Retirement age in Denmark set to raise to 70

[MikeRafone]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg71v533q6o

I hadn’t realised Denmark was presently in line with uk on retirement age and now raising it to 70

and that’s for people born 1970 onwards! I wonder if this will be used for uk to fallow suit?

Read the the thread?
I pointed out earlier that the average manual worker dies at 71, so he/she is entitled to 3 or 4 years of SP in your opinion?

Personally i don't want elderly lorry drivers on the road, do you?

She isn't a boomer then is she ?

I’d agree I worked in Environmental services at the council and (with the odd exception) pretty much all the physical jobs people are done in by mid fifties. It used to be they’d be shunted onto “easy jobs” till retirement but there’s no longer that culture.

We do have an aging population though. Pensions already cost nearly 130 billion pounds a year. Going up every year, realistically we don’t have the money as a country. It’s not just pensions NHS spending and social care costs go up dramatically as we age.

Its either means testing or raise the retirement age?

Its not the way it was at all... for around 50% of women, like my mum, they worked, took in washing, factories, health care etc.

The proportion of women in the labour force as a percentage of women of working age (15-64) increased from 45.9% in 1955 to 51% in 1965 and 58% in 1970

I just wish they wouldn't keep playing the martyr card, especially when they incessantly complain about today's youngsters with stupid comments like if they didn't have a mobile phone they'd be able to afford to buy a house and other similar nonsense.

Thanks very much I hadn't found that when I googled.

@treetopsgreen the poster you originally got snippy with basically said that all generations have to face whatever shafting they get. And each generation gets a raw deal in some way. So yes, the current “young” have been shafted, but so were all previous generations, and no doubt all future generations. Just in different ways. No one generation has it easier than any other. I’m surprised you’re struggling with this concept.

Firemen retire much earlier than state pension anyway. Typically 55 or as early as 50 if they've achieved 25 years of service. They're not going to be expected to work till 70, just like they're not expected to work till 67 now. Maybe, just maybe, their retirement age from the service may be nudged up a couple of years, but I can't see the unions standing for anything longer.

Yes, isn't it annoying when people insist on playing the martyr card ALL the time.😁

Most people that age are starting to have serious health issues

That's not correct.

I don't think I said she was?

In your opinion... thats all.

Yong people today face far greater cost of living issues than people in their 60s or 70s ever did.... in my opinion!

Trouble is, mine is born out by the facts, yours isn't.

My parents had quite a cost of living issue when my mother was pregnant with her first child in 1967. She was quite legally terminated from her job.

The problem with your "facts" is that until Gen Z start retiring no one has any idea if they were shafted more than any of the generations before them.

No one knows what's ahead of that generation.

And comparing people in the early years of their working lives to those who are either at the end or have retired isncomparing the same thing at all.

What facts are you basing your claim on?

See post yesterday at 11.22.

This is true. I also think that social media has a lot to answer for here.
Whereas previous generations did not like to be seen to be struggling, now there is a type of competitive victim hood prevalent on SM, where everyone is vying to be the poorest, the most traumatised etc.
Maybe we just have to accept that Gen Z, as well as being the definitively best parents, are also the most shafted ever in the world.
No one has suffered as much and no one will suffer as much in the future.

@TallulahBetty DustyLee123 is just scare-mongering (as pointed out previously). One academic has talked about how that change in pension age would be needed to keep the ratio of workers to retired people the same and she is making out that it's the government's plan.

Well people, everyone, will have to get used to paying more taxes throughout their lives, even in retirement years, to pay for their pensions and healthcare for longer if they’re living longer then but don’t want to keep working until 67 or longer. We can’t expect to retire early, have years not working, but not expect to pay for it! Most people don’t even pay enough tax to cover the public services used whilst they’re working and earning, so are a net drain even before they retire!

Lots of statistics showing the ever widening gap between wages and housing costs as adjusted for inflation etc. It’s statistical fact that today’s younger workers are paying a greater proportion of their wages on rents or mortgages due to crazy house price inflation.

They’re also paying more student loan repayments and workplace pension deductions out of wages than previous generations.

It’s also fact that everyone is paying more utilities, council tax, water rates, etc than in the past.

Finally, statistics show that whilst minimum wages have increased beyond inflation, wages further up the scale, I.e. graduates, young professionals, etc havn’t and some have barely increased at all for many years, not even keeping up with inflation. Meaning differentials have fallen and continue to fall. Mostly affecting younger professional who often can’t afford to live where graduate jobs are based. A few of my sons graduate work colleagues had to live in hostels at the start of their working life as they simply couldn’t find any affordable flats not even room rentals!

They sound like claims more than facts. I was really looking for, y'know, evidence. Yes, people are paying more council tax now than they did in 1970, say, but they are also paying less rates. Can you think why? And you're admitting that wages at the lower end of the scale (where young people tend to start) have increased faster than inflation. You complain about pay differentials being reduced. How does greater wage equality mean the younger generation is being shafted?

You can Google for the statistics.

I said young professionals who ARE being shafted - the statistics of earnings etc for graduates and professionals clearly show little if any real growth over the years, so they are being shafted when rents and housing costs have massively increased, straight after being shifted by getting into £50k of debt at Uni when previous generations got their degrees for free!

Inflation was rampant in the 1970s.
Mortgage rates spiralled in the late 1980s
In the 1950s, food costs were a much higher proportion of income than now.
Unemployment was high in the 80s

You can't cherry pick what's an issue now and disregard what other generations have suffered.
No one is saying life today is easier, but every generation has its problems, just not the same ones

OK, so you can't back up your claims. That's fine. Which price index are you using to calculate real earnings? RPI? CPI? They both include rent so if real wages have gone up then they've gone up after taking account of rent.

You sound very bitter that economic differentials between the working class and the middle class have been eroded. I'm not. I think it's a good thing.

Completely agree with 100%.
I have no idea why they state pays such a huge amount into public sector pensions and it needs to stop asap.
As does retiring at 55. It''s unsustainable, ridiculous and always conveniently gets forgotten in the constant demands for extra pay on top of perfectly acceptable salaries. The public sector unions are conning people frankly.
I am not alking about firefighters and other jobs that rely on fitness and mobility, but jobs such as teaching, nursing and general civil service jobs.