Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

customerserviceguy

(25,240 posts)
19. Agreed, but isn't that toothpaste out of the tube?
Sun Mar 24, 2013, 01:57 PM
Mar 2013

What I'm seeking by my suggestion is a way to have some folks return to 65 or 66 as the full benefits retirement age, by looking at the disparity within jobs. The icing on the cake for the opposition is that the average age would move slowly upwards as we became a more technologically advanced society.

Nothing else could happen to undo the mid-1980's 'repairs' that produced the current 67 rule. We're simply not going to lower the age of collecting full benefits for anybody with the crisis the Social Security System is presently in.

I'm in agreement with you as to what employers want to do, but they're going to do that with the over-50's anyway, if that is what they want to do. Some employers recognize that people outside their child-raising years have more time to devote to the job, and they'll retain their more experienced workers.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Social Security & Medicare»The Social Security retir...»Reply #19