It depends, some people get retired because they have been in service for way too long and some are retired because they are old, I understand that some older people are still able to work, but retirement comes with pension money right? Although some government in some countries don't fulfill their promises to retired government workers, in my country many retired government workers are abandoned by the government, left to survive on their own and some.of these old men and women have no relatives that can take care of them, only this that have children that are successful and rich are in good care.
If I have to advise anyone who is older and also a government worker, I will tell them not to rely on the government work, when they are getting closer to their retirement, they should be able to find something else to do with the money they made from the government's job, they should be able to deposit money into another new business that will help them as they get more older.
Topic: Retirement Age for Workers - Does this Make Sense? - page 8. (Read 1570 times)
If you need the government retirement plan in your late age you are fucked anyway. Retiring at 62-64? No fucking way. How about making investments while you were young and getting retired at 50? 40? or even 35? Now that sounds cool. The government can take that retirement plan and stick it to the place where the sun don't shine. Unfortunately for the most people, they need that shit to survive and that's a terrible thing. Now they need to work 2 more years just to what? get retired on a shitty gov plan. You only live once, plan accordingly.
Not everyone thinks this way and that's alright. Not everybody is going to have an early retirement. I have never looked at the statistics but I believe the percentage of people that retire early due to proper planning and investment are very few. There are countries where the government retirement plan works well and I don't see anything wrong with relying on it in that kind of system.
Why would I want to retire at 35 when I can still work? I mean, if I have proper planning and investment, that doesn't stop me from working, does it? For someone like me, that's an entrepreneur, and would most likely be an entrepreneur for the rest of my life, I don't think I'd have an early retirement.
Depends on the job you are talking about. Many people don't really like their jobs, they don't do enough vacations, get underpaid, work for long hours... These people can't work till their 60's. It is too damn stressful. I am talking about those people. People that need to work to survive this world.
If you are one of those trust fund babies then sure, you can work till your 80's.
It won't make a difference to you. 
If you need the government retirement plan in your late age you are fucked anyway. Retiring at 62-64? No fucking way. How about making investments while you were young and getting retired at 50? 40? or even 35? Now that sounds cool. The government can take that retirement plan and stick it to the place where the sun don't shine. Unfortunately for the most people, they need that shit to survive and that's a terrible thing. Now they need to work 2 more years just to what? get retired on a shitty gov plan. You only live once, plan accordingly.
Not everyone thinks this way and that's alright. Not everybody is going to have an early retirement. I have never looked at the statistics but I believe the percentage of people that retire early due to proper planning and investment are very few. There are countries where the government retirement plan works well and I don't see anything wrong with relying on it in that kind of system.
Why would I want to retire at 35 when I can still work? I mean, if I have proper planning and investment, that doesn't stop me from working, does it? For someone like me, that's an entrepreneur, and would most likely be an entrepreneur for the rest of my life, I don't think I'd have an early retirement.
Setting a retirement age for workers can make sense in some ways. It helps to ensure that there are opportunities for younger workers to enter the workforce and advance in their careers. Additionally it can help ensure that the older workers are not forced to work beyond their physical and mental capabilities. There are arguments that retirement age should be more flexible, based on individual circumstances such as health, financial status, and personal preference. Indeed whether or not a retirement age makes sense for every individual. None of us wants to force ourselves to work even we reach the old age.
You need to understand if not everyone in this world are get paid with minimum salary where they work and many people still get paid half of the country's minimum salary. How you can expect those people who are get paid half can save for their future life when it's only enough for their foods and bills? everyone would be happy if they have a lot money, so they can retire earlier, but the reality isn't and they're forced to work until they die. 
Setting a retirement age for workers can make sense in some ways. It helps to ensure that there are opportunities for younger workers to enter the workforce and advance in their careers. Additionally it can help ensure that the older workers are not forced to work beyond their physical and mental capabilities. There are arguments that retirement age should be more flexible, based on individual circumstances such as health, financial status, and personal preference. Indeed whether or not a retirement age makes sense for every individual. None of us wants to force ourselves to work even we reach the old age.
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
This so-called measure has several benefits and drawbacks. The elder employees can benefit from their years of experience if they are retained on the job for longer, which is one advantage. The drawback of this is that many workplaces will report low performance because there is an inverse relationship between a person's success at work and their deterioration in cognitive and physical capacities.
Regardless, what I think is that the government shouldn't shove it down the throat of people. 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?
If you need the government retirement plan in your late age you are fucked anyway. Retiring at 62-64? No fucking way. How about making investments while you were young and getting retired at 50? 40? or even 35? Now that sounds cool. The government can take that retirement plan and stick it to the place where the sun don't shine. Unfortunately for the most people, they need that shit to survive and that's a terrible thing. Now they need to work 2 more years just to what? get retired on a shitty gov plan. You only live once, plan accordingly.
