Women lose landmark legal fight against state pension age rise - MSE News

Silvertabby

“ The option of paying reduced NI (married woman's stamp) ended in 1977,

Paul_Herring wrote: »

That is not the point being made. This is. And this.

People earning less money pay less NI but can still get full NI credits, and those not earning, because reasons, can still earn full NI credits without paying any NI whatsoever.

And the people in those two groups tend to be, apparently, female.

My point is that those 1950s women who paid reduced NI can hardly claim that 'We paid in, Government must pay out'.

colsten

Silvertabby wrote: »

My point is that those 1950s women who paid reduced NI can hardly claim that 'We paid in, Government must pay out'.

The entire "We paid in, You pay out" initiative is probably the most bonkers of all the groups. Their very name shows that they are devoid of even basic knowledge about our state pension system. They have tough competition, though - Grey Swans, Pension Reformers United, 63 is the new 60 are full of deranged ideas, too. As are the rest of them, come to think of it.

Many of those who paid Married Woman's Stamp have been hoisted by their own petard. In the 70s, they were quite happy with the idea that they'd have to financially rely on their husbands in their later life - they settled for receiving just 60% of a full state pension, in return for paying lower NICs. Now they scream about unfairness when they are expected to do what they themselves chose, i.e. rely on their husband's money. Empathy? Me? No way.

ffacoffipawb

colsten wrote: »

I need to be quite open and brutally honest here: over the years, I have seen way too many WASPI sob stories that turned out to be totally untrue. This now leads me to the default reaction to treat all WASPI sob stories as untrue to start with. I am sick and tired of the lies about not knowing about SPA increases, too (delighted to see one of them - called Julie Delve - got found out in this regard by two High Court judges).

Jubrads worked in the NHS, and says she retired on ill health grounds. She doesn't answer questions such as what she would have done differently had she had any letter in 1995, why she didn't get ill health retirement money from the NHS, whether pension age rises were never discussed at work, why she should be treated differently to an ill man her age, and her index-linked NHS pension doesn't figure in her story.

I do absolutely not have even a shred of empathy for women who would be quite happy to see ill men their age having to exist on ESA (£73 pw), with all the horrors of repeated assessment ordeals, whilst the women demand a free ride on £168 pw for themselves, regardless of their financial circumstances. We all know that there are countless 1950s women who live in wealthy households, many of them with gold-plated final salary index-linked pensions. Yet they bleat about a plight that has allegedly beset all 1950s women, and that besets only 1950s women. 1950s men, as well as everyone born after 1959, gets happily thrown under a bus by them. They equally couldn't care less about existing pensioners who are living in poverty, about the homeless men and women of all ages, about children who grow up in poverty, or about those people who would have to somehow find the many tens of billions the WASPI want. All they are interested in is money for themselves. Don't ask me, or anyone, to have empathy with that greedy lot! :mad:

How was Julie Delve caught out?

SonOf

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

How was Julie Delve caught out?

She made allegations which the evidence provided showed she was wrong. i.e. the evidence showed she was notified.

ffacoffipawb

Juebrads wrote: »

I would not have done anything different. Having been disciplined in the NHS years ago and appealing against this unfair action and winning, but it left a bad taste as whistle blowing often does, one day when I was 58 I walked out of my career half way through a shift. And I never went back. I had burnt out and had enough of the misogynist way I was being treated, I could not have cared one dot about what happened next and most people in that state do not care a dot about their pensions. So no, I did not go off sick for years and cost the NHS vast amounts of money if that is what you are suggesting. I did not get early retirement, or any other benefits. Yes I have a small index linked pension but believe me after working part time for years and not at all when I was married, it is not great, less than £450. It goes up in £s, five or six at a time, I am not living in luxury, just for the record on that, MPs get more for lunch allowance each month. Index linking pensions matters more if you have a pension worth index linking I guess.

You can see clearly on this thread with all the judgements as a society there is no more understanding or empathy, just criticism. Even I am being called a liar, by someone who knows nothing of my life, or my struggles or my joys.

Perhaps this is how we learn from our politicians and if it is good enough for them to be rude on twitter etc then in our anonymous states we can certainly be rude and critical of others online. This is why I shun radio, TV and news papers, they speak rubbish mostly and when they speak the odd truthful line it comes with judgement and lack of understanding and compassion.

I was asking about Julie Delve. Presumably that isn't you?

ffacoffipawb

SonOf wrote: »

She made allegations which the evidence provided showed she was wrong. i.e. the evidence showed she was notified.

Which part of the judgement shows this?

Did she lie under oath?

Davy_Jones_II

Well yes, I’m afraid that if you walk out of a job so young and without having another lined up then yiy’ll Not be as well of as if you’d stayed in it.

Given the vast discrimination in the NHS in favor of women it’s it’s really on to cry “misogyny” especially as you seem to want men your age to have to wait longer than you for a pension.

You give the impression that you don’t really understand what sexual discrimination is, as you are both demanding it and complaining about it.

molerat

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

Which part of the judgement shows this?

Did she lie under oath?

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Delve-and-Glynn-v-SSWP-CO-3174-2018-Final.pdf
para 77 - 78

Pollycat

Juebrads wrote: »

Oh but women are truly greedy little beings out to stitch up men.

I guess from your latest post you may have flounced off...but I would say that some women whose stories were recounted in various Parliamentary debates and some women who have talked to newspapers are a discredit to their gender.
I've posted ( and reposted) about either downright lies or misrepresentation of the truth from women who clearly seek to make out their situation is worse than it actually is.
I'm not saying that Juebrads is in that category but I feel ashamed to be associated with women who feel that they deserve their pension years before a man born on the same day as they were.

POPPYOSCAR

woolly_wombat wrote: »

'Personal choices' that have had long term economic consequences for (mainly) women who worked part time to fit work around family and found themselves barred from pension membership.

It's been a lose lose 'choice' for those women.

P.S. I am not a WASPI woman either, but I do think some empathy wouldn't go amiss for women like Jubrads who find themselves in dire straits after doing their level best in difficult circumstances.

I quite agree with you.