retirement age and life expectancy

ninky_2

with the state retirement age set to rise (for a female like me it will have increased about 8 year in my lifespan i think) i thought i'd look into life expectancy relative to retirement age. initial findings are not good. this study suggests if you retire at 50 on average you will live to 86 whilst if you retire at 65 your will live to 67.

the conservatives are looking to increase the state retirement age rise even sooner.:eek:

http://old.swivel.com/graphs/show/13840305

tanith

I wonder what happens when the age of retirement rises to 67/8 :eek:

Really2

ninky wrote: »

this study suggests if you retire at 50 on average you will live to 86 whilst if you retire at 65 your will live to 67.

I would say retierment at 50 indicates wealth and thus access to a good lifestyle etc etc,
65 is a state retierment and will generally would have had a lower standard of life thus life expectancy also.

Cant say I agree with the 65 retierment figure though TBH unless the study was in a deprived area?

Really2

Ah based on boeing workers.

So it is comparing those working with chemicals on shop floors (65) against mangers (50+) and office workers (50+ -65).;)

It's all about the money and the type of work. Engineering can expose you to some fairly nasty stuff over your lifetime.

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

I just wonder how raising the retirement age will affect the amount of people in the older age groups going onto sickness benefits though.
I should imagine they would soar.
We may be finding new drugs etc but what about age related ailments such as arthritis and circulatory/heart problems and the like.
They don't seem to have found much of a solution to these over the years and until you get the crippling pain of arthritis you just won't understand how it can affect you.
Are the government going to bring about miracle cures along with later retirement ages.
Somethings we can't control and no matter how clever we think we are ageing is one of them.

Really2

MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »

I just wonder how raising the retirement age will affect the amount of people in the older age groups going onto sickness benefits though.
I should imagine they would soar.

That is a very good point.

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

I would say retierment at 50 indicates wealth and thus access to a good lifestyle etc etc,
65 is a state retierment and will generally would have had a lower standard of life thus life expectancy also.

Cant say I agree with the 65 retierment figure though TBH unless the study was in a deprived area?

What about about those dole lifers, are they going going to be the new Centenarians

Check how long you are going to live :eek:

http://www.livingto100.com/

88 for me.

Really2

StevieJ wrote: »

What about about those dole lifers, are they going going to be the new Centenarians

Check how long you are going to live :eek:

http://www.livingto100.com/

88 for me.

92, which is a surprise. Best not get a job at Boeing then.

lemonjelly

I seem to recall (going back a few years) that there was a great disparity in life expectancy between the sexes.

Men worked up to the age of retirement, & following retirement would die within 5 years, or developed significant health problems, such as dementia. It was believed that the "shock" of retirement, & the impact on their self image led to health issues. They weren't used to the lack of routine etc, being at home.

Women were used to being at the home (like I say, I am going back, & at the time I'm recalling the majority of women were "homemakers" or whatever they called them:o) were used to being at home, & were outliving their husbands for many years.

Personally I hope/aim to reduce the amount of time I am working as I age if possible to avoid something like this.

JonnyBravo

90

That'll do me.

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

92, which is a surprise. Best not get a job at Boeing then.

I will have to cut down on the beer :eek:

Did you live longer?
No but it seemed like it