Bah! You's people are all workaholics. I have worked hard all my life, still am. Time for the young ones to take over so I can go fishing and camping while my bones still allow it!

** And the reason the “young” will not have jobs in the future is the luddite attitudes of one-eyed conservationists and greenies who get into political office and then make us all run around protecting the planet by developing inefficient cottage industries, promoting a subsistence lifestyle and doing nothing in terms of real trade and commerce because, “ships use fossil fuel”. **

Well that's one way of looking at it I suppose. But wouldn't you agree that we humans can't really sustain our current way of life, sucking the planet dry of all natural resources until there's none left? Do you believe we can continue on this current path for ever?

I'm not a greeny in the political, luddite sense, but a little conservation can go a long way to us enjoying nature and planet earth for all it's worth. Ten billions tons of concrete and tar are not what I call progress I'm afraid!

Perhaps the young ones have newer ways of seeing life that's not compatible with yours? One where they can have a life and some fun too. So many selfish people on this rock, sad really.

'to current standards, using ODBC and SQL and other advanced computer tools.'

That's pretty funny. You've surged into the late 80s!

"'to current standards, using ODBC and SQL and other advanced computer tools.'

That's pretty funny. You've surged into the late 80s!"

not at all... when I go around and see how relatively primative many businesses manage their data...

there is a massive difference between the "cutting-edge" of technology and the weight of applications behind that edge..

you may choose to scorn my comment but I am making more than a very healthy living from my "surge into the late 80's" and will doubtless continue until I myself am well into my 80's, if need be.

And I will still be seeing no competition from the "young-lions" who pretend to know all but have so little applied or practical knowledge about real business, that they can only exist in a vacuum of their self importance and subsidised by government handouts.

I found the raising of the retirement age liberating. I came to the conclusion some years ago that I wouldn't be retiring at 65 because it would be both boring, and not financially smart. But I am concerned that there is a widespread attitude that once you are past a particular age you are no good.

By increasing the retirement age the government may well lead to a change in mindset where we value older workers more because it's officially OK to be older and at work.

I think it will have benefits well beyond a small saving to the budget.

Aren't you guys mostly missing the point. Raising the retirement age has NOTHING to do with giving people the choice to keep working, which already exists as many of the posters answers attest.

No, raising retirment age is about preventing people from accessing either the pension or superannuation. That's all, and doing so at a time when simultaneiously giving a raise to current pensioners is really just stealing from the the voters of one generation (who won't feel that pain until it affects them) in order to buy the votes of those who feel the benefit now. What justification can their be that makes it fair for today's wanna retirees to be allowed to access the pension/super at 65 but not those born a few years later?

Absolutely, for obvious demographic reasons we need people to work for more of their lives, but the right and fair way to do it is to create incentives for people to do so voluntarily (both for the employees and employers), in the same way that people were given incentives to contribute to super, which is essentially aimed at solving the same problem (financing a decent standard of living for the elderly).

Shame on Rudd.

In posing the question I expected that views on retirement would be diverse but that's the point.It is dependant on the worker and his or her occupation, health, capacity to enjoy retirement and so on. But we have had the figure of 65 as a standard for quite a while.If a person wanted to retire earlier, he did.Forgoing the best outcome in the amount of his pension was the only penalty.I can't see that it makes much difference.