Retirement Age for Workers - Does this Make Sense?

[Vaskiy]

Increasing the age for retirement is like delaying their benefits for the sake of the government interest and I don’t agree with this one. In my country 60 years old is the retirement age and that is the only time you can get benefits from government, this could be an ideal age after working for so many years, i don’t know the culture in France but I don’t think this is a good idea, having an old employee can affect the company on many cases.

If I'm not wrong you're from India. Earlier retirement needs to be followed, maybe something around 55 is good in my understanding. After 60 even the fittest will feel tired and they doesn't have the time to enjoy. If the retirement age is 55 years of age, atleast they'll enjoy life for the next five years and then take rest. In my country it is like they spend 60 years working and spend the retirement fund on their children's education and marriage. With what they receive as pension they run the daily life. In that a major portion goes to medical expense.

[South Park]

In my opinion retirement age should be around the 50's of someone's age, despite them being men or women. And the age should be also the same for both genders. After all, is all this talk about equality for real or not?

I say that about the age, because from my experience, always I talk to people who are on their 52-58 years old, they show a lot of disinterest for working. They complain about it, they say it's time to stop and take easy with daily life, and when they are forced into something they aren't willing to do (regards work, in special), they become angry, annoyed, upset, depressed. So once they reach the 60's, they have a lot of negative sequels on their behavior, that potentially prejudice the after-retirement life considerably.

Even if I agree in principle that those which have worked for so long should enjoy a period of rest once they are old, we must remember that not long ago people literally worked until a few days before their death, and the longer people live and the more time they spend not working then the more expensive they become for governments all around the world, and this will eventually cause governments to simply stop paying pensions all around the world, so if anyone wants to retire early and avoid this scenario then they have no other option but to save and invest their money on their own.

[Hispo]

I am not so well informed on the French politics, but I'm my personal opinion and raise in the age of retirement is viewed as a cut in the governments plan for those desire to retire and spend the rest of their life in a calm situation, enjoying the money they have managed to accumulate during their professional career.

I am not sure why Macron needed to do this, are there not enough experienced workers in France ? Why not start a goverment program to recruit professionals adroad?

Even thought it is only a difference of two years I can perfectly see why anyone would not feel happy with that.

[Fiatless]

I am not so well informed on the French politics, but I'm my personal opinion and raise in the age of retirement is viewed as a cut in the governments plan for those desire to retire and spend the rest of their life in a calm situation, enjoying the money they have managed to accumulate during their professional career.

I am not sure why Macron needed to do this, are there not enough experienced workers in France ? Why not start a goverment program to recruit professionals adroad?

Even thought it is only a difference of two years I can perfectly see why anyone would not feel happy with that.

The French government is trying to reduce the cost of paying salaries and other employment benefits. When workers retire they have to receive gratuity and pension which affects the finance of the government. The government also needs to employ new staff to fill the position of these retirees which is also capital intensive. So to save money, they have to increase the age of retirees to make them work more years, which will also help the government to save the cost of employing new staff for an extra two years.

This policy will also help in reducing the number of foreign professionals that will be attracted to France. But the government fails to understand that forcing people to work against their will may lead to low productivity. Although some people might like the policy because they still want to be active for more years, I think a high number of French workers are against this policy and we might be more protests today.

[South Park]

The French government is trying to reduce the cost of paying salaries and other employment benefits. When workers retire they have to receive gratuity and pension which affects the finance of the government. The government also needs to employ new staff to fill the position of these retirees which is also capital intensive. So to save money, they have to increase the age of retirees to make them work more years, which will also help the government to save the cost of employing new staff for an extra two years.

This policy will also help in reducing the number of foreign professionals that will be attracted to France. But the government fails to understand that forcing people to work against their will may lead to low productivity. Although some people might like the policy because they still want to be active for more years, I think a high number of French workers are against this policy and we might be more protests today.

This is the gist of it, this is about money and nothing else, the French government likes most governments around the world is heavily indebted and they need to find ways to reduce their expenses, and one way to do it is to increase the age at which people can retire as they can avoid paying those people the money they are owed for a few extra years, but this is nothing more than a temporary solution as eventually people will work for that extra period of time and retire anyway, so unless the French government finds a way to increase its tax revenue they may begin to consider more extreme options, like raising the retirement age for workers again or simply stop paying their obligations to them.

