What is lost in the discussion of retirement ages being bumped is that life expectancy has grown by two decades since the retirement age was introduced in the USA in 1935 [0][1][2]. The retirement age was originally past the point where most people died.
I don't personally understand the expectation that average people be economically sustainable while jobless for two decades+. It makes sense to me to slowly increase the retirement age.
I know several people (i.e. 3 of my grandparents) who lived jobless that long or longer. At least half of their retirement years, they were physically and mentally incapable of holding their previous jobs, or even the most menial unskilled jobs.
One had half his body paralyzed by a stroke, and you couldn't really tell how much understanding he had of the world around him when he was alert. The other two had forms of alzheimer's that, eventually, left them occasionally speaking czech instead of english (they moved to the USA as children) and not recognizing their own children. The first sign they needed full-time care was when we caught one of them overdosing on ibuprofin- get a headache, take some, forget, take more, repeat. That, and leaving the gas stove on for hours.
I fully agree that the retirement age should start increasing, but there's definitely a point of diminishing returns. We may be living longer as a whole, but our physiology hasn't caught up enough to trust that those extra years can be spent making economically valuable contributions to society.
Agreed, I think that in health cases, there can't be an expectation for people to work. In a better world, our society as a whole would have better end of life support for when people are of ill health.
But, not everybody's mind slips. I'm hopeful that we will have better preventative measures for Alzheimer's and other mind or body crippling diseases soon. I do recall seeing some good news on the Alzheimer's front in the last year.
My first article mentions what you said: past a certain point, it may be more detrimental for some to work.
Except what happens when you increase the same retirement age for farmers, construction workers, software developers, and teachers? The software developers and the teachers work more with their minds than with their bodies. The farmers and construction workers (putting aside the possibility that their age makes them less productive in physical labor and less likely to find jobs in their fields) would be at much higher risk for onsite injury, and who’s going to pay for that?
I'd buy that if not for the massive increase in year-over-year productivity that we as a society get from better technology. If that's not going toward spending less time working, where is it going? And is that where it should go?
I think it goes to the rich through systemic imbalance in companies and personal greed of those at the top. Wages should rise.
I don't mean that people should work hard until they die; people should be able to enjoy their lives while working -- hopefully at a job they enjoy, maybe more community oriented as their needs for large salaries to support families goes away.
I don't think that is happening, I think people are nearly destitute, and I see that as the problem.
One had half his body paralyzed by a stroke, and you couldn't really tell how much understanding he had of the world around him when he was alert. The other two had forms of alzheimer's that, eventually, left them occasionally speaking czech instead of english (they moved to the USA as children) and not recognizing their own children. The first sign they needed full-time care was when we caught one of them overdosing on ibuprofin- get a headache, take some, forget, take more, repeat. That, and leaving the gas stove on for hours.
I fully agree that the retirement age should start increasing, but there's definitely a point of diminishing returns. We may be living longer as a whole, but our physiology hasn't caught up enough to trust that those extra years can be spent making economically valuable contributions to society.