I am just trying to get @portboy to explain how treating women exactly the same as men is an injustice to women. Not succeeded so far. I wonder what kind of different rules for women would amount to justice, in his view?
You obviously haven't picked all the meat off the bones of my previous threads, the rules should be the same for men and women its just the transitional period and how it was implemented of the equalization of the state pension age was achieved.
OK, @portboy , so you agree that the rules being the same for men and women does not constitute injustice. The implementation process began in 1995 (after lengthy previous discussions) and took place during a period of over 20 years. Are you saying that was too short? What kind of implementation schedule would you have preferred? How and when should equalization have been achieved, in your view? I have not been able to detect in your posts, meat or bones, any clue as to what would have satisfied you.
As I understand the situation arose due a change in legislation giving women equal rights with men it was one of the negatives that the equel rights campaigners didn't concider
I think the part that the OP is annoyed more at is no one informed them that signing on would keep NI contributions up to date for his partner who is female. Im aware that you need to do this to keep NI credits to go ttowards my pension When you have children as a woman child benefit counts towards this too. Always best to keep yourself informed as no one will encourage you to do this
It seems you actually have no idea what you want @portboy . Your original post is just a kind of vague, ill-considered whinge, and when challenged on it you just get stroppy. Which is quite funny really.
Funny most of the other members has got an understanding my old fruit, i take it the 1950 is your birth year ? If not it must be your bedtime now run along, beaks under blankets and head under wings.
Interesting thread The real injustice was that men have been discriminated against for a very long time Whilst it is harsh the sudden change for the pension age for woman it should have perhaps been addressed decades ago or phased in over a longer period or alternatively the mens age simply dropped to 60 which is a far better idea and encourage older people to move out of the work force to create career opportunities for younger people and get young people off the dole Interestingly whilst the uk pays into the eu slush fund and is increasing the age of retirement other countries (Poland I believe) that draw out of the eu slush fund are lowering retirement ages - maybe if the uk were to draw money out of the eu slush fund we could also have more generous pensions Also the NI contributions - why not simplify the tax system and roll NI and tax into a single tax. Get rid of an entire govt department and all the administration and use the savings to give everybody a better flat rate pension scheme that starts at 60 and tapers to a full pension at 65 And arguing with Pete, you will never win, but he enjoys enjoys a good discussion and as a clever wordsmith he will tie you up in knots
Good post Ken, exactly the debate i set out to have. I haven't or wouldn't argue with Pete he is as you say a wordsmith i am not so when challenged i react in the only way i can.
Don’t react straight away just leave it for a bit and re read in a different frame of mind Your allowed 10 mins out Everyone reads things in different ways depending on mood and everyone has different views and you might find something you missed Now breath........
its a robotic civil service thing, if it involves thinking out the box, their screwed. almost everybody got what was meant by "injustice" the injustice being the lack of info or ensuring that woman received and understood what the future payment structure in such a critical payment (not benefit) in latter life was gonna be. assumption is the mother of all fug ups.
Too long in the tooth DB, my wife of 45 yrs says i am the most laid back person .............. know thy beast. Thanks babe (hope you don't mind me calling that ) you have of all people have a great outlook on the human mind.
The people who neither receive a salary on which to pay NI contributions nor claim any kind of benefit nor bother to obtain NI credits are mainly wealthy people of independent means. It could be argued that it is unfair and unjust to those wealthy people that their entitlements to benefits and pensions are thereby reduced. Maybe it is, but I have to say that my sympathy for them is limited.
The people who neither receive a salary on which to pay NI contributions nor claim any kind of benefit nor bother to obtain NI credits are mainly wealthy people of independent means. I think that might be true of today's rich/well off possibly but the waspi situation dates back to those where a traditional male went to work and the women stayed home at kids with no wage or benefits support. Those caught out are far from rich and from a generation where the woman didn't need to be kept in the loop for such things as state support and then provide notification of a changed address as it used to be done through the male as the sole provider. It's that reason I feel why so many got caught out in a way that would not happen today. It's a change and like most changes that are needed, it will effect a very small few but if you are one of those few it can be quite dissapointing and desperate. It's easy to blame the government of the day but like so many things, governments change but the same people in the Civil service rarely do and as we saw with Windrush, civil servants destroying documents based on assumptions rarely see's anyone actually responsible ever suffer a consequence of it. It would have been understood by the majority I feel that the group effected was comparatively small and could have been helped in this once in a life time transition
