Originally Posted by
Onceapilot
Hi Al,
Yes, I expect the moving goalposts will continue with increasing the age and qualifying work years for state pension. Let's face it, there has been little voter rebellion to the huge change in female state pension age due, I think, to the fact that it has not yet effected many ordinary people. But, it will! I do not think many people realise that the present delay of female state pension age has cost all future female OAP's around £50,000! One important factor that is purposely not highlighted is, that living longer (alegedly) in old-age does not make you suitable for productive work in old age. Cheers
OAP
My Twitter timeline is full of people angered by a) me, and b) my attitude to the WASPI thing. I was called racist, sexist, mysoginist.. you name it (the little poppets didn't realise I had my skin leathered and tanned in a gunshed). Gender is now not even used to level previously undulating and unfair aspects of retirement planning; now, it seeks promote the gender as you would promote any other niche lobby. To my mind, far more important than gender when determining the nature of one's state pension are postcode, occupation and health. For women currently in their fifties/sixties to assume that women in their early twenties must work until they're seventy five or older, because they want to pick and mix aspects of gender equality, is the height of selfish arrogance. I'm well familiar with the intricacies of the WASPI campaign; and I am all for helping those with a plausible case. But not a blanket reversion, which is what the campaign seeks.