Why aren't we out on the streets protesting the increase in retirement age?

[Nugget]

Nugget your arguments are ridiculous.

No there are just too intelligent for you to understand.

[ivnryn]

Think of it this way Nugget, by the time you reach 65 years of age you could retire but say you live for another 50 years which is possible given todays breakthroughs in medicine etc. you be claiming a state pension for 50 years.

Inter-generational solidarity would decrease if people are paying 50%+ of their income just so that pensioners can be paid pensions and that is excluding taxes for the government to actually provide services..

This is especially true if pensioners are actually reasonably healthy and could work.

At least with personal pensions, rather than state ponzi schemes, people won't have to pay higher taxes.

However, one way or another, the dependency ratio is unavoidable. We either need a higher birth rate, more immigration, or an increase in the retirement age.

Also, it is quite possible that in 50 years, someone at 65 will be as healthy as someone who is 30-40 Today.

[Sync]

I agree it's disgusting. I'm sure we all know people who struggled hard to keep on their feet until they were 66 and could claim the pension. I know my parents did. I'm just hoping when we kick FF into touch we can reverse it. Please put it on the list of things to quiz FG and Labour about on the doorsteps.

So let's turn back the clock a little bit. Up until 1972 the pensionable age was 70. That was at a time when work (As nugget pointed) was harder than it was now, when medical care wasn't as good as it is now, and when the life expectancy was only about 69.

Now we have (comparitively) great medical care, easier work, and a life expectency of 78 in 2010.

The proposals are that by 2028 the retirement age will be 68, and the govt are pledging to match the current pension of 35% av weekly earnings.

We've got 6 people supporting each pensioner now. 2050 sees that as being 2 people to 1 pensioner, and public spending will jump to 15% from 5%.

Now if you disagree with any of those figures that the CSO and NPF have come up with, feel free to show your work. Otherwise you've got to accept that something needs to be done, and raising the age for people like me and you is the way to do that.

As for Nugget....I still think Nugget is against this because we have high unemployment on the 10/03/2010. I don't think they've seen further than that point, or are capable of doing so. I'd suggest they're either a troll, a sock puppet, or less likely a 14 year old.

[JohnBlake]

No there are just too intelligent for you to understand.

Maybe your intelligence should focus on your spelling.

[Johnny random]

Nugget, how about you take your righteous indignation to the streets instead of trying to spoof rational people ( or the 'pathetic irish' as you say ) who understand a rational decision?

[Cassandra Syndrome]

Well 5 times Bilderberg attendee, Garrett Fitzgerald thinks its a great idea. If they want people to have more money when they retire why not raise the PRSI rate?

[Nugget]

The argument over the use of technology is being completely overlooked. We have so much machinery and automation today that we do not need to extend the working life of people. The problem is that under capitalism technology is used only to increase profits rather than make the lives of people easier.

[Sync]

The argument over the use of technology is being completely overlooked. We have so much machinery and automation today that we do not need to extend the working life of people. The problem is that under capitalism technology is used only to increase profits rather than make the lives of people easier.

Yeah I'll pick troll. Nobody could so clearly miss the point at this stage unless they were willfully doing so.

[MsAnneThrope]

Please put it on the list of things to quiz FG and Labour about on the doorsteps.

1. Will the local be open on Good Fridays?
2. That pothole!
3. Will the local GAA club get the lottery money for a new members' bar?
4. When will RTE show our town on the weather map after the news?
5. Auntie Eithne's carbuncles are killing her and she can't get an appointment
6. That 'head shop' that just opened in the town
7. We need a third speed-bump on the street because they're accelerating between the other two
8. The Cusack's dog is barking all night and we can't get a wink of sleep
9. I heard rumours that they're giving that house down the road to immigrant drug dealers and prostitutes
10. Emmm, what was it? Oh yeah, is it true we might have to work longer? What's that all about then?

[goosebump]

The argument over the use of technology is being completely overlooked. We have so much machinery and automation today that we do not need to extend the working life of people. The problem is that under capitalism technology is used only to increase profits rather than make the lives of people easier.

OK, Nugget, I'm feeling charitable, and am waiting for an email, so I'll unveil this one for you.

We don't need people to work until they are 68 because we don't have enough people to carry out the amount of work that needs to be done.

We need people to work so that they can contribute to the Exchequer to fund pensions, and so that they aren't drawing pensions.

Its a fiscal issue, and machines don't pay income tax.