30 November 2005
Pensions Panel Urges Higher Retirement Age
Yeah, sure, that’s fine. We didn’t want to have any free time before we drop dead. We’ll just work until we’re almost fucking 70.
As people live longer, birth rates fall and populations age, there are fewer people working to support an increasing number of retirees
Ahem. Care to perhaps explain the birth rate fall? Maybe someone in the government might like to risk being attacked by a bunch of pre-menstrual harpies by pointing out that the birth rate has been falling since the rise of feminism?
Y’know, feminism, that nasty little ideology that encouraged women to stop having kids and instead charge into the workplace, whether they wanted to or not, and which has also – by bloating the welfare state so that the government can make a nice substitute husband/father to single mothers – meant hard working couples cannot afford to have more than a couple of kids.
Oh, wait, I forgot; if it’s a faux pas to criticize women in general then it’s a hanging offence to take issue with any of the effects of feminism.
It’s the high taxes that go hand-in-hand with socialism/feminism that mean so many people can only just afford to get by with what’s left from their plundered wages, let alone put some aside for retirement.
The commission proposed raising the age at which people take a state pension, “to at least 67” for men from the qualifying age of 65 by 2050
Hmmmm. Did I read the word “men” in that sentence? I believe I did. Strange how the government and its think-tanks never seem to give a fuck about men until it comes to extorting a bit more labour and money out of us.
Even if the retirement age was raised to 67 for both men and women it’ll effect the former more than the latter. After all, men do the heavy physical work, like construction. Women have their nice Pink Collar Jobs in air-conditioned offices. Age will hamper those doing the physical jobs more than the Pink Collar Jobs. If you needed someone to work on a building site hauling bricks around all day, a guy age 65+ is not going to be your first choice but if you need a typist you don’t really care if a woman is over or under 65, so long as she hasn’t got crippling arthritis.
Here’s an idea. Fresh from my steaming brain.
In Britain, men retire at 65 and women retire at 60. Here’s the deal. Women – who are, so they laughably claim, so much more productive than us humble males – can work until they’re 67, and us men will retire at 60 from now on. As women live longer then they’ll still have plenty of retirement left.
posted by Duncan Idaho @ 7:30 PM
At 9:47 PM, The Phantom. said…
I like that suggestion about women retiring at 67, but I can’t see it happening any time soon.
At 3:35 PM, Slaytan said…
“The commission proposed raising the age at which people take a state pension, “to at least 67” for men from the qualifying age of 65 by 2050″
Don’t you just love that. Man, I don’t know… Will men ever WAKE THE F*CK UP?!?!!?
At 7:13 AM, T4 said…
What better issue to force feminists to work to rule on? It’s about time female contributions to the workforce were recognized and the retirement rules adjusted accordingly, given that women have a 5-7 yr longer life expectancy.