Posted on 05/24/2025 9:52:49 PM PDT by Cronos
the International Monetary Fund has urged governments to encourage fit, older workers to delay retirement.
Its recommendation is that people of the baby boomer generation should stay in work for longer to help balance public finances amid fiscal pressures caused by an ageing global population.
The IMF said: “The 70s are the new 50s,” and released data that suggested a person aged 70 in 2022 had the same cognitive function as the average 53-year-old in 2000. Physical health had also significantly improved, the IMF found.
Governments burdened with historically high levels of public debt, the IMF said, could not afford to let growing numbers of older workers exit the workforce while they were still healthy and able to work. Instead, it argued, governments could encourage workers to delay their retirement, cut early retirement benefits, and increase pension ages to rebalance the increasingly precarious ratio of workers and retirees.
Thousands of people from across the globe shared with the Guardian how they felt about such proposals. Although some thought the IMF’s idea was good, an overwhelming majority expressed outrage, typically describing the concept that older people should retire later to ease fiscal pressures as “disgusting”, “ludicrous” and “unfair”.
“Seventy is not the new 50. That’s propaganda,” said a 63-year-old NHS admin worker from Dundee. “Having worked since the age of 18, retirement cannot come soon enough for me. I find travelling for work stressful and long for a time when my days are my own. I am tired.”
...“People are likely to push back against this idea, because retirement is seen as a right,” said David, a town planner from the north of England. “However, as the cost of living increases, retirement is looking like an unaffordable luxury for the future.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
They’re attempting to continue to rig the stock markets. That’s what’s this is about.
Government pensions/retirements go into the stock markets through fund management.
As long as the pipes are open, the rise continues.
They don’t want to pay out the investment. Period.
It is not really replaced. More resurfaced.
There’s an old fable about that, iirc. Something about a grasshopper and an ant.
I’d rather work until the day I die than rely on society. That’s what I would rather have society do, enable people to work if they want until they perish.
However, you may be right on the idea of saving. However, our masters would never let that happen, allowing the masses to save their money. Impoverishing the masses through socialism is all part of the master plan.
On the contrary, those figures are well documented and confirmed by mulitiple sources. There have been a number of detailed studies of the net fiscal effect of immigration to the UK. Those studies were commissioned by both pro- and anti- immigration bodies. Although differing because using different criteria, the broad consensus is that the net fiscal effect is neutral to positive.
As long as I am able to, will continue to work. I like what I do, have flex hours, and the compensation is good. Could have retired years ago but seemed too early.
The trick is to plan for retirement. When I retired I had two TSA’s of 110,000 and 29,000. Had accumulated over 200 days of sick leave (treated it as a secondary insurance policy). At retirement I was able to collect on 120 of the days. Had a pension that paid out 3,500 a month and ss of 1,500 a month. I timed my retirement to make sure ss kicked in three months after retirement.
I do have a small pension and I am collecting widow’s benefits from previous deceased husband but all our money goes back into the HVAC business or the rental rehabs.
I plan to switch to my SS benefits which are much greater at age 67 due to my long, extensive work history.
I recall when my mom passed she was using my dad’s ss benefits since she only began to work outside the house when all of us kids where in middle school or higher.
Total BS since the UK is claiming workers need to work longer due to the stain on the system.
Net contributors? Lol
There is certainly a strain on the system, of which the principal cause is the ageing population. Benefit recipients are predominantly the very old and the very young.
In one sense they’re correct...
70 IS the new 50...in terms of being close to retirement.
The elite have spent future generations taxes, now expect the elderly to cover it. The short-sighted virtue-signaling that they can ‘solve all our society problems via government’ is disgusting.
If we all lived by the example of Christ we wouldn’t need government.
Totally unnecessary. The only reason such countries are having budget problems is that they imported without vetting a pack of animals who do not contribute at all. They are parasitic and an enormous drain on all services.
Get rid of them and all depts will flip from net negative to net positive.
Of course, that will not happen since the commie trash in charge need that pack of future slaves to continue to commit election fraud. Not work. Not contribute. Just keep generating fake ballots to keep politicos in power.
My husband-wife neighbors are both 77 and still working full-time because even with both incomes they can’t afford to retire. Property taxes alone would eat up their social security payments.
I took them to mean they want to push the retirement age up. Something like “early” SS would move up to 65, “full” to 70 and “max” to 75.
Eat bugs and work til death - it’s the Globalist Elites plan for you.
How is that the republic's problem?
My ancestors came here almost 400 years ago now.
However did they survive before government welfare.
There proposals to do a sneak attack by raising the ages ever so lightly so no nobody notices.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.