Putting an age limit to when a worker can retire is simply academic nonsense. Age should have nothing to do with retirement. I say, as soon as someone has worked for say, 45-47 years then they are entitled to exit the workforce & receive a pension or whatever some ignorant mutts in the public service want to call it.
Physical work is shortening peoples' lives so they deserve better than work themselves into a split-second retirement before dropping off the perch.
I'm in my early 60's & have worked since the age of 14, I don't think I could survive being in my work until 70. That's not what I'm paying taxes & Super for.
The whole show is just such a pardox of idiocy & incompetence & corruption. Bludge in the early years of your life & you'll find you'll have to work longer till you get to 45 or 47 years of working years. What could be simplier than that ? Or we could have a system of so much pension for so many years worked.
I like to think I'm saving for my retirement & not for others".

The federal public service has made a virtue out of 'boning' older workers.

It isn't as though the 'Boomer' bulge, which covers a span of 18 years(!), wasn't known about when the the federal public service started its sledging and massive retrenchments of older workers.

Actually Ludwig and Rehctub have pointed out what will happen.
It is just that they didn't really dig deeper into the effect.
Immigration will reduce because the government will be forced to
acknowledge that more people cannot be afforded and as Rehctub pointed
out we will not have spare money.Our GDP will sag into negative value
and like most European countries will have high unemployment.
Government will experiment with money printing because Hockey's
austerity will have failed and his successor will spend more borrowed
money.

Just like these two policies failed in Europe and the US they will
fail here also and the situation will be desperate.

This situation will completely redraw the political scene.
If any political party tries to keep the politically correct policies
intact they will suffer the political never never land.

People will be forced onto their own resources and everything will become local.

Dear Bazz,

<<People will be forced onto their own resources and everything will become local.>>

I say Amen to that.

It will give the younger generations a healthier future, but what about us who are too old to become farmers and the like?

Meanwhile, we can't keep our savings in bags of rice - because the rats will get them; but otherwise it is inflation which eats our savings. If as you say, the day of reckoning will not happen all at once and massive money-printing will occur in between, then we will lose all the fruits we accumulated over years upon years of slavery and disciplined frugality, planning to live on our own resources, as should.

Have you any solutions, or is it just "tough luck"?

Well Yuyutsu,
I think it will depend on the type of community in which you live.
Some communities will help their elderly if those elderly make some
effort to help others, eg they could look after children while the
mothers are working in the community garden or in some local business.
Child care centres will be defunct as unaffordable.
Some elderly with technical abilities could repair appliances in a
local repair shop.
A retired carpenter could work in a local furniture shop.
The Men's Shed movement could become a centre for problem solving in
return for vegies etc.

In situations like this local currencies like Totnes Pounds, would probably take off.
We have seen situations where communities which did not seem to exist
previously suddenly come into being when an emergency occurs.
That is the concern for your fellow man that surfaces when needed.

Now that is an optimistic view I agree, but look at the membership
of the bush fire brigades and the SES and many other voluntary groups.

Not everybody ages the same, If you are going to have coronary problems it will begin after 40 and before 70. And mostly between the hours of 6 to 8.30 am.
Some come to dementia of varying degrees after 65.
Most will be on some kind of medication by the time they become 65.
Some drivers lose their quick thinking skills before others.
I don,t think a longer longevity has anything to do with a persons ability to work. If you are going to work longer it would best not to change the type of work you are accustomed to. And there you may not have that choice.
Viagra is handy but not for people with heart problems, it may even bring on a heart problem.
Sixty seven is the upper limit but then it will be limited.
Seventy is stupid, and irresponsible for both the person and employer.
It takes a dingbat like Abbott to come up with these initiatives.