growstuff
Calistemon The pension age is the same for men and women.
I know that ?
It wasn't when I retired. I said it needed equalizing and it was - bt perhaps 65 for all.
omg I am watching Good Morning Britain and apparently Vince Cable thinks retired pensioners who are fit should go back to work. I am 66 and still work through choice (I am trying to save a little bit for emergencies) I will leave my job in June next year.
The guests discussing this are Nina Myskow who thinks it should be a choice and this young guy called Mark Ryan Parsons (from the Apprentice) is saying we should go back to work and stop being 'LAZY' his exact words to Nina were ' Nina, stop making excuses for elderly being LAZY'............I am shocked at his attitude. Some of us have worked over 50 years and we deserve our pensions and the choice to retire. He also said we cost the economy thousands in care, what an upstart. We have paid in for years and supported the care of previous generations, he insists we are living off the younger generation! Nina said the elderly have done their bit and young people should get off the gadgets and get to work. I just can't get over his arrogance, we are not lazy.
growstuff
Calistemon The pension age is the same for men and women.
I know that ?
It wasn't when I retired. I said it needed equalizing and it was - bt perhaps 65 for all.
growstuff
Calistemon The pension age is the same for men and women.
I ten to agree, Gagajo and think the pension age needed to be equalised for men and women, what that should be is a moot point.
I think that is clear (although it should be tend).
It needed to be equalised.
It has been.
The age is debatable- too old imo.
PS. You were probably able to retire earlier than those on the new state pension. The age at which the two systems pay the same total amount is, I believe, 82, so some people will win and some will lose. That doesn't take account of the lower National Insurance Rates, which older people paid.
Ooops! Sorry! Didn't see your past tense.
I think the pension age is about right.
SueDonim
Given that some are of the opinion that older people should not still be driving, how are all these aged workers going to get to their jobs? In fact, given that there are plenty of older people doing driving jobs, how are they to do that work, if they shouldn’t be driving?
Very good point indeed.
I have retired twice since I was 60 I am now 71 even now I get requests every month from an Agency I was with offering part-time cover in Sales Offices for new builders all of witch involves travelling a good 25mls each way but there is no way I would consider driving that far now.
Blossoming
Vince Cable is a wibbling old fool, he will say anything to get noticed.
I tend to agree after noticing him passing comment on any subject under the sun recently.
He must need to top up his pension.
I hear/read a lot of negativity about Biden age, and Trump (who may or may not be making a come back) being too old.
It seems people like to find ways to complain about the retired population.
As SueDonim pointed out older people driving is a continued focus.
Isnt there enough division in society without stirring up more? Grrrr.
The 'lazy' comment was inexcusable, but as a general point Vince Cable's comment reflects the fact that retirement age is now way out of step with increases in life expectancy, hence some of the problems with pension funds.
And of course many older people didn't want to retire in the first place.
I think VC needs to define what he means by 'lazy'. It's such a judgemental word, and means different things to different people.
In any case, it's nothing to do with the government whether people are 'lazy' or not - their role is to manage the economy, keep law and order and defend the country if necessary. They are not there as our moral guardians.
He also needs to be clearer about why older people should go back to work. Is it to boost the economy or to save on pensions? Maybe if the economy needs everyone to work for X years, there should be some sort of incentive to ensure that they do, but he needs to spell out how that would be enforced, eg how would the government ensure that those who didn't work in their younger years should make up for it when older? It would be interesting to see how he could spin that to make it voter-friendly.
If he is saying that people should go back to work to save on pensions, he really needs to understand that in a democracy based on consensus, (which we in the UK were used to until recently), it is necessary to have trust between government and citizens. When they change the rules so that people are shafted when, after taking the government at their word and planning their lives accordingly, they find that they are changed, trust and respect are shattered. Asking someone who has worked for decades, paid taxes, juggled work and family, and all that goes with contributing to society to do it for even longer is unrealistic. Expecting them to vote for a party who would have them 'go back' into roles that are far less skilled than the ones they left is insulting, but that is what is likely to happen - how many employers will choose a retired applicant over a younger one with the same qualifications? I, for one, would have stayed in my full-time role if I'd known that leaving it would condemn me to having to take unskilled work on minimum wage. If we all did the same, the careers of young numpties like the Parsons chap would be blocked, and they would be the ones who ended up working in B&Q.
They both sound as though they need to have a think about the implications of this nonsense.
Good post Doodledog.
We can't do right for doing wrong can we. If we continue working past retirement age we are taking jobs from younger people. If we don't work we are lazy.
I do feel for the younger generation though, my daughter is a nurse and will have to work until she is 68 ( currently ) to achieve the pension I got at 60.
Calistemon
Doodledog I think it was this Parsons young man who described retired people as Lazy.
He who doesn't seem to have done a proper day's work in his life.
