Whoever advocates to lower SocSec to 50 will win the nomination in 2016, but...

[TheKentuckian]

32. That is already the way it is because 50 year olds have experience, obligations, and time in

to expect living wages and decent overall compensation. They also cost more to insure, generally would accumulate more paid time off, and probably came up in much more friendly environments which mean higher expectations of employers which means younger workers are cheaper and easier to dictate to.

The retirement age has moved to 67 from 65, I see no indication this has made it any easier for older workers, in fact for most all it is doing is cutting their lifetime benefits because they are forced into early retirement. Many are just holding on desperately trying to somehow make it to Medicare.

Increasing the retirement age has not extended the viability of workers not one bit, it just further glut the job market while making the entire working age population more desperate with more folks for fewer and fewer positions.

Yes older workers are being hit harder, making them try to hold on for as long as possible with no income or desperately scrambling for extra years so that the lucky few in demand don't feel so old is silly.

The jobs aren't there and are far more likely to further diminish than transition to desperate, all hands on deck need.

We need to provide for an orderly transition from the current paradigm. Lowering the age of eligibility for retirement benefits is a perfectly rational plank in any such plan. Some folks will continue to churn along just like they always have should they have the opportunity, the body, the mind, and inclination most who don't fit into that Venn diagram will be able to at least get by with some level of dignity.

My job isn't physical at all and I am very doubtful I will be functional at it at 70 and 60 seems to be pushing it beyond plausibility too. In fact, by mid 50's it will be too much to keep up with the pace, stress, and changes it is a tall order now in my early forties and I am pretty well seasoned now compared to the mean. This Is an office job, labor just makes the conversation stupid and willfully cruel.

In another life, I hired lots of retirees and preferred them a lot of times because it can show in your work that you are there because you want to be rather than you have to be so this isn't about ageism but about the reality of the labor market, the ruthless levels of efficiency, and the impact of technology on both.

We advance this to deal with reality, propping up the self esteem of the lucky few that don't end up on the scrap heap is not really a big part of the calculation besides all of those kids already see you and even me as over the hill, potentially in their way, and desperately holding on anyway.

I can still out work them and have a healthy amount of answers so maybe I'm not yet seen as needed to be culled from the herd but I know I can't keep this up for thirty years, I think by 55ish everyone is chewed up and spit out below the board level. Maybe I'm in the no company for old men but this ain't my first rodeo, older folks are almost always doing entry level crap because they are either desperate enough to take it if they can get it or are just around for shits and giggles with a side of money to blow.

It is my preference to help folks fit the latter rather than the former, if you don't want to be about door number one then you have to be talking about exploding the demand for labor while making minds, bodies, and spirits capable of working longer which requires a hell of a lot more than pointing to a longevity increase.