Retirement Age - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

zz0011 · 02-18-2006, 11:47 AM

Submitted for your perusal...

Retirement age 'should reach 85'

Quote:

Retirement age 'should reach 85'
By Paul Rincon
BBC News science reporter, St Louis

The age of retirement should be raised to 85 by 2050 because of trends in life expectancy, a US biologist has said.

Shripad Tuljapurkar of Stanford University says anti-ageing advances could raise life expectancy by a year each year over the next two decades.

That will put a strain on economies around the world if current retirement ages are maintained, he warned.

He also told a science meeting in St Louis that 50-year or 75-year mortgages may not be unusual in the future.

Dr Tuljapurkar was speaking at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in the Missouri city.

"People are going to do things they didn't get round to in their working lives. Current institutions are really not equipped at the moment to deal with such long lives," Dr Tuljapurkar said.

"We are going to have to plan a lot more carefully, which people are not very good at."

LIFESTYLE TRENDS

The Stanford researcher has been looking at relationships between historical trends in ageing, population growth and economic activity.

Based on this, he came up with a scenario in which anti-ageing technologies will increase the most common age of death by one year per year between 2010 and 2030.

Dr Tuljapurkar then applied this scenario to four countries: the US, China, Sweden and India.

In the US the cost of social security and medical care would almost double if people retired at 65

He found that his projected trends in life expectancy would have profound effects on the economy, lifestyle and population demographics.

"It might be possible to go through two mortgages, for example, or even have 50-year or 75-year mortgages," Dr Tuljapurkar explained.

In the US, the cost of social security and medical care would almost double if people retired at 65 under Tuljapurkar's scenario.

But an increase in the retirement age to 85 would bring costs down to today's levels.

However these trends would also create a "permanent underclass" of countries where opportunities for increased life expectancy were not the same as in the industrialised world.

"We can't even get retrovirals to some countries now," he told journalists.

Published: 2006/02/17 23:57:20 GMT

QUESTION

What job would it truly suck to be stuck at until 85?

LazyBoy · 02-18-2006, 12:29 PM

Most any of them....85 just seems a bit outrageous to me...Because even though one may LIVE until 85 or longer, I'd have to say (from personal observation) many of them are not really able to function by themselves, on a daily basis...

If anything, I think retirement age may need to be adjusted, simply because of the increase of the "elderly" in society. And a retirement age of 85 may take a lil of the load off...

But FWIW, I'd hate to be a truck driver at 85....With your eyesight at half mast and you reflexes slow.....something bad is BOUND to happen lol

-Will

Carno · 02-18-2006, 02:23 PM

You know I guess they're right, senior citizens, although slow and dangerous behind the wheel, can still serve a purpose.... like being door greeters at Wal Mart.

maleficent · 02-18-2006, 02:24 PM

My father is an attorney, and he'll be 73 next month... He tried retirement about 10 years ago and decided he'd rather be carried out of the office ina box rather than sit home and rot.... Doctor says he's as healthy as a 40 year old (considering he had a heart attack when he was 60, prostate cancer at 65, bladder cancer at 68 that's pretty impressive.., My mother, on the other hand is 73 - worked her entire life teaching English lit in college... She's been retired 20 +years because of arthritis and other ailments... The woman can barely walk across the room - She couldn't work...

Bottom line with my parents is - I expect my father to still be kicking ass in the courtroom and berating associates for not putting inthe hours that he does when he's 90- if he's still alive... He loves what he does and couldn't imagine doing anything else... My mother loved teaching... til the end when it just got too painful for her---

85 is an unreasonable age to expect a person to keep working towards.... healthwise... but if a person likes what they do - then they should be allowed to keep doing it as long as they are capable...

Though the way the job market is - good luck to most people over the age of 50 trying to get hired somewhere...

ryfo · 02-18-2006, 04:21 PM

where i live the government has been talking about scrapping the retirement age altoghether and just having super available from a certain age if u are not working ffull time...it would work but as mal said if your over 50 and unemployed i dont hold much hope of work being offered.

Fob_Magi · 02-20-2006, 07:59 AM

For anybody under 40 in the United States today, don't hope to ever retire on the governments dime... its just not going to happen... the social security system is on the edge of the abyss. You will be responsible for your own retirement, and only by your thriftiness, hard work and luck will be able to retire before your no longer physically able to work.

Work hard, save and invest... (Or alternatively give birth to smart children who will become doctors and lawyers and support your poor ass)...

Carno · 02-20-2006, 08:25 AM

I'm going to retire when I'm 39... on the government's dime! Hahahahahaha!!

Seriously.

Craven Morehead · 02-20-2006, 08:58 AM

My father is in his early 80s. He recently attended a White House seminar on aging as a delegate. He said one of the speakers said that if by the time you reach 65 without any serious health problems (heart attack, stroke, cancer) you should be financially prepared to live to 90!

I think working until 85 is a bit much but there will be several that will have to work as they will not have the means to support themselves.

Rodney · 02-20-2006, 11:22 AM

Personally, I'll probably work until I die, mainly because sitting on my ass is totally boring. I assume, however, that I'll be financially able to do something I enjoy even if it doesn't pay a lot, rather than just chase the biggest bucks.\

I think "retirement age" should be based on your ability to do work; some people are in pretty bad shape in their early '60s, others are rolling right along at 80, sharp as a tack. I'd replace social security with a kind of super-disability that's available after a certain age.

