Should 1950s WASPI women be compensated?

badmemory

Silvertabby wrote: »

That said, I do remain sympathetic with the 1950s women who may not have had the chances I did - and wonder if a way round this would be to remove the 'must seek work' criteria in the case of 60+ women (although that would probably have to apply to over 60s men as well).

WASPE won't approve of this, of course.

I think that probably should read must, the pressures back then to be a stay at home mother were at times quite strong, although I managed to ignore them. But it did have significant impact on their futures. But I do believe that equality has to start somewhere & if we women are going to fight for equality & expect men to help us do that then we should also be fighting for equality for men.


No WASPE will definitely not approve. Which would make this an even more satisfactory outcome. I must confess to really disliking some champagne quaffing women undermining what so many of us fought/worked for.

custardy

badmemory wrote: »

I think that probably should read must, the pressures back then to be a stay at home mother were at times quite strong, although I managed to ignore them. But it did have significant impact on their futures. But I do believe that equality has to start somewhere & if we women are going to fight for equality & expect men to help us do that then we should also be fighting for equality for men.


No WASPE will definitely not approve. Which would make this an even more satisfactory outcome. I must confess to really disliking some champagne quaffing women undermining what so many of us fought/worked for.

such an apt username for some in the WASPI movement :rotfl:

Malthusian

Silvertabby wrote: »

That said, I do remain sympathetic with the 1950s women who may not have had the chances I did - and wonder if a way round this would be to remove the 'must seek work' criteria in the case of 60+ women (although that would probably have to apply to over 60s men as well).

I'd be in favour of that. I'd be in favour of removing it for everybody, as a step on the way to the inevitable progression of Universal Basic Income. There is zero evidence that paying an army of bureaucrats to humiliate the working class actually encourages anybody to take a job who wouldn't get one anyway. A job that might not exist because it was destroyed by the tax and dead weight loss required to pay the salary and pension of the bureaucrat badgering you into CV writing lessons.

People generally remain on the dole not because they are lazy (as the right think) or oppressed (as the left think) but mostly because it is the rational decision when you face effective 90% income tax. Or because there are no jobs available and there is no point uprooting yourself to a more prosperous area away from your support network so you can pay effective 90% income tax.

But it wouldn't help WASPI's founders as they probably wouldn't be seen dead in a JobCentre.

Paul_Herring

But it wouldn't help WASPI's founders as they probably wouldn't be seen dead in a JobCentre.

Or in second class...

Pollycat

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Or in second class...

Or drinking prosecco.
Or cava.

Ganga

Malthusian wrote: »

I'd be in favour of that. I'd be in favour of removing it for everybody, as a step on the way to the inevitable progression of Universal Basic Income. There is zero evidence that paying an army of bureaucrats to humiliate the working class actually encourages anybody to take a job who wouldn't get one anyway. A job that might not exist because it was destroyed by the tax and dead weight loss required to pay the salary and pension of the bureaucrat badgering you into CV writing lessons.

People generally remain on the dole not because they are lazy (as the right think) or oppressed (as the left think) but mostly because it is the rational decision when you face effective 90% income tax. Or because there are no jobs available and there is no point uprooting yourself to a more prosperous area away from your support network so you can pay effective 90% income tax.

But it wouldn't help WASPI's founders as they probably wouldn't be seen dead in a JobCentre.

There was a program on the tv i saw that was trying to get people back into work and one person complained that " They would lose their benifits if they took a job!!" whilst i agree that the benifit system is there to help people who really need it but like all things it will always be open to abuse.

fred246

We have just been looking at my wife's state pension entitlement. She worked a few years and then after our first child she refused to work again. Amazingly because there is a large gap between our children she has full entitlement. We were surprised that she could get an average of 83 (avergae female life expectancy) - 67 (her SPA) = 16 years x £8720 = £140000 out when she has paid in less than £10K. These WASPI women are claiming 23 years of state pension (83-60) whereas the men will be getting 79-67 = 12 years. The amount they have contributed will on average be far less than men. How can they say 'we have paid into the system, now it's time to pay up?' It's just so unbelievable.

bigadaj

fred246 wrote: »

We have just been looking at my wife's state pension entitlement. She worked a few years and then after our first child she refused to work again. Amazingly because there is a large gap between our children she has full entitlement. We were surprised that she could get an average of 83 (avergae female life expectancy) - 67 (her SPA) = 16 years x £8720 = £140000 out when she has paid in less than £10K. These WASPI women are claiming 23 years of state pension (83-60) whereas the men will be getting 79-67 = 12 years. The amount they have contributed will on average be far less than men. How can they say 'we have paid into the system, now it's time to pay up?' It's just so unbelievable.

Many might say your wife deserves something for putting up with/ looking after you all these years.....

fred246

bigadaj wrote: »

Many might say your wife deserves something for putting up with/ looking after you all these years.....

Actually you aren't the first person who has said that.

colsten

Norma Cohen, a 1950s woman, on what she thinks of the Labour proposal. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/economics-and-finance/labour-pledge-waspi-women-unaffordable-giveaway-state-pension-age-election-manifesto

EDIT: Here is what qualifies her to speak with some authority: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/norma-cohen-89690956