extended you the courtesy of explaining even though I wasn't going to post on the thread again, but hope that explains, and would appreciate that tone reciprocated - and suggest we just move on.



Jeff

bigadaj

The antipathy to that poster was based on historic posting which seemed to have called upon any published piece to support the waspi view, however ill informed or irrelevant.

In this case it seems to have been in incredibly poor taste, you may well not have been aware of the history but the context needs to be explained.

saver861

Dearie me.

For those who thought Pennylanes' post re Jo Cox was undignified - why not remain silent and maintain the dignity that you say was not observed by the post?

I'm happy to debate anything on here - but some of the posts on this thread really do disappoint - coming from supposedly mature adults.

God bless you Jo Cox. RIP

Pennylane

I saw Brendan Cox on TV last night talking about his late wife's devotion to a wide range of charities, organisations and causes. He didn't mention them all by name, but as we all know, WASPI was one of them. HE said that everything she was involved with she was passionate about and he admired that.

I'm not sure why some people on here appear to really dislike the fact that thousands of women are fighting for what they believe is a great injustice whereby they are having to wait up to 6 years longer for their pensions and lose out on tens of thousands of pounds. Jo Cox could see this was unfair and was prepared to stand up in Parliament and say so.

ITs not my fault some of you feel like this ..... All I was trying to do was convey my thanks and sadness as she was involved with a campaign just the same as me and thousands of other women.

Would you be so keen to vent your anger if, say, she had supported The Batley Rhubarb Growers association because you didn't like rhubarb?

missbiggles1

Pennylane wrote: »

I saw Brendan Cox on TV last night talking about his late wife's devotion to a wide range of charities, organisations and causes. He didn't mention them all by name, but as we all know, WASPI was one of them. HE said that everything she was involved with she was passionate about and he admired that.

I'm not sure why some people on here appear to really dislike the fact that thousands of women are fighting for what they believe is a great injustice whereby they are having to wait up to 6 years longer for their pensions and lose out on tens of thousands of pounds. Jo Cox could see this was unfair and was prepared to stand up in Parliament and say so.

ITs not my fault some of you feel like this ..... All I was trying to do was convey my thanks and sadness as she was involved with a campaign just the same as me and thousands of other women.

Would you be so keen to vent your anger if, say, she had supported The Batley Rhubarb Growers association because you didn't like rhubarb?

Unfortunately, recent months have shown how ill informed and ill advised on this subject several MPs have been, however well meaning their views. I'm prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt.

Pollycat

Pennylane wrote: »

I saw Brendan Cox on TV last night talking about his late wife's devotion to a wide range of charities, organisations and causes. He didn't mention them all by name, but as we all know, WASPI was one of them. HE said that everything she was involved with she was passionate about and he admired that.

I'm not sure why some people on here appear to really dislike the fact that thousands of women are fighting for what they believe is a great injustice whereby they are having to wait up to 6 years longer for their pensions and lose out on tens of thousands of pounds. Jo Cox could see this was unfair and was prepared to stand up in Parliament and say so.

ITs not my fault some of you feel like this ..... All I was trying to do was convey my thanks and sadness as she was involved with a campaign just the same as me and thousands of other women.

Would you be so keen to vent your anger if, say, she had supported The Batley Rhubarb Growers association because you didn't like rhubarb?

It's simply not an injustice no matter how many times you or WASPI say it is) for womens state pension age to be brought in line with that for men.

Any 'injustice' could be considered the changes brought about by the 2011 act.

I have no comment on the tragic events that happened last week in West Yorkshire.

uk1

Pennylane,

I am not an historian, but my understanding was that at one point pension ages were the same. The female age was lowered because as men died earlier than women, as a couple too few men and women were enjoying any retirement together. The lowering of female retirement age therefore gave some pensionable retirement time together. I think, but I'm not sure that it was after the war.

The unfair consequence of that is that woman had considerably more pension time than men. I think at that time they were also earning their pension on their husbands contribution.

Equalising retirement ages and the acceleration of normal retirement ages are two separate issues. The consequence of those two issues being changed at roughly the same time is that it has caused a compound effect to many people. Sadly when you put right something that is clearly unfair to one group or in this case two groups eg men retiring later and taxpayers a new "unfairness" is created. I think it ends up simply then a matter of two groups holding opposing views on the issue.

I am sure that if I have the background in broad terms factually wrong, then I will be corrected.

My opinion is that it was fairest of all unfairnesses to do what has been done.

Jeff