Sure, people would game the system; but it'd be hard to make a case that you deserved the payment if you still pulling in the high five-figures. Also, disability-based aging benefits compensate for the probability that the best anti-aging techniques would probably be better available to the well-heeled, at least at first. Those who could afford the most and best anti-aging techniques would go on working; those who got left out would deteriorate faster and thus pass the test for disability insurance earlier.

Even with the inevitable system-gaming aside, I think we'd be better off; and there could be some sort of (cost-effective) reward for people who were lucky/prudent/well-heeled enough to get to an advanced age without requiring gov't assistance: better medicare, a tax break on earned income up to X amount, something like that.

02-18-2006, 12:29 PM	#2 (permalink)
LazyBoy Insane Location: Memphis Area	Most any of them....85 just seems a bit outrageous to me...Because even though one may LIVE until 85 or longer, I'd have to say (from personal observation) many of them are not really able to function by themselves, on a daily basis... If anything, I think retirement age may need to be adjusted, simply because of the increase of the "elderly" in society. And a retirement age of 85 may take a lil of the load off... But FWIW, I'd hate to be a truck driver at 85....With your eyesight at half mast and you reflexes slow.....something bad is BOUND to happen lol -Will __________________ Life is nothing, everything.....and something in between...

02-18-2006, 02:23 PM	#3 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	You know I guess they're right, senior citizens, although slow and dangerous behind the wheel, can still serve a purpose.... like being door greeters at Wal Mart. __________________ http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/

02-18-2006, 02:24 PM	#4 (permalink)
maleficent Junkie Moderator Emeritus Location: Chicago	My father is an attorney, and he'll be 73 next month... He tried retirement about 10 years ago and decided he'd rather be carried out of the office ina box rather than sit home and rot.... Doctor says he's as healthy as a 40 year old (considering he had a heart attack when he was 60, prostate cancer at 65, bladder cancer at 68 that's pretty impressive.., My mother, on the other hand is 73 - worked her entire life teaching English lit in college... She's been retired 20 +years because of arthritis and other ailments... The woman can barely walk across the room - She couldn't work... Bottom line with my parents is - I expect my father to still be kicking ass in the courtroom and berating associates for not putting inthe hours that he does when he's 90- if he's still alive... He loves what he does and couldn't imagine doing anything else... My mother loved teaching... til the end when it just got too painful for her--- 85 is an unreasonable age to expect a person to keep working towards.... healthwise... but if a person likes what they do - then they should be allowed to keep doing it as long as they are capable... Though the way the job market is - good luck to most people over the age of 50 trying to get hired somewhere... __________________ Free your heart from hatred. Free your mind from worries. Live simply. Give more. Expect less.

02-20-2006, 07:59 AM	#6 (permalink)
Fob_Magi Psycho Location: Texas	For anybody under 40 in the United States today, don't hope to ever retire on the governments dime... its just not going to happen... the social security system is on the edge of the abyss. You will be responsible for your own retirement, and only by your thriftiness, hard work and luck will be able to retire before your no longer physically able to work. Work hard, save and invest... (Or alternatively give birth to smart children who will become doctors and lawyers and support your poor ass)... __________________ Whoever appeals to the law against his fellow man is either a fool or a coward. Whoever cannot take care of himself without that law is both. For a wounded man shall say to his assailant, "If I live I will kill you, if I die you are forgiven". Such is the Rule of Honor.

02-20-2006, 08:25 AM	#7 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	I'm going to retire when I'm 39... on the government's dime! Hahahahahaha!! Seriously. __________________ http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/

02-18-2006, 04:21 PM	#5 (permalink)
ryfo Psycho Location: melbourne australia	where i live the government has been talking about scrapping the retirement age altoghether and just having super available from a certain age if u are not working ffull time...it would work but as mal said if your over 50 and unemployed i dont hold much hope of work being offered.

02-20-2006, 08:58 AM	#8 (permalink)
Craven Morehead Custom User Title	My father is in his early 80s. He recently attended a White House seminar on aging as a delegate. He said one of the speakers said that if by the time you reach 65 without any serious health problems (heart attack, stroke, cancer) you should be financially prepared to live to 90! I think working until 85 is a bit much but there will be several that will have to work as they will not have the means to support themselves.

02-20-2006, 11:22 AM	#9 (permalink)
Rodney Observant Ruminant Location: Rich Wannabe Hippie Town	Personally, I'll probably work until I die, mainly because sitting on my ass is totally boring. I assume, however, that I'll be financially able to do something I enjoy even if it doesn't pay a lot, rather than just chase the biggest bucks.\ I think "retirement age" should be based on your ability to do work; some people are in pretty bad shape in their early '60s, others are rolling right along at 80, sharp as a tack. I'd replace social security with a kind of super-disability that's available after a certain age. Sure, people would game the system; but it'd be hard to make a case that you deserved the payment if you still pulling in the high five-figures. Also, disability-based aging benefits compensate for the probability that the best anti-aging techniques would probably be better available to the well-heeled, at least at first. Those who could afford the most and best anti-aging techniques would go on working; those who got left out would deteriorate faster and thus pass the test for disability insurance earlier. Even with the inevitable system-gaming aside, I think we'd be better off; and there could be some sort of (cost-effective) reward for people who were lucky/prudent/well-heeled enough to get to an advanced age without requiring gov't assistance: better medicare, a tax break on earned income up to X amount, something like that.