Oh I remember him
.
He was a twit on The Apprentice, wasn't he?
winterwhite
The 'lazy' comment was inexcusable, but as a general point Vince Cable's comment reflects the fact that retirement age is now way out of step with increases in life expectancy, hence some of the problems with pension funds.
And of course many older people didn't want to retire in the first place.
I didn't see the programme, so thanks for saying this. I think that people should be able to work for as long as they want, which will need having a re-think about part-time and flexible work. I believe there's an agency somewhere that specialises in finding part-time, skilled work for those who want it (but don't know what it's called).
It's obvious from the number who do voluntary work that many people are capable of work beyond retirement age, so why shouldn't they be paid for the work they do?
Calistemon
Doodledog I think it was this Parsons young man who described retired people as Lazy.
He who doesn't seem to have done a proper day's work in his life.
I hadn't a clue who he is, so Googled him. He appears to want to follow in Katie Hopkins' footsteps. Why do people even listen to him or read what he's written?
Another person who may be clever but lacks intelligence. Like most of the current cabinet. Sadly that seems to apply to VC as well. Once upon a time I used to admire him. Not any more. my faith has been gradually eroded ever since he became leader of the LibDems.
Doodledog
Calistemon
Doodledog I think it was this Parsons young man who described retired people as Lazy.
He who doesn't seem to have done a proper day's work in his life.Oh I remember him
.
He was a twit on The Apprentice, wasn't he?
I only watch a few episodes but I do remember him, yes, an absolute first-class twit!
I never understand how someone can make a living out of doing nothing much except being a celeb.
Then telling us we're lazy just takes the proverbial.
Mind you, I'd rather give a willing 80 year old a job than him!
Mark Ryan Parsons? Never heard of him. Why are people even caring what he says. This man's opinions are not important to anyone. I'd ignore, mind you, he will probably feel differently as he gets older. If he wants to work till he drops, good luck to him with that. People like him never seem to realise health issues play a massive part in what you are able to do. Sixty years old may not be classed as an old person nowadays, but it's sure not the same as being twenty.
If he wants to work till he drops, good luck to him with that.
He doesn't work, though, Pepper59
Not in any meaningful way of the word.
We're just taking the Michael out of a one-time politician and a daft young person.
I remember him on the apprentice too and to say he’s a twit is a serious misspelling …….
It’s ok for Vince in his job, what about those working outside at his age, in factories, doing manual labour, he needs to get out there and do the work, did a few trenches, get up at 4 and drive a truck, before passing his stupid comments, I’m sure a lot of older pensioner would take his place for a time.
I remember this pompous ass on The Apprentice....ignore him!
I hadn't realised until I found the GMB clip that Vince Cable wasn't actually on the programme to explain himself.
The idea that some people should work beyond pension age seems to have been based on an article in the Independent. Maybe people should read it before jumping to conclusions.
"Our ageing population is fuelling inflation and adding to public debt. Getting elderly, retired, but fit people back in to the workforce, and treating them as an economic resource, is right even if it is provocative. These were some of the conclusions to emerge from a conference this month on the future of ageing (#FutureOfAgeing; International Longevity Centre).
Britain, like other developed economies – and China – is getting distinctly older. The percentage of the population aged over 60 is around 22 per cent, having risen from 16 per cent in 1990 – and is projected to rise to 25 per cent in another 40 years.
And, within that total, the share of the very old (over 80) is growing especially rapidly, from around 2.4 per cent now, to an estimated 7 per cent in 40 years’ time.
Projections are, of course, uncertain. The main assumption is that people are living longer thanks to better health treatment and healthier lifestyles, but this is not inevitable – as we have seen from declining life expectancy amongst males in the USA.
The fertility of women of child-bearing age has been declining to around 1.6, and is likely to stabilise at a lower level still. Net immigration is also a big factor in population size and composition, and if this were cut in line with the Conservative government’s aspirations it would have the effect of reducing the proportion of younger people and increasing the number of over 60s.
Other countries have progressed further in the ageing process. The share of the over-60s is 33 per cent in Japan, 29 per cent in Italy and 28 per cent in Germany. That share is expected to rise rapidly to over 40 per cent in those countries by the middle of the century – and they will be joined by China.
The economic effects of ageing are complex, but we can make a few plausible assumptions. First, there is a pressure on government budgets, since there are more people with high dependency requiring expensive health treatment and social care.
At the same time, the share of population which is working goes down, reducing the tax take. So, in the absence of continued budget tightening, governments will run up growing budget deficits and public debt.
In addition, the retired population will spend out of its accumulated savings. The decline in the share of the working-age population will reduce the productive capacity of the economy.
Increasing demand for goods and services while reducing supply will create inflation, all other things being equal. In practice, governments will use monetary and fiscal policy to counter the trend; but it will be like walking into a stiff headwind.
