Working to age 70 – the worst idea

By Rap Lewis

Raising the normal Social Security retirement age from 67, where it is currently headed, another three full years to age 70 may well be the worst single idea to emerge from the feverish national discussion about the federal budget deficit.

At a time when millions are in the streets of Europe to protest raising the retirement age from 60 to 62, making our working men and women hang in there even until age 67 is uncivilized. We cannot hold still for any further increase. At age 70, workers should already have been retired on full benefits for at least a decade

Social Security has never contributed one penny to the budget deficit. Its funding is separate and as it stands the program will remain solvent for almost 30 years. Even raising the retirement age to 90 wouldn’t address the budget deficit.

But any increase beyond 67 would mean a substantial reduction in the already modest benefit checks of every man and woman who retires after the effective date of the change.

Above all, a higher retirement age is cruel economic punishment to the millions of workers who, for many reasons, simply cannot continue grinding it out day after day anywhere close to the age of 70.

Data in the Current Population Survey and in the Occupational Information Network spell out the numbers who would be driven by the nature of their work into early retirement at reduced benefits. In 2009, about 6.5 million workers age 58 and older had physically demanding jobs, involving lifting, handling or moving objects, spending significant time standing, or doing other physically demanding work.

Another 5 million workers age 58 and older had jobs with difficult working conditions, including cramped working space, labor outdoors, exposure to contaminants or to abnormal temperatures, hazardous equipment, or excessive noise.

We’re talking about factory workers, nursing home workers, construction workers, hotel maids, coal miners and farm workers, among many difficult or dangerous occupations.

There are also millions trapped by the current recession in long-term unemployment, with uncertain prospects for ever working again. Among them are all those whose work experience is dated, already replaced by younger workers with the required newer skills.

As the recession drags on, instances of age discrimination multiply. Challenging such discrimination has just been made much more difficult by the U.S. Supreme Court, with a decision shifting the burden of proof to the worker.

Increases in life expectancy are used to rationalize a later retirement age. But life expectancy statistics need close scrutiny. The National Council of Women’s Organizations reports that “increased longevity is linked to income and education and does not mean that people are able to work longer before receiving their Social Security benefits.”

Over the last century, although life expectancy at birth has increased significantly for both men and women, a major part of the increase has been between birth and age 20.

Moreover, most of the improvement in life expectancy has occurred among higher-income and more educated men. Lower-income and less educated men have seen little or no change.

Women’s overall life expectancy has stagnated. Lower-income women have seen actual declines in life expectancy.

Under these circumstances, to extend the retirement age even one year – never mind to 70 -- is to impose cruel and indefensible punishment on millions who have committed no offense except the graying of hair and the multiple health problems that come with aging.