WASPI Campaign .... State Pensions

mgdavid

hyubh wrote: »

Ha ha, good one. Although, seriously, I don’t think anyone under 40 needs lecturing from the generations that gave the country the three day week, themselves final salary pensions, and current 20 and 30 somethings a sharp decline in state entitlement and a collapse of occupational pension provision into negligible DC arrangements that, nevertheless, we are told we should be thankful for.

Congratulations for a vivid imagination ! That's about the most fallacious post I've seen on this board, certainly for many months.

1. The 3-day week was brought about by less than 1000 people - largely the NEC of the NUM aided and abetted by the TUC, and in the shadow of the OPEC council representatives.
2. If only company directors had DB pensions it may stand scrutiny but it is clear that the vast majority of working people were never in a position to 'give themselves' a DB pension. In the blue-chip companies I worked for from 1968 either enrolment was automatic, or one was pressured to join the DB scheme.
3. there's that word 'entitlement' again, so beloved of the iPhone generation. Nobody owes you a living or a benefit, they are privileges to be worked for.
4. DC arrangements are not negligible they are as big (or small) as the employee wishes them to be; the choice is simply between short-term gratification or long-term prudence and a substantial pot to live on after ceasing work.

OldBeanz

mgdavid wrote: »

Congratulations for a vivid imagination ! That's about the most fallacious post I've seen on this board, certainly for many months.

1. The 3-day week was brought about by less than 1000 people - largely the NEC of the NUM aided and abetted by the TUC, and in the shadow of the OPEC council representatives.
I am sure most events in history could be blamed on fewer than 1000 people. Labour were elected to power and the beer and sandwich Governments began.
2. If only company directors had DB pensions it may stand scrutiny but it is clear that the vast majority of working people were never in a position to 'give themselves' a DB pension. In the blue-chip companies I worked for from 1968 either enrolment was automatic, or one was pressured to join the DB scheme.
Of course DB pensions were available to a great many more people and company directors were of that generation
3. there's that word 'entitlement' again, so beloved of the iPhone generation. Nobody owes you a living or a benefit, they are privileges to be worked for.
WASPI - collective memory loss; collective inability to work as long as males despite living longer; of women between 57 and 67.
4. DC arrangements are not negligible they are as big (or small) as the employee wishes them to be; the choice is simply between short-term gratification or long-term prudence and a substantial pot to live on after ceasing work.

Every few months there is a rant on here by someone who thinks Government DB backed pensions schemes are unfair

AnotherJoe

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

There was an old Prudential newspaper advert from decades ago with pictures of the same man ageing from twenties to his sixties.
In the first one the caption said something like "I'm young, what do I need a pension for?"
30s he said "They tell me there's no pension scheme",
40s "I suppose I ought to start thinking about a pension"
50s "I dread the thought of retiring without a pension" and finally
60s "I've no money - I wish I'd saved for a pension".

And in those days all he spent his money on was beer fags and betting. Now he expects the full range of gadgets that he sees everyone else having, plus holidays and a new car.
There's no way of getting through to such people.

Spot on.

As an aside, that ad, it was a line drawing of a man as I recall, must have been everywhere I remember it clearly even from a time when I was at an age I actually had no clue what a pension was !

Malthusian

colsten wrote: »

That is truly scary! With this sort of approach to his later life, he'll almost certainly end up as one of the people living in poverty.

Eritreans live in poverty, your guy will end up living in a warm and secure council flat moaning that he can't afford to go down the pub on his State Pension.

bowlhead99

Malthusian wrote: »

Eritreans live in poverty, your guy will end up living in a warm and secure council flat moaning that he can't afford to go down the pub on his State Pension.

An Eritrean living over here in a warm and secure council flat living off a UK pension having contributed into the system for the requisite amount of years, would still be worse off than the guy mentioned above - as Eritrea charges its citizens income tax on their overseas income (albeit a relatively low flat rate) and does not have a double tax treaty with the UK.

Although, the plight of that person would pale into insignificance next to a WASPI woman who was victim of moving goalposts and found she wouldn't receive state pension until later in life than someone older than her was able to receive it.

AnotherJoe

Jackieboy wrote: »

Why should teachers understand pensions any more than other public sector workers?

Because they are in a profession thats about learning, and so they have less excuse not to learn about about such an important subject thats to their direct personal benefit.

Same as you would criticise a cancel specialist who smoked more than a teacher who smoked, or a car mechanic that never maintained his car compared to a doctor who didnt.

Jackieboy

mumps wrote: »

I had two preschool children at the time, one a lively 18 month old daredevil so I took the form away with me to do it when they were in bed, it was too chaotic to do it any other way so yes I did actually do the form although we had discussed how her condition affected her. To be honest if you have arthritis in your hands that means you can't hold a pen, cut up food, prepare food or dress without help and arthritis in your ankles and knees that means you can't walk up or downstairs or as far as the frontdoor without agonising pain it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out what the issues are. Obviously she read through it before it was sent off.

My point was about if the form has changed as it wasn't that big a form and I have looked online now and can say it is alot bigger than it was 20 years ago. I should have just looked in the first place.

The only benefits my mother ever had prior to the AA were family allowance as it was called then and her pension. My father never had a penny of benefits in his life. To be honest I think that is irrelevant if someone is entitled to attendance allowance, if someone needs the level of support my mother needed then I think they should have it. There was no indignity in my mother applying for and receiving a benefit she was entitled to. She worked from 14 years of age, during the war she worked night shifts in a factory doing vital work to produce equipment that our armed forces needed, she brought up 3 children when she was widowed. Frankly I think the suggestion she was undignified is rude and unnecessary.

I certainly neither said nor implied that.

Jackieboy

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Because they are in a profession thats about learning, and so they have less excuse not to learn about about such an important subject thats to their direct personal benefit.

Same as you would criticise a cancel specialist who smoked more than a teacher who smoked, or a car mechanic that never maintained his car compared to a doctor who didnt.

I think that's an extremely tenuous suggestion. By that definition, teachers should not only be finance specialists but medical experts and skilled travel agents, all of which affect them personallty and all of which involve learning a certain amount of knowledge.

Pollycat

Jackieboy wrote: »

I think that's an extremely tenuous suggestion. By that definition, teachers should not only be finance specialists but medical experts and skilled travel agents, all of which affect them personallty and all of which involve learning a certain amount of knowledge.

You said this better than I was going to. :T

Not really a sensible analogy from AnotherJoe, imho.

AnotherJoe

Jackieboy wrote: »

I think that's an extremely tenuous suggestion. By that definition, teachers should not only be finance specialists but medical experts and skilled travel agents, all of which affect them personally and all of which involve learning a certain amount of knowledge.

Medical - Amount of learning unrealistic to keep up with
Travel - Well why not, its not that difficult to learn about the places that might interest you?
Pension- a few hours familiarising themselves with the schemes and options is all thats needed.

No doubt they berate their students for not doing a couple of hours revision or homework when they fail a test. Yet despite the fact they are paying in thousands of pounds a year many seem to have an utterly tenuous grasp of the scheme conditions for want ofa littel applied learning, which is what they are meant to be skilled in.