MSE Guest Comment: WASPI campaign responds to Pensions Minister's advice to take...
Comments
-
Here's one of the secrets to persuading MPs: write a letter on real paper to your own MP at their constituency office. It's significantly more effective than electronic communication. Better to try to stop something happening than deal with it afterwards.There will be fury if WASPI get their selfish way on this!
Just in case they haven't read the debate you might consider quoting the minister's offer to help as well. They and their staff might appreciate the help in dealing with some of the tough cases of constituents who really are often in significant financial need before they contact their MP. While it won't be a number remotely close to all women in the age range there are some and they deserve all of the help with finding work or claiming benefits that is available to them.0 -
I would agree, it is very appropriate that MSE report on the state pension age increases which directly affect every woman born after 5/4/1950, and every man born after 5/12/1953, and indirectly also men born between 6/4/1950 and 6/12/1953 as the Pensions Credit Age rises in line with women's SPA. It is, however, most disconcerting that you do not provide a comprehensive account of the effects of the state pensions age rises legislated in 1995, 2007, 2011 and 2014. In particular, I find it distressing that you are not reporting about the millions of tax payers who would have to fund the payments WASPI are demanding for themselves. Why are you excluding those consumers from your WASPI coverage?
This remark was very clearly in the context of Guy Opperman explaining "that the Government have done a massive amount on a progressive basis to get people back into employment or retraining in their pre-pension years". He never said apprenticeships were "a key solution" for WASPI.
As an important aside, MSE should be aware that WASPI are making a misrepresentation when claiming that they represent 3.5m women born in the 1950s. They do not have permission from most of those women to speak for them, nor have they ever sought such permission from most of them.
Very much agree. This money doesn't come from nowhere - it comes from additional tax/NIC which will have to be levied on others.
And although my wife is one of those affected, she was fully aware of the situation well in advance and reluctantly accepted the delayed pension which resulted from it. She is livid at the WASPI approach - and certainly does not consider herself to be represented by them. Her view (and mine) is that this is an additional burden that should not be placed on the younger people who would have to pay for it.0 -
Here's one of the secrets to persuading MPs: write a letter on real paper to your own MP at their constituency office. It's significantly more effective than electronic communication. .
I've tried that in the past with other issues (revolving around personal choice and responsibility - I'm for it, he isn't.)
My MP apparently considers me to be an idiot and now refuses to listen to me on anything else.
The feeling is mutual.Conjugating the verb 'to be":
-o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries0 -
-
The sad thing is that the people they want to pay for their £40,000 each (for millions of them - do the maths) is the younger generation. They complain that their kids are stuck with huge student debts, can't get affordable housing etc but then say they want the same population to pay them 40k each. I am a woman of 34 - I am currently due to retire at 68 but am fully expecting it to be 70 or means tested by the time I get there and am therefore preparing to never get a pension. I pay 15% of my salary and my company pays 8% of my salary into a work pension scheme (about £7.5k a year paid into my pension) and it is predicted to be worth 5k a year when I retire. A person on a gold plated teacher pension, who has been able to retire early, lives in a 700k+ house is complaining that my generation and younger who do not get generous employer pensions, need two salaries to buy a 2 bed ex council house and leave university with 50k of debt owe her 40k just because she wants some extra cash - jog on love.I am a Mortgage Adviser
You should note that this site doesn't check my status as a Mortgage Adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Mortgage Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.0 -
The sad thing is that the people they want to pay for their £40,000 each (for millions of them - do the maths) is the younger generation. They complain that their kids are stuck with huge student debts, can't get affordable housing etc but then say they want the same population to pay them 40k each. I am a woman of 34 - I am currently due to retire at 68 but am fully expecting it to be 70 or means tested by the time I get there and am therefore preparing to never get a pension. I pay 15% of my salary and my company pays 8% of my salary into a work pension scheme (about £6k a year paid into my pension) and it is predicted to be worth 5k a year when I retire. A person on a gold plated teacher pension, who has been able to retire early, lives in a 700k+ house is complaining that my generation and younger who do not get generous employer pensions, need two salaries to buy a 2 bed ex council house and leave university with 50k of debt owe her 40k just because she wants some extra cash - jog on love.
Well said. From a 1950s woman.0 -
haras_nosirrah wrote: »I pay 15% of my salary and my company pays 8% of my salary into a work pension scheme (about £7.5k a year paid into my pension) and it is predicted to be worth 5k a year when I retire.
Please do not lose hope, the fact your pension pot is getting 23% of the salary will help you greatly in the long run. From what I understand and I may be wrong but the projection used by the pension provider is more pessimistic than not.0 -
JoeCrystal wrote: »Please do not lose hope, the fact your pension pot is getting 23% of the salary will help you greatly in the long run. From what I understand and I may be wrong but the projection used by the pension provider is more pessimistic than not.
bloomin well hope so. I put in a pension tracking website up to 40% of my salary as a contribution along with 8% of my employer and it still said I was under target of getting 2/3 of my salary as an income when I retire. I think I got up to around 65% of my salary going in to get 2/3 of my income in retirement. I am on 32k so not a ridiculously small income. I have been contributing for 10 years and currently have 88k in there. Very depressing.I am a Mortgage Adviser
You should note that this site doesn't check my status as a Mortgage Adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Mortgage Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.0 -
haras_nosirrah wrote: »bloomin well hope so. I put in a pension tracking website up to 40% of my salary as a contribution along with 8% of my employer and it still said I was under target of getting 2/3 of my salary as an income when I retire. I think I got up to around 65% of my salary going in to get 2/3 of my income in retirement. I am on 32k so not a ridiculously small income. I have been contributing for 10 years and currently have 88k in there. Very depressing.
Add in the state pension and you should be OK. BUT only if it isn't means tested in which case most of your pension saving will have been a waste of time.
There are only 2 real options for the government to control state pension costs, namely :
1. increase state pension age with longevity which is current policy or
2.to means test it which is the inevitable outcome of conceding WASPI claims for state pensions to continue to be based at age 60 (and probably Corbyn's policy of fixing SPA at 66 for ever)0 -
Teaandscones wrote: »Add in the state pension and you should be OK. BUT only if it isn't means tested in which case most of your pension saving will have been a waste of time.
There are only 2 real options for the government to control state pension costs, namely :
1. increase state pension age with longevity which is current policy or
2.to means test it which is the inevitable outcome of conceding WASPI claims for state pensions to continue to be based at age 60 (and probably Corbyn's policy of fixing SPA at 66 for ever)
I fully intend to be earning more in retirement that the bare minimum. add in my btl property and probable inheritance and will be over the threshold for means testing even without the pension saving. I am planning for self support with the state pension a bonus if I get it rather than relying on it to be there.I am a Mortgage Adviser
You should note that this site doesn't check my status as a Mortgage Adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Mortgage Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards