Topic: Retirement Age for Workers - Does this Make Sense? - page 3. (Read 1422 times)

In my opinion, in this case it depends on the health of the citizens, in essence in terms of physical and other things, of course the government also carries out research on the physical and performance of the people because sometimes each country always has different physical conditions, and in my opinion, aged 62 or more, are no longer strong. in physical terms but of course in this case there are definitely pros and cons and even in one country but sometimes physical conditions vary so I think in this case there must be awareness from individuals because in reality everyone has different physical conditions sometimes there are times when people who are old but still want to work because their physical condition is very good, but there are also those whose physical condition is no longer strong, even though for example they are less than 60 years old, so in my opinion, in this case we have to respond wisely.

People should be allowed to decide if they want to continue working or not because most people retire without any achievement  it has  resulted to different cases of forging ages just to sustain and last long on the job so government should allow workers to be optional on this because many retire and find it difficult to survive

Productivity at age is not always the same from one person to another and there are some people at the age of 50 who cannot even work anymore due to limited health. Every company or government has a different perception regarding productivity age, but I think it needs to be seen from a health perspective. In my country there is usually a young retirement term for people with health problems and they don't have to wait until retirement age to stop working.

So as long as they are still productive at work, I don't think it's a problem, but it's different if they don't have health that can encourage more productive work. Age 62 years should be enough for workers to retire and does not need to be added to 64 years for retirement.

This is a double standard. You are speaking in two voices supporting extension of retirement age and also pointing at unemployment rate for the young people. Of course if old people are retained in work force even when they are not contributing efficiently to the economy, they need to be replaced and this may not be done selectively. The best is to let them go for a replacement with the young people and you may open up space for the old active workforce on a contract or part time bases because of their expertise. I believe countries with long service age are those who lack young workforce for replacing the old. There are more advantage for introducing energetic minds in the workforce and these advantages are what we all know needless to mention.

It makes sense to raise the retirement age so that people can continue to contribute to the workforce and the economy. Many workers are physically unable to work past a certain age, and that raising the retirement age would unfairly penalize these individuals. There are also economic considerations to make into account. If the retirement age is raised, it could lead to decrease in unemployment rates as older workers remain in the workforce for longer. This could also lead to a decrease in job opportunities for younger workers who may struggle to find employment. Retirement age for workers should be based on efficiency of employees. It is important to balance the needs of older workers with the needs of the economy as a whole in order to ensure a fair and sustainable system for all.

It seems that the retirement age is around 60-65 years. And because they certainly think about the productive period of the workers while working. And if you are above that age, of course you have to think again about your productivity, about the risks at work, how big the impact is, not only for the company or institution but also for yourself. So I think, if it's time to retire and it's old enough, there's no need to extend it anymore. especially if they do get a pension fund, at least they can have enough rest in their old age. Even if they still want to work, maybe they at least choose work that is not heavy, not binding, and can be done optimally according to their conditions.

There are many things to take into consideration before we say that this is the right thing. Because with old age, people lose the edge both in mental and physical health. What business wants? More production and works. So if they keep those guy who are over their 60s and lost the edge, then that will be a loss. Experience is not everything when it comes to work. It is important, but in order to implement that to work, you need strength and mental capacity to keep working. New recruits will be less productive in terms of working benefits, but they will pick up the pace and gain those experience if they work hard.
Also, the population of this earth is not decreasing every day. Instead, it is increasing. So if you keep people over 60s, will that not take away the opportunity from the new generation? Working opportunity is getting less and less every day, and not to mention that the competition is so high these days. What to do in this situation? On the other hand, those who retire, they can create their own business or help the new gen to gain the experience that they have achieved over the years.
Or the companies can offer a service in where the veteran will teach the newbies what they know best. And in return, they will get paid for their service. Doesn't this make more sense than keeping them in the work and taking away opportunities from others? I don't know, man. This is what felt right to me.

Depends on the working area. If a person is working in the office, then retiring at 60 seems early (yet again, depends on persons health and how he had lived till 60), because I've seen many people at 60+/- being quite energetic at work. But if a persons had a physical work who whole life, then at 55+ he will be exhausted already.

Imho, it would be better for aged people to retire at 60. They still have time to live for themselves, to get some rest in life. I believe that even though ages people are experienced, current generation has learned enough from them already.

Naive young individuals will not endure in their jobs until retirement. They will struggle to compete with other workers when it comes to promotions. It is true that individuals aged 60 and above possess remarkable experience, but their productivity declines along with their less-than-optimal physical condition.

They easily become drowsy, and senility becomes a common occurrence. Thus, when this truly happens and there are still elderly employees, it only adds to the company's burden. There is nothing that leads to a significant improvement for the company. Everyone will simply bow down out of respect, rather than working objectively.

I also think that it would be much better for someone who has turned 60. to have the option of whether to take retirement or choose to continue working for an additional few years as agreed. So that people who have the desire to retire at the age of 60 will not feel disappointed if there are options they can choose. and those wishing to remain employed will also not be disappointed as there are options for extensions of employment. and I heard there is a system like this in my country. what is referred to as young retirement or early retirement, namely retirement before entering retirement age. but they still have pension benefits. it's just not as big as when they retire at the retirement age limit.

