Rioting is a young person’s game. Apart from the grey riders, I can’t think of another protest movement in history, that was not predominantly led by the younger generation. I’m not rioting at my age. I’ll get on the internet & moan instead..
Works both ways.The old ones we see protesting to save the planet are`nt doing it for themselves,it`s for future generations.
Why are farmers wasting time working their fields when they could just nip to Aldi for all the cabbages they need? ???
Yeah - despite the average life expectancy of your average froggy male increasing by 20 years in the last 100 by 2050, it makes sense to reduce their retirement age. As a 63 year old, I wonder why you think I ought to have retired 3 years ago, and expected the rest of the country to pay for me. When I'm still fit enough to ply my trade and apply energy and experience to the job. And where I can't find a replacement for my job anyway.
"Froggy male" - any need for that? I didn't say people should be compulsorily retired at 60, just that the option should be there to take the pension if they want. If you think working yourself to death is some sort of virtue badge then knock yourself out.
40 years on and sadly every word is still as relevant, wish me knees were up to a good riot, not sure they're up to kicking statues either tbh
You don't need the rest of the country to pay for you. If you weren't drunk on Kool Aid you'd just want to redistribute a small fraction of the super wealthy and that would sort it.
We're rosbifs. If you want to get upset about name calling, perhaps you could interject every time anyone on here uses slang for other football team supporters. Which may be a full time job. Perhaps your statements need to be a bit more precise, because "The retirement age should be no higher than 60" is a statement as slack as they come.
Maybe if we as a nation protested more, we might not be in the situation we now find ourselves in....gas/electric / water transport all privatised NHS on its knees lowest pension rate across Europe if I'm not mistaken too, let alone the age of qualifying for it up and no doubt going up again....its OK to spout about putting money into a private pension, but there's far too many folk out there, living hand to mouth and can't afford to heat their homes let alone feed their kids to be able to save....Aren't I glad I'm not just starting out as ive already retired.... We can all sit there and mock the French but at least they aren't sitting there, looking no further than the end of their noses and saying bugger everybody else I'm alright jack....they are out there shouting with one voice So good luck to them... The problem is those we elect to represent us allow the power they get to go to their heads and then start representing themselves looking after their own interest and are in it for all that they can get... We then sit back complain yet facilitate their lifestyle by taking no physical actions As for retirement it's a personal choice if you actually take it once you reach pension age.... In my opinion it should be lowered to 60 years of age regardless..you still have the choice to differ it until you are ready Viva the revolution
But it wouldn't. It might be nice to think that redistribution of "a small fraction of the super wealthy" wealth enables you to retire at 60, but it won't. If you had a mass attempt at wealth redistribution (which I have no rosbif with), then once it's been done you've got everyone still here and still living longer. And that means working longer and getting a state payout later.
Question should be - why aren’t our kids kicking off? They have greater cause than the bloody French.
It's not so long since that people could buy a house and raise a family on one modest income. If that was previously achievable then why not again? Your generation had it better than anyone before or since, so I'd have thought you might have sympathy for the current generation taking a stand for their future.
The simple answer is if they don't protest in their 20s, then it might not affect them for another 50 years!!
People could not really recently raise a family on one modest income. For years women/partners have had to work in order to supplement or indeed equally provide the family income. So as to increase the family standard of living, and to prevent women being stuck as housewives. To suggest "one modest" income has been the norm, or that it should be again, is to me old fashioned and unpopular. Plus it is a myth that my generation have had it better than others - especially when compared to a later generation that didn't go through the miner's strike as we did round here. I was a legal aid lawyer for my first 20 working years. Is that having it better than anyone before or since? Well it wasn't. For ex-miners trying to find jobs it wasn't. Everyone's circumstances are different. Standards of living have generally been increasing. The next generation are liable to have it better due to the natural progression of things, if all goes well. Who knows? Anyway I don't object to youngsters or indeed anyone taking a stand. About anything. I have one myself, struggling to make a living, but loving BFC. I object to them being anything other than peaceful in their protest.
It's not sustainable to work for 42 years and then have the government pay you a pension for the next 22. The best advice I ever got was to start saving early with a private pension in my early 20s and I'll be giving my kids the same advice.
I don't know what the actual figures are on a sustainable retirement age. It would be interesting if someone could link a reputable study. The truth is that people are living longer and there's no magic money tree. Nothing is free, even the NHS which is paid for via taxation. Thank god my ex wife had us start private pensions in our late 20s. I'm absolutely 100% for the welfare state but there's also an onus to look after your own future too.