Velocipede

Because in just 9 days foreign pilots over the age of 60 will be able to exercise the privileges of their certificates in US airspace. US pilots will be denied the same privileges by US law. This is unfair and UnAmerican to boot.
Additionally, there is some question that the Supremecy clause of the US Constitution requires that all US laws and TREATIES are the supreme law of the land. That means the ICAO treaty age limit would supplant the FAA regulation, if you were to adhere to this particular opinion.


Not necessarily. Granted, some will exercise their option to fly until they are 65. Many more will not. I suspect there are plenty who will go until 62 to bridge the gap between mandatory retirement and Social Security/Medicare. Those of us fortunate enough to have contract language specifying Age 60 as the normal retirement age will have no incentive to fly past that age, unless there are personal reasons to do so. I, for one, will not.

Again, you're a victim of faulty reasoning. This is a generalization that does not take into consideration several factors...increased Medical retirements, increased downgrades to the right seat due to performance errors, more 'early' retirements due to the increasing stress of the job vs. declining pay rates. The bottom line for most of the young guys who are against the change is "This will delay MY upgrade!"

Sadly, that line of reasoning is even MORE self-centered than that of those arguing for the change. Your career will be extended for 5 years as well, remember that. Just my opinion, but most of those who do elect to go past Age 60 will pull the plug at 62. That give you 3 ADDITIONAL years in the left seat.

Ever consider that?