[cryptoknightt]

I don’t think anybody should have to work past the age of 65, if they don’t want to. The situation in France has been wild but their current retirement age is 62, I really don’t think it is that bad that Macron is attempting to push it to 64. If it was 70 or something I would support the uproar but 64 really is not that old. It’s still younger than many other first world countries. The economy is obviously struggling, working until 64 does not seem too bad in my opinion.

Maybe indeed at that age people can still work but the work done at that age in my opinion will not go well, therefore people who work at that age must be rewarded for their dedication to an institution

[Unbunplease]

Raising the retirement age is not a panacea. It simply means that state leadership is incompetent. There are many other ways to support the state's economy. It's not worth hitting the most vulnerable people. I hope that reason will prevail and that the retirement age increase will eventually be repealed.

[brother brother]

It is quite understanding that every individual get older day by day and as we get older our power and strength and ability also reduce, which natural affected our output. Due to this poor output is what brought about retirement age, generally there is a particular age that we are weak as humans and cannot do some certain work.

Retirement age also in need and useful to implement in every organization so that the weak ones can give ways and opportunities for the young ones and youths to be replaced. It is a chance given previlage for the young ones,  I think retirement age for workers makes sense in my own view and little understanding.

[davis196]

The state-owned pension/retirement system is the biggest ponzi scheme in history. Few young people enter the labor market, while many old people leave the labor market and start getting pensions. The only two ways to maintain the system are:
1.Import more workers from somewhere else-Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, etc.
2.Raise the retirement age gradually or at once.
Raising the retirement age with 2 years at once, was a radical decision by Macron. I don't know why he decided to do such thing.
A way better solution would be to raise the retirement age with 3 months every year for several years.
Anyway, I'm not a big fan of the "Bismarck" pension system.

[mm2543363580]

In government jobs it's definite that you are going to retire after 60 or 65 years of age and after that you'll get pensions to support you in later years.  But in business you have no retirement and no definite working hours which is tiring as everyone wants to relax at some point in thier lives .

[philipma1957]

Retirement is a math game.

Every government that allows and pays some funds to your retirement has skin in the game.

Every government in the world wants the following thing to not happen.

My stepfather worked for the Long Island Railroad in New York.

He got the job in the 1950s when he came back from Korean War.

He was born in 1932
he got the job in 1954
he had a boy in 1960
his boy joined the Long Island Railroad in 1982
he retired in 1987 got his government funded pension. retirement age was 55
his son had a boy in 1990
that grandson got a Long Island Railroad job in 2010
his son retired in 2022 retirement age was raised to 62.

So right now.

My stepdad will be 91 this july and he is on pension since 1987
My stepbrother is 63 this april and he is on pension since 2022
My stepbrothers kid has had his job since 2010 and can retire in 2052

So one worker getting paid
and two workers getting pensions

This is not an affordable thing to do.

So pension age gets raised.

but this fucks kids coming out of college since the older worker has to wait to retire.

The swing is still towards pushing workers to older pensions and fucking college kids.

Maybe it swings back.

[Rruchi man]

Workers who are approaching retirement age should be given a choice after appraisal to keep working or retire.

What sense does this make? Would you agree or disagree?

People age differently, and while some other people in growing old may become both weak in body and mind, some others may just become weak in body but their minds more better with time. For that reason I feel workers should not just be given a choice but some sort of test to determine is they will be fit to continue working or retire.

If only a choice is given without any form of test to really know the answer, some workers may want to lie about their fitness to continue working productively, just so they can still get the benefits of working in the company.

[rat03gopoh]

In my country, 56yo is the set retirement age, while in the US it is an average of 63 to 65. In conclusion, individually the productive age of each employee can be different and sometimes some aren;t ready for their retirement, so 2 years imo isn't too much addition to make lots of protests here and there.
But I agree that this policy shouldn't be implemented all at once. Actually there is a more subtle way that isn't provocative for the majority of workers, like op's last suggestion.

[el kaka22]

It should be based on performance really, if you are rich, then you can retire at whatever age you want, like Mark Zuckerberg had the IPO and had billions of dollars at that point, he was less than 30 years old, he could have retired easily and just had fun, that's a type of retirement too. And some person may retire at 70 and still have huge debts and not survive and have financial trouble, that guy retired as well. Are those two the same? Obviously not, they are nowhere near the same.

