Vote Tory and you are voting to work until you are 66!

[HeadingNorth]

It would be a lie if "Tories will make everyone work a year longer" was stated but as it isn't

 

But it is. You specifically claimed that voting in the Tory party meant people would have to work until 66 instead of 65. That claim is false; most people are going to have to work until 68, regardless of who wins this election.

[Pooch_1]

But it is. You specifically claimed that voting in the Tory party meant people would have to work until 66 instead of 65. That claim is false; most people are going to have to work until 68, regardless of who wins this election.

 

This is true ... Depending on the year you was born, I think after 1965 (I may be wrong with this date) Everyone would have to work a year longer.

So if you were born in 1965, you would have to work until age 66 male, and age 61 female.

 

If you were born in 1966, then you would have to work until you was aged 67 male, 62 female.

 

And so on............

[Titanic99]

But it is. You specifically claimed that voting in the Tory party meant people would have to work until 66 instead of 65. That claim is false; most people are going to have to work until 68, regardless of who wins this election.

 

Here is what I said:

 

"One of the interesting aspects of last night’s debate was confirmation from the Tories that we will all have to wait until we are 66 before we can claim our pension."

 

But put more bluntly, if I wake up to a Tory Government on Friday I will be working until I am 66, if I wake up to a Liberal or Labour Government I will be working until I am 65.

 

The first option does not appeal to me and I fail to see how it can make any financial savings. But there again that nice Mr Osborne has got his sums wrong on this one before now.

[Tony]

You don't see how it can make any financial saving?

 

Did you miss the Labour announcement that the state pension age was being pushed back to 68 from 2044?

[Titanic99]

You don't see how it can make any financial saving?

 

Did you miss the Labour announcement that the state pension age was being pushed back to 68 from 2044?

 

I can see it if you have full (as in what is deemed as full employment) employment as when the policy change was announced.

 

I can't see it under the Tories as they never have full employment.

[Tony]

What you see is wrong.

 

How do you feel about Labour's Pension Act that increased the retirement age for women from 60 to 68. That's a 20% extension to their working life.

[Titanic99]

What you see is wrong.

 

How do you feel about Labour's Pension Act that increased the retirement age for women from 60 to 68. That's a 20% extension to their working life.

 

Explain to me why what I'm seeing is wrong.

 

I think it was right to allign Men and Womens retirement age and wrong to put it up to 68 for future generations.

[Tony]

So what's your beef with the Conservative policy to accelerate it to reduce Labour's deficit before UK PLC goes bust?

 

Shouldn't you be blaming Labour for introducing it in the first place, then blaming them for creating the deficit that necessitated the Conservative policy?

[Titanic99]

So what's your beef with the Conservative policy to accelerate it to reduce Labour's deficit before UK PLC goes bust?

 

Shouldn't you be blaming Labour for introducing it in the first place, then blaming them for creating the deficit that necessitated the Conservative policy?

 

Quite simply I don't see how it reduces it in times of high unemployment, I can see how in times of full employment that it can save money but not when there's a couple of million unemployed.

 

Perhaps you could explain how the savings come about, George Osborne got it wrong the first time he calculated it.

[Tony]

No, you are claiming that they are wrong. Explain yourself.