• FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Mostly because that’s another fight. I picked SS’s retirement age mostly because it’s already established as a reasonable age- this otherwise basically arbitrary age is already set so it simplifies the convo, that’s all.

    • Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Everything is always a fight. You’ll be lucky if the age isn’t boosted to 70 or 75 by the time you retire. It’s already happening as the whole world slides right. Even if you don’t want to fight, other more powerful groups are fighting against you with everything they have.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        So? What’s your point?

        I fail to see how any of that is relevant to an upper age limits in congress.

        Sorry, that’s an entirely separate conversation.

        Again, the only reason I put it there is because it’s already an accepted age for retirement. That’s it. Which simplifies things by preempting the whole debate about where to put it.

        Because that debate derails the conversation- every damn time. Currently, in point of fact… by you.