Mums Pension In Jeopardy?

EdInvestor

djohn2002uk wrote: »

Don't know much about Ed but I seem to have read that Margaret and SDW don't miss much when it comes to claiming for things and I begrudge you nothing, but please stop whingeing when you read of someone else getting something.

No, you don't know much: especially about who's been campaigning for equal rights and fair pensions, and for how many years they've been doing so.

So we will forgive you for your remarks as they are based on ignorance.

seven-day-weekend

djohn2002uk wrote: »

Margaret, SDW and Ed. Like the 3 witches of McBeth, at it again. Why don't you stop worrying about what somebody else is getting all the time. Good luck to them I say. Don't know much about Ed but I seem to have read that Margaret and SDW don't miss much when it comes to claiming for things and I begrudge you nothing, but please stop whingeing when you read of someone else getting something.

I have never claimed a State Benefit in my life! (Other than Child Benefit, which everyone gets). I don't even get my State Pension yet, I'm not old enough.

However, were I entitled to a State Benefit then I would certainly claim it.

And I DON't think it's fair that someone who stays married is treated worse pension-wise than someone who has been divorced.

However, if I begrudged people getting benefits as you say I'd hardly be on MSE's Benefits and Pensions boards trying to help people to do so, now would I?

MissMoneypenny

There are many benefits that are unfair to the tax payer imho, but I don't think letting someone live in poverty or have to be stuck in a bad marriage is one of them. I taught a computing course at a womens refuge the other year and I would hate to think that those people have to live in poverty in their old age. They were there to learn, but those in their 60s would never make their 39 years to get a full pension. They lived in different times, when a lot of husbands expected them to stay at home and be a homemaker.

I will have 40 years based on my own contributions when I make 60, but will now need only 30 years for a state pension, and I stayed at home with my children. I had a very good job before I had my children, so it was easier for me.

seven-day-weekend

Miss Moneypenny, I don't think people should live in poverty either, I haven't said that, I've just said that married women should not have less than divorcees and that those who do not have a full pension should have it made up with means-tested benefits.

They would probably end up with the same amount of Basic Pension as someone who has paid in for years, but the ones who have paid would have it in their own right and it would not be means-tested.

There has to be SOME perks for paying in for years, surely?

MissMoneypenny

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Miss Moneypenny, I don't think people should live in poverty either, I haven't said that, I've just said that married women should not have less than divorcees and that those who do not have a full pension should have it made up with means-tested benefits.

If you want that, then surely all types of benefits should be means tested?

seven-day-weekend

No, why should that be? Some are already contributory and if you haven't contributed you don't get it and have to have a means-tested benefit instead (Incapacity Benefit and Income Support spring to mind).

seven-day-weekend

I just want to apologise to the OP for discussing pensios policy on his thread.

It should have been on the discussion board. None of it was aimed personally at the OP.

Sorry for it going off-topic OP and I hope you got the answer you required!

djohn2002uk

margaretclare wrote: »

However, it never occurred to me that this was a place where I would be likened to one of Shakespeare's Wyrd Sisters. You live and learn, don't you.
Margaret

But look at the 2 thanks, still sticking together.
Margaret, you do post some very very good stuff on here but IMHO it is spoiled by the whinging posts from time to time about what other people get against what they deserve.
Perhaps if you didn't broadcast how well off you and hubby are combined with what you have claimed I'd have a little more sympathy with your views.

seven-day-weekend

We too are SKI-ers as well as savers.......

Or at least we aspire to. We do not have enough income at the moment to SKI as much as we would like, regardless of what djohn may think (around £10k a year).

You know, my neighbour in the UK always used to think we were 'rolling in it' because we had paid off our mortgage and he hadn't. He had had a similar job to my husband and his wife had a better-paid job than I ever have had.

The reason we had paid off our mortgage and he hadn't was because we just overpaid little amounts for twenty years and made do with old cars and shopping at Asda and Lidl, whereas he and his wife borrowed more money on their mortgage and shopped at Sainsburys and Marks and Spencers.

I appreciate that some people don't earn enough to save anything. (My son is one of them). That is why I am here on these boards trying to do my bit to help them get what they are entitled to.

I too deny that I whinge, I am actually a very fair and honest person - which is why I care so much about fairness in pension provision.

Put it this way. I didn't buy any shares in the Gas Board when they were available. Some people have since made a lot of money on them. Would it be right for me to be given the same as them, when I didn't buy shares when I had the chance?

Course it wouldn't. Although I would expect in a civilised country to be able to have a decent standard of living, that would have to come in some other way other than through British Gas shares.

djohn2002uk

margaretclare wrote: »

I am not asking for you to have 'sympathy with my views'. I can live without your sympathy, or anyone else's for that matter.
Margaret

There is a big difference between showing sympathy for YOU and sympathy for your views.