Accrington Web

Accrington Web (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Chat (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/)
-   -   SHOCK of the day (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/shock-of-the-day-61112.html)

chrissy 29-03-2012 11:16

SHOCK of the day
 
Ive just found out that I cant get my state pension till Im 66. I knew it was going up but I thought Id be 64 with being born in 1954. Im really peed of now and on top of that I dont think the turkey leg Ive just eaten was cooked enough and I feel a bit queezy.....or is that the shock?????:confused:

accyman 29-03-2012 11:37

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
aye the government wants you well on your way to death before they give you a penny of your hard earned money back that you have been paying all these years to ensure you are looked after when you have worked enough of your life.

chrissy 29-03-2012 11:51

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
aye but will we be looked after????? from personal experience of care for the elderly it sucks. Carers arnt given enough time to do the job there supposed to do before rushing on to the next poor old person. I dread to think what we will be faced with......

Margaret Pilkington 29-03-2012 12:10

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
No....it'll be the turkey leg.

susie123 29-03-2012 12:22

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Of course I don't know your circumstances but it sounds from your profile that you do not have a job currently. If you have time to spare while waiting for your delayed pension and you are concerned about the suffering of children as you implied on another thread, why not consider becoming a volunteer with VSO? That way you would be able to make a difference and pass your time in a useful way.

Neil 29-03-2012 12:42

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
I agree it is terrible that they have made the retirement age for men and women equal at 66.
Women live on average 4 years longer than men so surely the retirement age for women should be 70 and that of men 66.

ToffeeGuy 29-03-2012 13:08

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil (Post 980936)
I agree it is terrible that they have made the retirement age for men and women equal at 66.
Women live on average 4 years longer than men so surely the retirement age for women should be 70 and that of men 66.

Yeah, and generally men do more manual, labour intensive jobs and don't have long periods off having children. The retirement age will be 70 before long as more people live to 100.

Having said that, if you save long and hard throughout your life you could retire a lot sooner. Most people can't have an adequate standard of living on the state pension alone anyway. It's a matter of priorities and choices made, get the bigger house or the new car and foreign holidays when you are in your 40s or put the money in savings/pensions and retire at 60.

Margaret Pilkington 29-03-2012 16:49

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
While the government delay retirement for older people, there will be fewer jobs for young people to take up.
Doesn't it just seem a bit crazy that these young people will live life on benefits, while those who should be putting their feet up continue to work?

And as for women having long periods off work on Maternity leave....these days women seem to go back to work earlier(that is if they actually have a job)........and as for women doing less labour intensive work...that is a huge generalisation...plus when women get home from a day at work there is another job waiting for them at home.......called looking after the family.

As for putting money into pensions when you are 40....that is good in principle, but there is no guarantee on the returns being enough to allow you to retire earlier, or to a more comfortable lifestyle......at present savings are worth diddly squat(I never ever thought I would say that)

susie123 29-03-2012 17:22

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 980981)
While the government delay retirement for older people, there will be fewer jobs for young people to take up.
Doesn't it just seem a bit crazy that these young people will live life on benefits, while those who should be putting their feet up continue to work?

And as for women having long periods off work on Maternity leave....these days women seem to go back to work earlier(that is if they actually have a job)........and as for women doing less labour intensive work...that is a huge generalisation...plus when women get home from a day at work there is another job waiting for them at home.......called looking after the family.

Yes, it's daft to keep the oldies working while the young are on benefits.

As for maternity, my next door neighbour is pregnant and due on 1 April. She works in a factory and finished work on 22 March. This will give her the maximum time off after the baby is born. By the way she is Polish, as is her boyfriend and her mother who lives with them. They all work extremely hard and I don't begrudge them anything. We couldn't wish for better neighbours. That's in contrast to the lowlife alkies and druggies that seem to populate most of the area round here.

Neil 01-04-2012 13:07

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 980981)
.....and as for women doing less labour intensive work...that is a huge generalisation...plus when women get home from a day at work there is another job waiting for them at home.......called looking after the family....

That is a huge generalisation as well :p

Not all men work then go to the pub, come home for tea then fall asleep in a chair.

Margaret Pilkington 01-04-2012 13:43

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Now, are you putting words in my mouth Neil?.......because I don't recollect saying that.

What I said was, that women(and surveys bear this out) have another job at home - called looking after the family.
While you may do your share at home, there are many men that don't.
I never mentioned the pub, or for that matter, falling asleep in the chair.

Neil 01-04-2012 14:38

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 981724)
Now, are you putting words in my mouth Neil?.......because I don't recollect saying that.

I was yes sorry :D

Margaret Pilkington 01-04-2012 14:45

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
thank goodness for that....I thought I was starting with Old Timers disease! :)

Neil 01-04-2012 23:32

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 981730)
thank goodness for that....I thought I was starting with Old Timers disease! :)

I hope that will never happen to you Margaret.

Margaret Pilkington 02-04-2012 07:13

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Me too Neil.......that is the thing I fear the most. Losing my lovely memories.

susie123 02-04-2012 08:33

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 981873)
Me too Neil.......that is the thing I fear the most. Losing my lovely memories.

I assume you are referring to Alzheimers... surely with that it's the memories that stay and the present that fades, but if they did go, you probably wouldn't be aware of the fact?

jaysay 02-04-2012 09:06

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by susie123 (Post 981887)
I assume you are referring to Alzheimers... surely with that it's the memories that stay and the present that fades, but if they did go, you probably wouldn't be aware of the fact?

That's the most frightening thing about it susie

Margaret Pilkington 02-04-2012 09:59

Re: SHOCK of the day
 
Yes Susie.......I was referring to Alzheimers.......there are different types(of dementia) and in some there isn't much of anything left(or certainly, that is how it seems)...unless perhaps the sufferer has the memories, but cannot articulate them.

It is my fervent hope that whatever happens to me in my life........this does not.
I would hate to be in such a situation.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:13.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com