Because there aren't many options for healthcare and life expectancy is declining globally, I find the idea objectionable. With the retirement age being raised to 64, some people who have worked and paid into the system for many years may not live long enough to get benefits. Thus, extending work hours shouldn't be required; instead, people should do it if they feel well enough to do so. Recreational pursuits, travel, time with the grandchildren are all intended to be part of retirement. They cannot appreciate life if they are broken down and in anguish.

i didn't read clearly about the pension law set by the French order but it definitely doesn't include the post of president or other state officials.  those who are over 60 years old, of course, will experience a decrease in the quality of energy and thoughts, so it's no wonder that in some fields of work, hiring people over the age of 60 is a bad thing, moreover, job vacancies don't increase but young people who are productive continue popping up then it establishes a shrimp pension law is a good thing imo.

I believe the government is considering the well-being of employees and aiming to ensure they can benefit from their retirement by enjoying life while they have the opportunity. Ultimately, this decision may be influenced by the global mortality rate, also known as life expectancy.

According to the research as we can see here in this article.


If the retirement age is set within the age bracket mentioned by OP, individuals would only have around 10 years to enjoy life after retirement. Therefore, I believe it's necessary to encourage them to retire, as life is not solely about work but also about fully enjoying it.

And in the end it will depend on the health and fitness of our body at that age. whether we will still be able to work or not. I personally want to be prepared from now on so that before retirement I have a passive income that can keep me receiving income without having to work. I want to enjoy old age with lots of vacations to various areas that I have never visited with my family. or relax enjoy every moment with family. And to make that happen I have to have two long-term investments. namely health investment by maintaining body fitness so that it remains healthy until old age. and one more long-term investment in assets that could pay off for me in the future.

Do we only look at work productivity to determine if a plan is something that is great or not? I don't think so. This plan is great as it is because not only does it give these old people a little more chance to work and put food on their table especially now when things are a little hard to deal with and the government's not really reliable. At the same time this gives them more opportunities to live a more fulfilling retirement life. Work productivity will not be inversely affected by this change as you have to consider the fact that the percentages of people on their 62 applying for work is not only low, but exceedingly impractical for companies to hire, not only over the fact that they are already old, but also because they are only legally allowed to serve the company 2 years. Plus the fact that there are also young people that are getting hired every year.

So all in all this is a great plan, gives those whose old but still capable of working at least 2 more years to provide for themselves, and ultimately allows them to live fulfilling retirement days.

It is not France's crisis alone, but rather that all countries that suffer from demographic aging are subject to decisions similar to those taken by France. Population aging means a decrease in economic productivity that may reach the stage of disability. This also explains why these countries accept large numbers of immigrants and asylum applications.
In my country, the retirement age was raised to 62 for the same reasons, and we did not witness any protests, neither from unions nor from citizens, although I live in a country that enjoys a good margin of freedom.

It makes sense though in many way like if you don't retire after reaching certain age then how is it possible for the upcoming generation to get a job? First of all the concept of permanent job should not be exists anymore because that is where most low efficiency of a job comes from, if the job based on their performance then who is giving the results will stay and others shouldn't which is hard I know but if we have such system I bet we will have different world than now.

The government isn't shoving anything down the throat of people, they're likely trying to keep the books balanced. People live longer now than when these pension systems were first developed so it's only normal to increase the age. In reality you are free to retire at any time you want, but you need to accumulate enough assets to support yourself in that endeavour. Nobody is being forced to retire in any country with normal laws, many businesses allow people to stay on for as long as they like and are competent enough to complete the job they are paid to do.

Yes, I may agree with your statement above. On the other hand, from an economic perspective, an aging population can put a strain on the pension system and public finances. But, if the government conducts a Polling for Workers who are approaching retirement age, Choose which to keep working or retire. I'm sure Dominan will choose to continue. Everything has a cause and effect, perhaps. Some individuals may want to continue working past the traditional retirement age for financial reasons or a desire to stay active and involved. Raising the retirement age gives them the opportunity to make that choice.

On the other hand, extending the retirement age may limit job vacancies and career advancement opportunities for younger workers. This can lead to an increase in the unemployment rate among the younger generation and hinder intergenerational equity.

I think it's just general. Each country has its own Rules of Law, one of which is the age limit for working. So, as good citizens, as much as possible to follow what has been determined and what has been determined is not a unilateral decision, they have sat together to discuss this as has been done by the French Constitutional Council.

Well if I was age 61 and going to retire then this happened I would be really upset. Thinking I was going to retire but then having it taken from me. Now having to work for another 2 years would not make me very happy.

I think it needs to be up to the person going to retire. I know people who are aged 70 and above still working. It really depends on the person and the age is just a number when it comes to working. Me I will want to work until I am older then 64 but maybe not someone else.