Another likely consequence is growing inequality between generations. The old demand more spending on health and social care as pressures on hospitals grow. We have seen that budgets for school and colleges are being – relatively – squeezed.
Additional spending currently promised for health and social care is being financed by taxes which fall on the working population (in the form of National Insurance Contributions) rather than by taxation on the accumulated capital of the elderly.
That is not all. In the last “decade of austerity”, with falling real wages for many working families, pensions were protected through the “triple lock”. There is also a political ratchet effect whereby ageing produces an ageing electorate, and one where older people have a higher propensity to vote, defending its interests in terms of government spending priorities at the expense of younger people.
Moreover, younger people have less secure employment than before, with fewer careers offering steady progression and salary increments and essentially none offering final-salary pensions And, there is an inflationary property market – which excludes those with low and average incomes and rewards older owner-occupiers with appreciating property wealth.
Some of these pressures could be eased if younger, fitter, people of retirement age were to continue working. They would help to meet growing labour shortages. They would generate more tax revenue for government. And, in many cases, they would keep themselves mentally and physically active, thereby postponing the onset of conditions leading to high dependency.
The barriers to such employment are falling. Compulsory retirement has been outlawed and age discrimination is illegal, too (at least in theory). The nature of work is less physical and more desk based.
While more flexible working patterns, like zero-hours contracts, are less secure; they may suit older workers, who are looking to supplement their pension income. Fitness levels are generally higher: all those yoga and pilates classes, walking, gym and cycling (or, in my case, ballroom dancing and gym).
Furthermore, many older people need to work because their occupational pension provision is inadequate for comfortable retirement. In particular, there are large numbers of women who prioritised unpaid parenting and are now denied the full state pension – or who have been caught out by the postponement of the women’s pension age.
“Work until you drop” used to be a feature of exploitative capitalism or enslavement. “Work as long as you can” may be the slogan of a society trying, in an ageing society, to get a better balance between the interests of young and old. How do we achieve it?
First: more imagination. There are numerous roles – teaching in schools and colleges; policing; nursing and doctoring; legal work; accounting; working in supermarkets; delivering the post – which those who have reached pensionable age may be happy to perform for a limited number of hours provided there is no financial disincentive. But it requires employers to be flexible and to maximise synergies between workers of different age and experience.
Second: retraining. Skills atrophy. And older workers will often lack IT aptitude. As a 78-year-old part-time worker, I put in a lot of creative hours – but have the computer skills of a six or seven-year-old. People are expected to teach themselves keyboard skills, which are daunting for those who honed their communication skills in a world of pen and paper.
Adult education institutions should be seen not just as places for hobby learning, but for improving such basic modern, generic, skills: perhaps (in short) “boot-camp” retraining programmes.
Third, we should learn from countries further advanced in ageing – especially Japan. The oldest area in Japan is called Akito. It has been described as, “the backwater which leads the world”. The local authorities, instead of the usual emphasis on sheltered housing for retired people, encourage integrated living.
The elderly offer childcare, and in return, working-age families offer services which the older residents need. Women are able to work without the uncertainties and costs of childcare, and elderly people have a useful role as well as support.
Finally, there are millions of older people who cannot work and depend on care. As with others who have a physical or mental disability or chronic illness, they rely on an army of carers. Many carers are volunteers and are unpaid, especially relatives of dependent loved ones. They may not pay tax and are not counted in GDP statistics, but they substitute for people who do and are.
Recommended
What Kamala Harris’s wired headphones tell us about US politics today
What Kamala Harris’s wired headphones tell us about US politics today
Editorial: Who now can take the prime minister seriously?
Editorial: Who now can take the prime minister seriously?
As a former teacher, let me tell you what ‘less racist’ math actually looks like
As a former teacher, let me tell you what ‘less racist’ math actually looks like
Their role in an ageing economy needs to be factored in. That means providing much more respite care, both as a compassionate measure and as a means of postponing when people have to go into expensive institutional care permanently; and far more generous carers’ allowances to compensate for dropping out of formal work.
Britain has the advantage of time to prepare gradually for an ageing population and to adapt. For many that will mean working longer. But that is the price we pay for living longer.
surely there are plenty of people of working age at home that could get a job? I think they need to encourage to economically inactive to apply for positions, incentivise with training etc
I think everyone has missed the point that this young man was put on the programme just to put a controversial and opposing viewpoint in order to generate discussion, which seems to have worked. I have seen some discussions on GMB and that seems to be what they do. The guests often have extreme views which make for a good battle!
I had just woken up when I heard him speak. He said that there was a lack of HGD and farm workers ….. did he mean those jobs were for me, he didn’t explain.
I started work at 15 full time and have just retired from my main job because of covid 71 but I still work a few hours elsewhere. Admitted I took time off for the children but I did child minding at the same time.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.