Originally Posted by
billtaters
Increasing the retirement age helps those at the top in the short and long term. Most of us lose in the short and long term, which is why most of us are against raising the age. Eliminating the retirement age, as you suggest, skews this even further and turns our profession into something closer to what the Flight Attendants get to "enjoy." Think of it like a 401k, where you delay contributions at the front end only to get a couple years of additional contributions at the back end. The numbers have to be very favorable for you to come out ahead overall in this scenario.
Raising the age helps those at the top. It only helps the rest if they work longer than they are required and probably want now. And it definitely stagnates progression for the junior people now. I think most of the top people will take the extra time, and/or the extra years on disability, paid for by the rest. Although I would be okay with 67, I understand that there is probably a sizable majority overall, and definitely in the more junior group that are against it. I was not against 65, I knew it would hold me back, but at the same time I felt there was no way I could be ready to retire at 60 after starting later. And I am absolutely sure that the whole LEPF is a big fat lie, anybody in favor of 67 is looking at their bank account or does not like their significant other. In the same vein, those who oppose do it for themselves more than for safety because the geezers are too old (not against a more strict medical, and huge LTD premium increases/eligibility changes for the older peeps if 67 happens). And I am personally not swayed by the whole keeping the status quo is in and of itself more morally just than asking for change, but that is me...