the uk goverment is going to increse the age of retirement to 66 for men in 2016 but for women in 2020 does anyone else think this breaks the equality law?. Should it not be 66 for both men and women either 2016 or 2020. if they proposed that women retired at 66 in 2016 then men in 2020 giving women time to gain more pension credit would the equality law be shouted at that.
Originally posted by stokerIt is not the UK guvamints business to decide when people retire.
the uk goverment is going to increse the age of retirement to 66 for men in 2016 but for women in 2020 does anyone else think this breaks the equality law?. Should it not be 66 for both men and women either 2016 or 2020. if they proposed that women retired at 66 in 2016 then men in 2020 giving women time to gain more pension credit would the equality law be shouted at that.
Originally posted by WajomaYou sounds like a broken record.
It is not the UK guvamints business to decide when people retire.
The "official" retirement age does not force anybody to retire at a specific age. If you wish to work, and your employeer wish to pay for it you can keep on working. Many people do.
The "official" retirement age does not prevent anybody from retirering earlier, if you feel you have worked enough and have the money you need for your golf fees rest of your life, you can stop working tomorrow.
The "official" retirement age regulates when the evil goverment will start subsidizing your retirement. What you perhaps wanted to say, but lacked the words for, is that goverment should not help out with financing the retirement of its senior citizens.
I on the other hand think that it is a key area of responsability for society to ensure that everybody can enjoy a bit of old age, regarless of how fortunate their finances stand at the end of their work life.
Originally posted by Scheelwell said .. but does it break the equality law disciminating against men by increasing there age of retirement while delaying womens,even tho they on average live 5 years longer so in efect get aprox 10 years pension above there male equiverlent . this may change but if twins had been born 1952 one female the other male and lived worked thier time the female gets more from the state having payed less into.
You sounds like a broken record.
The "official" retirement age does not force anybody to retire at a specific age. If you wish to work, and your employeer wish to pay for it you can keep on working. Many people do.
The "official" retirement age regulates when the evil goverment will start subsidizing your retirement. What you perhaps wanted to say, bu ...[text shortened]... t of old age, regarless of how fortunate their finances stand at the end of their work life.
Originally posted by ScheelAnd you're a skipping CD, all those that believe in the official retirement age should sign up for the official retirement age and leave those that would like to take their own chances (i.e. decide for themselves) alone.
You sounds like a broken record.
The "official" retirement age does not force anybody to retire at a specific age. If you wish to work, and your employeer wish to pay for it you can keep on working. Many people do.
The "official" retirement age does not prevent anybody from retirering earlier, if you feel you have worked enough and have the money you need ...[text shortened]... of old age, regarless of how fortunate their finances stand at the end of their work life.
Originally posted by WajomaIf someone is not allowing you to decide for yourself, you should pop your bicycle helmet on and pedal down to the police station and make an official complaint about the force and fraud that is being applied to you.
all those that believe in the official retirement age should sign up for the official retirement age and leave those that would like to take their own chances (i.e. decide for themselves) alone.
Originally posted by stokerIf anything, it should be the opposite because women typically live longer.
the uk goverment is going to increse the age of retirement to 66 for men in 2016 but for women in 2020 does anyone else think this breaks the equality law?. Should it not be 66 for both men and women either 2016 or 2020. if they proposed that women retired at 66 in 2016 then men in 2020 giving women time to gain more pension credit would the equality law be shouted at that.
Originally posted by stokerBig Brother knows best. 😉
the uk goverment is going to increse the age of retirement to 66 for men in 2016 but for women in 2020 does anyone else think this breaks the equality law?. Should it not be 66 for both men and women either 2016 or 2020. if they proposed that women retired at 66 in 2016 then men in 2020 giving women time to gain more pension credit would the equality law be shouted at that.
1 edit
Originally posted by stokerIt does, but that is not the point. The point is always to make men more like women and women more like men. That's because politically correct social crusaders have determined the both sexes are "wrong".
the uk goverment is going to increse the age of retirement to 66 for men in 2016 but for women in 2020 does anyone else think this breaks the equality law?. Should it not be 66 for both men and women either 2016 or 2020. if they proposed that women retired at 66 in 2016 then men in 2020 giving women time to gain more pension credit would the equality law be shouted at that.
Hence, aggressive (oops, assertive) UK women lobbied on their own behalf for four extra years of early retirement while passive UK men responded, "Whatever you say, dear."
So it all seems to be working according to plan!
Originally posted by spruce112358Yes, while the same trend is not seen in countries with far more emancipated women. It all makes sense now.
It does, but that is not the point. The point is always to make men more like women and women more like men. That's because politically correct social crusaders have determined the both sexes are "wrong".
Hence, aggressive (oops, assertive) UK women lobbied on their own behalf for four extra years of early retirement while passive UK men responded, "Whatever you say, dear."
So it all seems to be working according to plan!
Originally posted by spruce112358Of what would you like to see evidence?
Well...this is a little better than 'yawn'. But not much. No links, no evidence. C'mon KN, you can do better than this!
http://www.weforum.org/en/initiatives/gcp/Gender%20Gap/index.htm
The UK does not make it into the top 10 of countries with highest female emancipation, and I can assure you countries like Sweden have far more emancipated women.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraRight. And Sweden has a fertility rate around 1.67 -- which is well below the replacement rate of 2.3. So the net effect of all this androgynous behavior you are saying is to eliminate populations that practice it and replace them with other populations that don't?
Of what would you like to see evidence?
http://www.weforum.org/en/initiatives/gcp/Gender%20Gap/index.htm
The UK does not make it into the top 10 of countries with highest female emancipation, and I can assure you countries like Sweden have far more emancipated women.
OK, it all makes sense now. A nice example of selection in action.
Originally posted by spruce112358What does that have to do with anything?
Right. And Sweden has a fertility rate around 1.67 -- which is well below the replacement rate of 2.3. So the net effect of all this androgynous behavior you are saying is to eliminate populations that practice it and replace them with other populations that don't?
OK, it all makes sense now. A nice example of selection in action.