As we all know, the modern thing is equity, not equality. A difference of outcomes is, by definition, hate and discrimination:
The average woman in her 20s today will have a £250,000 pension by the time she retires age 68 – £100,000 less than the average man. That is despite women needing £85,000 more than men to cover the costs of a longer life span and higher care costs.
A 25-year-old man today will live to 86 while women can expect to reach age 89, according to the Office for National Statistics. One in four women who are 60 today will live to 94. Women must save an extra £50,000 to cover income for the additional years and will need £35,000 to pay for care as they spend 460 days in care homes on average, compared with just 100 days for men.
Jackie Leiper, of Scottish Widows, said: “Even if we close the gap between how much men and women have saved by the time they retire, true equality would not be achieved. Women need to fund a longer retirement and shell out more on care.”
So how’s that going to be equalised?
Well, these women are gaining all those additional years of life over the average man, someone has to pay for it and why shouldn’t it be them? Although it isn’t them is it? They don’t contribute the same and take more out of the system.
And why is no one looking at the blatant inequality that women live longer than men and do something about it. You know, reduce the inequality, possibly with a cull……
In Logans Run they seemed to have sorted the problem of old age.
Marriage?
“Marriage?”
Well yes. I have a private pension fund that I started when I was single but my wife and I built it up together since then. She has an occupational pension. Most of our money is pooled together anyway so we don’t really have inequality in the way that it is implied here.
So the woman are more likely to inherit if men die earlier.
Hunt little old ladies with dogs? Evens up the life expectancy rate, provides entertainment, gives the LOL’s an interest in life. What’s not to like?
If women can expect to live longer, maybe they should save more into their pension? Just a thought.
Time for men to get out of pensions as a savings vehicle, before the Gover starts stealing it for the women?
Sorry, that should have been government; I wasn’t trying to just blame Gove.
“Men die younger; women most affected”
That gap between male and female lifespans is also found in other primate species.
And researchers aren’t entirely sure why.
“It’s puzzling. If we can make life last so long, why can’t we shrink the male-female gap?” study co-author Susan Alberts, a biology professor at Duke University, said
I didn’t know the bit about other primates having the F>M life expectancy.
In addition to her own occupational/state pension, women inherit the husband’s pension(s), their family home(s), together with the couple’s life savings.
I think – I think! – the argument is that pregnancy is tough, those who survive it gain longer lifespans. At the cost of those who don’t survive it.
Now, I don’t know this but would surmise it. That with narrow human pelvis, big head etc, with archaic childbirth death rates then women did not have a longer, on average, lifespan than men. But those who survived childbirth did.
@Tim
“Now, I don’t know this but would surmise it. That with narrow human pelvis, big head etc, with archaic childbirth death rates then women did not have a longer, on average, lifespan than men. But those who survived childbirth did.”
So the problem is those evil patriarchal men and their medicine saving womens lives! Bastards!
Make 70 the retirement age for women.
Bongo: I didn’t know the bit about other primates having the F>M life expectancy.
Frankly, you surprise me: with a name like yours I’d have expected you to know a bit about local fauna!
I think – I think! – the argument is that pregnancy is tough, those who survive it gain longer lifespans. At the cost of those who don’t survive it.
I think you miss the point, Tim. Childbearing is as irrelevant as males’ propensity for risky behaviour. Neither affects subsequent time of death.
It is curious that we can live as long as we do. A dozen years after menopause, or a bit longer for men, would be the efficient lifespan, in evolutionary and learning terms, with earlier inheritance as a bonus.
I’m sure it’s a problem the NHS is working on: like their agent,that lady doctor in Gosport doing her best to discharge the convalescent to the undertakers, or the remarkable increase in midazolam consumption…
@Bongo All the social primates also run on the harem system..
Somehow I can’t see professor Albers promoting that…
And she bloody well knows, or at least should know why males live shorter lives… Any male but the alphas are the Front Line against a harsh environment.. And there’s no such thing as a pension for an ex-alpha..
Women may have some use past their child-bearing age in a social group, but old(er) males are cannon fodder. There’s never been an evolutionary advantage to have us live longer than absolutely necessary.
SARS-COV2? SARS-COV3-n?
If women worked as many hours as men, for as many years, and contributed the same %age of earnings into a SIPP or DC Pension plan, they would have the same pension savings.
Except that a majority of public sector workers, with superior pension rights and lower contribution rates than private sector workers, are female. So the system *already* is biased in favour of the average female vs average male. So the average woman doesn’t need to match male work and contribution rates to get an equal result: even so all the screeches about the system being unfair make it sound as if the discrimination is in favour of men when the opposite is true.
“I think – I think! – the argument is that pregnancy is tough, those who survive it gain longer lifespans. At the cost of those who don’t survive it.
Now, I don’t know this but would surmise it. That with narrow human pelvis, big head etc, with archaic childbirth death rates then women did not have a longer, on average, lifespan than men. But those who survived childbirth did.”
This doesn’t feel right, Tim.
Surely the implication would be that childless women had, and continue to have, on average, shorter life-spans? And since M<F is several years, then I reckon that would easily show up.
So, maybe something, something, menopause?
So how’s that going to be equalised?
Sati
Kill women at 86 to ensure equity?
Alternatively, kill everyone in care. That was Hancock’s and NHS strategy
and Australia, Canada and New York
https://dailysceptic.org/2021/11/15/australian-care-home-residents-may-have-died-from-neglect-after-staff-were-furloughed/
.
@Andrew C
+1 or retire later