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

Paul_Herring

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Your choice to have four kids.

Arguably he's not paying enough; I don't have any kids, and if I was on the same wage as him, I'd probably be paying the same amount of tax and NI... </offtopic>

Silvertabby

“ I - and a number of other posters - have said the same on different threads.

The last time, someone replied with this (6/19):

So do some of the woman who say they are are financial difficulties specifically because of the equalisation of state pension age not qualify for any of these benefits?
Originally posted by Pollycat

Among some of the 'sob stories' there was one woman who bemoaned the fact that her lack of State pension meant that she and her husband wouldn't be able to afford all the holidays they had planned. Another had wanted to give up work so she could take care of her grandchildren while their parents worked. I assume that neither of these ladies would have qualified for means tested benefits.

I also sympathise with those hardest hit by the 2011 acceleration, the 1953/1954 women. Although I wouldn't have benefitted from such a plan (born 1956 and, thankfully, will never qualify for means tested benefits) I would have supported a move to help them. Perhaps make their 1995 State pension age their pension credit age? Sadly, the WASPE and Back260 organisers were only concerned with 'me me me'

Mistermeaner

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Your choice to have four kids.

Arguable... I'm not sure exactly what role i played in all this as it was my partner what birthed them. The only thing we can be sure of is that I'm paying for them

Mistermeaner

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Arguably he's not paying enough; I don't have any kids, and if I was on the same wage as him, I'd probably be paying the same amount of tax and NI... </offtopic>

but key point is are you on the same wage as me? I expect my taxes more than cover my take out

and dont forget society wants and needs children... how else is the ponzi maintained?

JoeCrystal

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Fair is an entirely subjective measure

As a 40 year old male with 4 kids to raise i don't think it's fair how much tax and ni i have to pay

You get child benefits for your kids anyway. So that helps. Besides, it is the single childless person living on his/her own that bear the most significant burden of paying taxes and NI while not expecting much in return apart from the NHS. (along with all other disadvantages that come with being a singleton) But hey, at least we get a discount on paying the council taxes at least.

t0rt0ise

My first raise in pension age took it to 64 and a half. I was fine with that, then it was changed to 66. Ironically ill health has meant that I have retired a month after the original date. I'm now living off savings because I can no longer do the job I was doing and am not fit enough to look for work and get JSA but not sick enough for ESA. I'm lucky to have enough savings with a very small pension from a previous job, to see me through the 18 months but wouldn't begrudge others getting help.

It's a shame that the WASPI women didn't stick to complaining about the second lot of changes which really hit some hard.

foofi22

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Your choice to have four kids.

Not necessarily. I know of one couple who chose to have another baby.

They had triplets.

colsten

Silvertabby wrote: »

Although I wouldn't have benefitted from such a plan (born 1956 and, thankfully, will never qualify for means tested benefits) I would have supported a move to help them. Perhaps make their 1995 State pension age their pension credit age? Sadly, the WASPE and Back260 organisers were only concerned with 'me me me'

I am one of those 1953/1954 women who got another 18 months added by the 2011 Act. Although I was/am quite annoyed by the increase, I was lucky enough to be able to cope with it. I also know plenty of women in real life who are in much the same situation as I am. But I am fully conscious to the fact that some are not as fortunate, and like you, I would fully support a Pension Credit arrangement on the 1995 basis. I should add, however, that this would have to apply not just to women but also to men, and I can't see any reason why such an arrangement should not continue beyond 31/12/1959.

lisyloo

Mistermeaner wrote: »

but key point is are you on the same wage as me? I expect my taxes more than cover my take out

Over a life time on an individual basis you don’t know.
You could need expensive NHS treatment, intensive care or long term care.
You are covered just as everyone else is (the point of insurance).
If you are going to say you’ll be paying for your own care, note that long term medical care is free at the point of delivery.

Insurance isn’t meant to be fair, But generally if your house doesn’t burn down or you don’t have a car crash that considered a good outcome even if you are out of pocket.

lisyloo

foofi22 wrote: »

Not necessarily. I know of one couple who chose to have another baby.

They had triplets.

They didn’t choose to have triplets perhaps but they chose to take the (very small) risk of having a multiple birth.