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
~
What sense does this make? Would you agree or disagree?
Although in france, the average human age can reach more than 60 years.
Quote
In France, the population has an average age of 82.4 years.
Source: https://www.halodoc.com/artikel/8-negara-dengan-penduduk-yang-berusia-panjang#:~:text=3.%20France,age%20population%2082%2C4%20years.But that's just average, and it's very lucky if someone can touch that age. Because when it comes to age no one knows, because that is the secret above.
I am not even close to retirement but is it better to have it early right? I really dont know well about retirement but if you move it for few years then it think it is inefficient to the worker as he is too old to do the task and i dont really see a reason moving it to +2 years and i think all of us aiming for early retirement as we know that we will be receiving pension closed to what we earned monthly but still this depends on the government or private sector as other will really force you to retire without pension due to other circumstances but i dont like have additional on retirement age
It would be really sad for the people who have already made plans years before the age of 62 to travel and go on vacations with their families. Regardless of the pros and cons that accompany this decision, it would have been better if the people were given the choice on when they want to retire without compromising the benefits that they'd be able to receive. This is because for some, their work has been stressful and detrimental for their health both mentally and physically after enduring it for years while for others, it is what gives meaning to their existence, or should I say, it makes them feel a sense of purpose; that they are still useful and capable. Governments should be more compassionate towards its people so to receive as much compassion as well that would make things better for the whole country. Forcing people to work against their will when they have already dedicated so many years of their lives to their jobs, would only degrade the quantity and quality of work in the long run. Not to mention the negative views that people would have towards their government that should have been taking care of them instead of treating them like slaves.
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
This so-called measure has several benefits and drawbacks. The elder employees can benefit from their years of experience if they are retained on the job for longer, which is one advantage. The drawback of this is that many workplaces will report low performance because there is an inverse relationship between a person's success at work and their deterioration in cognitive and physical capacities.
Regardless, what I think is that the government shouldn't shove it down the throat of people. 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?
I think this all depends on how other money is spent in France by the government, that force them to make this change of moving the retirement date back. This is the reason I stress to my clients that they should be saving as if social security (our version of France’s retirement package you speak of here) isn’t going to exist when it comes to time for them to retire. Never count on the government to do it all for you. Plan as if they won’t, and if they do provide retirement of some sort when it comes to your time ..then it’ll be icing on the cake and a much more comfortable retirement.
Experience they say, is never out of fashion. It is important to always tap from the wealth of knowledge of the elderly, because over the years they've had so much techniques and expertise while working for a certain organisation.
In the field experience for instance, a newly recruited police officer might not be well baked on how to file a case for prosecution for a court hearing, at this point, it will take an experience police prosecutor to properly guide the new officer on how to appropriately go about the filing of the case for hearing.
So you see that In this case, experience has played a great role.
But a lot of people will argue that, the younger ones are not getting jobs, why are you increasing the service years of those that already gotten jobs, so there is always a two side argument whenever this topics is raised.
agreed - vaild point stated In the field experience for instance, a newly recruited police officer might not be well baked on how to file a case for prosecution for a court hearing, at this point, it will take an experience police prosecutor to properly guide the new officer on how to appropriately go about the filing of the case for hearing.
So you see that In this case, experience has played a great role.
But a lot of people will argue that, the younger ones are not getting jobs, why are you increasing the service years of those that already gotten jobs, so there is always a two side argument whenever this topics is raised.
neither does the hard work - if someone is a hard worker and hosnet worker he would not be failed person
Experience they say, is never out of fashion. It is important to always tap from the wealth of knowledge of the elderly, because over the years they've had so much techniques and expertise while working for a certain organisation.
In the field experience for instance, a newly recruited police officer might not be well baked on how to file a case for prosecution for a court hearing, at this point, it will take an experience police prosecutor to properly guide the new officer on how to appropriately go about the filing of the case for hearing.
So you see that In this case, experience has played a great role.
But a lot of people will argue that, the younger ones are not getting jobs, why are you increasing the service years of those that already gotten jobs, so there is always a two side argument whenever this topics is raised.
In the field experience for instance, a newly recruited police officer might not be well baked on how to file a case for prosecution for a court hearing, at this point, it will take an experience police prosecutor to properly guide the new officer on how to appropriately go about the filing of the case for hearing.
So you see that In this case, experience has played a great role.
But a lot of people will argue that, the younger ones are not getting jobs, why are you increasing the service years of those that already gotten jobs, so there is always a two side argument whenever this topics is raised.