This is why the 62 or 64 discussion worths nothing, it all depends on the performance, governments job is to make sure that elderly could live a life where they do not have to worry about shelter, food, clothes, health and so forth, basic needs, after that, whatever their age, if you can provide that, then rest should be up to them.

[CryptSafe]

Retirement age should not be a thing of much concern.  The government knows the input of every staff and it  Should not be a thing of concern to separate the seeds from the shaft. The out put of every staff should determine if they should be retained at some certain age which is a legal age of compulsory retirement.

Those staff who contributed immensely during their vibrant age Should be retained so as to share their wealth of experience to the junior staff.

I know of a man who served and achieved so many milestones while in active Service. He was well known be the state government and to federal. Due to his vast experience and knowledge on the job, his year of retirement was extended to 5 years and even after retirement, he is still sort after by the government for consultation and technical input uptill date, he is called upon when ever there is a difficult situation at hand.

What I am trying to say here is that the government or organization knows their workers very well. They know their inputs and that is a factor to guide them through making decisions after retirement of workers. Age should not be a concern as their are lots to learn from older generation that has been on the job. I think this is another topic of discussion because the new generation gets things wrong in line of duty most times and would need the advice or guidance of the older to get things going.

[bittraffic]

This relates to the culture of every country. You can't just tell them to retire base on their merits and achievements in the past as opportunity of each person is different. One person comes from a rich family and able to graduate Law. The other one worked  a hard labor being a plumber.

Not sure if they have 401 in France but 401 as well is dependent to how much you have saved for yourself.

[Sithara007]

Well, I have only one question here. Why this retirement age is not applicable in politics? Joe Biden will be 86 years old when his second term ends in 2028 (in case he gets elected during the 2024 POTUS elections). My question here is, if someone at 86 years of age is capable enough of running the country, then how can you prevent (or impose a blanket ban on) someone who is 66 years of age from working in some other domain? IMO, it should be left to the employee and the employer. If both the parties are satisfied with their current arrangement, then the government doesn't have any role to play.

[bayudndy]

I have thoughts about the imbalance of working age, when the aging population in the EU or Japan and the US is growing, and the level of young workers is decreasing and many people are not interested in serving. service with local jobs they only benefit from preferential policies from unemployment benefits.
I'm not sure about the appropriate level of retirement in their country, but where I live, people usually retire before age 60, perhaps because of their poor health, they need to be replaced by a class are younger and we really feel that retirement is not a concern with the current workforce. Sometimes I see people in some countries claiming their own interests, but they are not under a good obligation to build a developed country in a balanced way, benefiting from many years of policies in terms of finance makes people less conscious of labor responsibility, it is not natural for the government to decide that, accept it as a contribution and bring balance rather than demanding personal interests when there is no obligation to perform well.

[doomloop]

Raising the retirement age is not a panacea. It simply means that state leadership is incompetent. There are many other ways to support the state's economy. It's not worth hitting the most vulnerable people. I hope that reason will prevail and that the retirement age increase will eventually be repealed.

Well, it might also be because they want their senior employees to serve a bit longer in their duties since we know knowledge and experience plays a great role at any job, so if senior retires and is replaced by a young worker, he probably won't bring the same expertise and professionalism which the senior had within himself.

I don't say that the younger generation is not talented and can't cop with responsibilities and carry the burden of their seniors, but they will obviously take their time until they become able to fit in the shoes of their seniors who retired.

[South Park]

Retirement is a math game.


snip great example


So one worker getting paid
and two workers getting pensions

This is not an affordable thing to do.

So pension age gets raised.

but this fucks kids coming out of college since the older worker has to wait to retire.

The swing is still towards pushing workers to older pensions and fucking college kids.

Maybe it swings back.

Governments like always were shortsighted when they designed the retirement system or maybe they never had the intention of paying up, as such a model could work when the population pyramid consisted of a lot of young people as the base of the pyramid and very few old people at the top, however now we are living longer due to a combination of better medical attention and a change on the habits of the people, while at the same time a global campaign to reduce the number of kids born out of each couple was implemented, this changed the nature of the population pyramid and now governments do not know how to square that circle.