We need ‘active ageing’ to solve the pensions crisis

Isn't 4 to 2 the same as 2 to 1?

The problem is potentially more acute than you make out for it does fully recognise the care problem.

Among those older people actively employed are many carers who, tied up with relatives care, find it remunerative to seek part time employment looking after others as well.

Cost of care, whether for those past retirement age or not, is being met through Council Tax and by loss of inheritance reducing future savings and available capital.

There is a quickening pace to all this, not only because of increased numbers of elderly people, but because non-contributors are partly subsidised by loading charges on tax payers and private payers in care homes.

I agree - the least that we should do is to raise 'normal' retiring age to 67 - and in the public as well as the private sector.

Bur let's not wait until 2012 and the 'European age of active ageing' - take a look at www.retirementreinvented.com , a not-for-profit website whose aim is to give oldies the chance to put their experience and expertise to use to help themselves and the community. It has information and signposts to paid as well as voluntary work.

Active oldie

Is there really enough work for the bulging population in this 'global' economy? Maybe we need to find a way forward where 'unemployed' (whatever the age)are given 'something' to do for short regular periods of time and in return they don't have to pay so much for utility bills and tax, as opposed to giving hand outs and then clawing it all back.

I think it is too late for many. They have already been shuffled off into early retirement by their employers. In my experience, employers really do not like employing anyone over the age of 50 unless of course they are in senior management. Their attitudes are going to be extremely hard to turn around. So the Government's solution is to diminish the pensions of those who have been forced out by capping increases to CPI rather than RPI. Over the years as their pensions reduce they will become more of a financial burden on the State.

As a female manual worker fron the ageof 15 to 66, bringing up a family now only working 10 hrs a week, I woul be unable to work full time. People who work manually are inclined to wear their bodies out quicker there for, they are not able to work for longer, & dont forget some of us left school at 15 so we will have put up more years than the workers of today.

Jesus Christ, I am coming up 62 and the thought of working till I am 67 frightens me to death. You work till 70 if you must, but leave me alone. After all, I paid for your education via tax and I am plain knackered by it all.

Still, I supose must of you guys think its a bad day if your biro runs out of ink. try a real day on the shop floor!

After retirement you die!

The trouble is medical science has stretched the intervening period out.

Clearly the cure is to shorten it again: there are two ways to do it. either reverse medical science so we die earlier, or we retire later.

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/blogs/jefflcbba/mad-lemming/and-i-am-voting-for5-party-postpones-retirement

May help?

I have a theory that everyone over the age of 50 is overpaid, if you don't believe me just try to get a job after this age and you will see what is your market worth, I was on over £60K until redundancy at 55, now I am lucky to find anything over £15K. Perhaps the problem is that people are pricing themselves out of jobs in their late forties.