People lose their ability to work after a certain time. As a result, he has to go to retirement since it was a specific time. But the main thing is that when a man retires, he is not the one he becomes. However, many people may have a slight problem in the work and many can perform the task naturally. However, the government must give a specific limit here otherwise the discipline will not remain. However, if the government extended the time here to 2-4 years, it would have been more associated. Because some are able to work enough at that time.
some people might think differently, it's everyone's right whether they still want to work after retiring from their last place of work because there is already an age limit for that.
and also there are many activities that can be done after retirement for example trading farming, fishing, or any other activity that I think has no age limit while you can still do it.
and also there are many activities that can be done after retirement for example trading farming, fishing, or any other activity that I think has no age limit while you can still do it.
I agree that it's people's right to decide whether to continue to work after retirement. It becomes their decision to make since they are no longer employed to anyone. If you are an employee, you must know that your employer is the one that will make decisions about your work, including when he feels that you are due for retirement. You don't have much choice when the employee wants to review salary or retirement age. So going further, I also agree that it is good that an employee that wants to continue work after retirement should have plan for a business that has no age limit, as you rightly mentioned.
Yes, workers should have the option to stay after the age of 50-60, in my opinion, because human abilities differ from one person to another. Some people weaken early at the age of 50, while others retain their strength until 70 years.
This is on the one hand, on the other hand, in developing countries, where government salaries are insignificant and not sufficient to cover living, forcing workers to work up to 60 years with these ridiculous salaries, so workers must have the right to stay or retire before reaching this age.
This is on the one hand, on the other hand, in developing countries, where government salaries are insignificant and not sufficient to cover living, forcing workers to work up to 60 years with these ridiculous salaries, so workers must have the right to stay or retire before reaching this age.
hero member
Activity: 2912
Merit: 541
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
It is logical. In spite of the fact that older people may still be capable and ready to work, ageism in the workplace is a serious problem that can lead to forced retirement. It's crucial to balance experience and productivity when weighing the advantages and disadvantages of keeping older workers on staff. While experience can be extremely helpful, it's also critical to understand how physical and cognitive aging might impact work effectiveness. To accommodate older workers and maximize their contributions while minimizing the detrimental effects on their health and well-being, employers should take into account alternative arrangements like part-time work, flexible hours, or job sharing.
It was logical but at least the parents realized they were getting older and didn't force themselves to keep working and it was time to retire. If the government gives them more time to work, they can do it if they are still strong and can work well. But if not, they should choose to retire and enjoy their days well without thinking about work problems. After all, having worked for more than 10-20 years seems enough for them to provide the best for their office, company or business. It is time to give that responsibility to the young ones to continue and develop it so that it is even better.Physical ageing is inevitable and their performance will not be as good as when they were young. In addition, companies may incur more costs for them, especially for health checks, because the elderly are prone to health problems. And it would be better to realize that it was enough for them to create and now is the time to enjoy the results. But people who still want to enjoy all the facilities of the office or company will not let go easily and will continue to try to keep working despite their limitations.
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.
The good thing about this plan is that you can pay as much as you want, and according to those payments, the retirement age wage will be determined ; I mean, if your current circumstances are good, you can pay a large amount, and if the circumstances do not allow, then the little amount available can be satisfied.
It is logical. In spite of the fact that older people may still be capable and ready to work, ageism in the workplace is a serious problem that can lead to forced retirement. It's crucial to balance experience and productivity when weighing the advantages and disadvantages of keeping older workers on staff. While experience can be extremely helpful, it's also critical to understand how physical and cognitive aging might impact work effectiveness. To accommodate older workers and maximize their contributions while minimizing the detrimental effects on their health and well-being, employers should take into account alternative arrangements like part-time work, flexible hours, or job sharing.
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
This so-called measure has several benefits and drawbacks. The elder employees can benefit from their years of experience if they are retained on the job for longer, which is one advantage. The drawback of this is that many workplaces will report low performance because there is an inverse relationship between a person's success at work and their deterioration in cognitive and physical capacities.
Regardless, what I think is that the government shouldn't shove it down the throat of people. 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?
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
?
Quote
Unions have vowed to continue protest actions in an attempt to get Macron to simply withdraw the measure.
In a country like ours, our senior workers hate the word retirement because their pension can not keep up with the standard of living, it may be different from France because they don't want it, and it being unpopular in France makes us conclude that senior citizen in that country wants to enjoy the fruit of their labor by retiring early than what was proposed by their leader.For a rich country where a senior retiree has a lot of benefits, they want to enjoy it as early as possible but for a third-world country a $100 to $200 worth of pension will not be enough.
Jump to: