FabSwingers.com forum: 65 plus

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

It's alright the government saying everyone now living longer ,and expect us to work another year or more, yet l'm worn out working hard all my life in a tough physical job , got to wait a year for a hard earned pension.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orthern StarsCouple
over a year ago

Durham

It's crap isn't it. Work hard all your life to maybe enjoy just a few years of active retirement if you're lucky. We are trying to work hard, save money (that's the hardest part) and hopefully ease back our work load when we are 60.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *usie pTV/TS
over a year ago

taunton

The swindling fookers let us work the best part of 50 years on the pretence of retiring at 65 then when you nearly get there move the goal posts LOL, but you going to need a lot more than the state pension to live in any kind of comfort.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I mean it's shit. But or also makes sense. In general the population is getting older, and is healthier now at 65 than when the retirement age was set.

In an ideal world we could all retire at 50 but its only gonna creep up for the foreseeable

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *host63Man
over a year ago

Bedfont Feltham

60 next year and I work a physically demanding job. The retirement age went from 65 to 66 to 68. For a state pension of less than 9k a year. Even with retirement plans I will barely make it and will need some kind of lob.

The tories are hateful. Big payouts and contracts for them and theor rich mates and they resent the people who work and pay taxes all gheor lives every little thing.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Im going to take each day as it comes ,cant get my head round it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There will be no pension around when I get to that age, accepted the fact I'll be working until death.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

worked since i was 15 after school then started full time employment @ 16 ...now ive been informed not long ago my retirement age is 67 .... ffs . they dont look after the hard workers , keep you working to pay for those that dont ...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *andyfloss2000Woman
over a year ago

ashford

I've got 8 months till my retirement at 66 will only have state pension but I'm not staying on work! I need a rest! I do a very physical job! Plus cycling there and back starting at 4 in morning! X

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

bloody hell .. well done you xx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Depending on when you were born some women got to work til they are 70 ffs.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *usie pTV/TS
over a year ago

taunton

Oh my goodness candyfloss will you be able to manage on the pension alone, and more importantly lets hope you don't go to seed with out all that daily physical exertion lol.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *andyfloss2000Woman
over a year ago

ashford

"Oh my goodness candyfloss will you be able to manage on the pension alone, and more importantly lets hope you don't go to seed with out all that daily physical exertion lol."

We will all go to seed eventually no doubt! But I'm doing pretty good for my age imo! And there will b plenty of physical exercise going on! In and out of the bedroom! Cycle rides walks! Have 2 dogs! Gardening! Plus I've put down for an allotment! Might have to wait for someone to die to get one though! x

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *r TriomanMan
over a year ago

Chippenham Malmesbury area

17 years ago when I was in the Army, we had to retire (excluding officers) after 22 years of service, the explanation for this was, given the nature of the job, a soldier is pretty much burnt out by then; making people in physical jobs work to 67 is madness.

This strategy puts people at risk of personal injury; as such, this adds an additional cost to the already struggling NHS.

The government doesn't save any money, unless, some bean counter has calculated that this approach means that some people in certain jobs will, due to having work longer, die earlier... Ker-ching!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *andyfloss2000Woman
over a year ago

ashford

"17 years ago when I was in the Army, we had to retire (excluding officers) after 22 years of service, the explanation for this was, given the nature of the job, a soldier is pretty much burnt out by then; making people in physical jobs work to 67 is madness.

This strategy puts people at risk of personal injury; as such, this adds an additional cost to the already struggling NHS.

The government doesn't save any money, unless, some bean counter has calculated that this approach means that some people in certain jobs will, due to having work longer, die earlier... Ker-ching!"

Not nessasarily some yes! But I do a very physical job and am in finner fettle than some of co workers half my age! Addmited slower now but more than able to do the job! But yes some won't be at same age! X

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iman2100Man
over a year ago

Glasgow

It would be lovely to maintain the retirement age the same as the "boomer generation" but that is simply not possible.

It may seem a blunt instrument to draw a line at one age of say 66 or 67 but given the variability of health and fitness what else is possible?

By 66 many will have already died or will have had medical retirements, whilst others, like our lovely Candyfloss2000, continue to defy aging.

All I would say as a retired man is ... Make absolutely sure you have a good pension. The State pension alone is NOT enough!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *usie pTV/TS
over a year ago

taunton

Employers now have to pay in big money to compulsory pension schemes, no bad thing probably but I do wonder who keeps an eye on these schemes to make sure they are being managed correctly and they are not paying all the money to big fat greedy directors.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Maxwell comes to mind on that one

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *andyfloss2000Woman
over a year ago

ashford

"It would be lovely to maintain the retirement age the same as the "boomer generation" but that is simply not possible.

It may seem a blunt instrument to draw a line at one age of say 66 or 67 but given the variability of health and fitness what else is possible?

By 66 many will have already died or will have had medical retirements, whilst others, like our lovely Candyfloss2000, continue to defy aging.

All I would say as a retired man is ... Make absolutely sure you have a good pension. The State pension alone is NOT enough!!

It will have to be enough for me as the only other option will b continue working! Which I'm just not doing! I've worked my entire adult life like others here have I'm sure! And am due my retirement! Although I can and do get up at 2 45 in the morning to cycle to work and run at 100 miles an hour with a home shopping cart! I don't want to! My dear old dad took early retirement at 60 and had 8 years doing his own thing till he popped his clogs! If need b I shall take a lodger or French students again to make ends meet! X

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread