Early retirement at 47!

Peter333

Thanks for the responses.

I have to say though, that I haven't 'contradicted myself' at all. I think I just didn't word my posts very well sorry...

I said she retired at 47, but I never mentioned her retiring through ill health. I said she had a chronic illness, but I never mentioned her retiring through ill health.

She just said she retired at 47, and she didn't mention whether it was through ill health or not. That is why I said 'what if she didn't have a chronic illness? Could she retire at 47 then?' (Without having ill health as a cause to take the pension at 47?) I was just curious.

As I said, I wasn't contradicting myself, I was simply trying to figure out if there was a way to retire at 47, if she had NOT gone down the ill health route. According to most responses here, that is probably not possible, so it looks like that is what she did.

Thanks again everyone. It's now clear, and I have the answers I was looking for.

kidmugsy

When a woman says she's 47, need one believe it to be true?

OldBeanz

Only if you are a gentleman.

Pincher

You need to time travel to Greece 20 years ago.

I saw how Greeks were mad keen to get into the civil service, even in England, and didn't understand the cause of it. They were willing to send their children to the UK and pay university fees (couldn't get into Greek Universities, competition too fierce) for the sole purpose of qualifying for a civil service job.

Greek Civil Servants could retire at age 50, on a civil service pension that can exceed their working salary. Without ill health as an excuse.

Easy to do, when you run the Treasury, and can issue debt in Euros, and then expect the rest of Europe to bail you out. Like a rotting water melon and flies, sweet deal while it lasted.

MiserlyMartin

mgdavid wrote: »

Why appear to contradict yourself? You gave a fairly detailed sequence of events in post #1 which you now deny?

I understood what he meant. I think you were being picky for the sake of being picky - a British trait I find hugely annoying.

ohreally

Peter333 wrote: »

Please don't say 'wassit gotta do with your wife or you?!' We are just curious if this can be done. And if she could have retired at 47!

Why, are you stewing at the possibility?

mgdavid

MiserlyMartin wrote: »

I understood what he meant. I think you were being picky for the sake of being picky - a British trait I find hugely annoying.

then you're a good guesser. I did for a reason say 'appear...'.
My background is one where detail and accuracy are paramount, and I have discovered that life is a lot simpler when this is followed; where it appears to not be the case, I ask questions. You carry on being annoyed, it doesn't affect me !

RichandJ

mgdavid wrote: »

then you're a good guesser. I did for a reason say 'appear...'.
My background is one where detail and accuracy are paramount, and I have discovered that life is a lot simpler when this is followed; where it appears to not be the case, I ask questions. You carry on being annoyed, it doesn't affect me !

Ditto. I've had a hugely frustrating, irritating, annoying week so far, and it's only Wednesday morning, because of people's seeming inability to either understand or articulate basic English.

We calculate people's pensions at work. Accuracy & lucidity should, you would think, be prized. But no, it's all about ticking boxes & post stats. Then again the ultimate parent company is Yank & the consultant culture they love, instead of actually managing, does give rise to this kind of b0ll0x.

Eric_the_half_a_bee

MiserlyMartin wrote: »

I understood what he meant. I think you were being picky for the sake of being picky - a British trait I find hugely annoying.

Isn't that a little picky of you?

kidmugsy

OldBeanz wrote: »

Only if you are a gentleman.

No true gentleman boasts of being a gentleman.