Sorry Don... This is a bit of a ramble...(Doing a couple of other tasks at the same time) and my slant is no less than others choose to do in their chosen direction

If all those who are in work have to work an extra year, then it also cuts down the number, and starting in employment times, of the young.There would be less vacancies initially. (Maybe a bit off topic but I was watching some programmes about railways in the 50'-60's. There were so many young people in employment 15 years old and above (ROSLA was 1974?) in just the railway industry alone...(they must mostly be retired now) who started as apprentices) There are just too few jobs for young people as it is. Earlier retirement and then huge scale recruitment of the young would be, IMHO, a better gain. The social gain would outweigh any losses and probably save more than it costs. In employment the young would earn (at a reasonable wage I would hope), they would not need the benefits that are given out now, nor the support and possibly not the teenage pregnancies or drug related activities. They would re-discover pride and reward in working and doing a job which is at present missing for many of them. They would pay taxes, nat ins etc into the pot. They would increase manufacturing output, skills, knowledge base and would be spenders of their disposable income generating huge high street revenue in many areas.

Work till you die.... AN exageration for alarmist sake, yet it wasn't so long ago it was true in Britain and as you can see below there are already plans afoot to increase working life. (But no less than..."Are you expecting all those who are working between the ages of 65, and 66 to drop dead then?

Who'd have thought one year extra would be lethal?" As a retort)

With regard to the planned increases in retirement age..There is nothing new here. The age at which people will get the state pension is already determined. If you are 40 you need to work until you are 67 if you are 30 you need to work until you are 67 if you are 20 you will need to work until you are 68 !!(Check with DWP pension age calculator) For many these extra years could be a death knell.

There are many jobs which lead to burn out !! It might be relatively easy standing in a shop or a library or even some factories, there are less demanding jobs. Of course if you are in one of the elite professions,(Mp's, legal, civil service etc) then life is generally easy any way. Police was retirement at 55 (Now 60 and 65), Military retire similarly though high rank officers can continue but you can retire with much less service; officers after 16 years and ordinary forces after 22 years.But retire at 55(generally......going to make them stay in the army then David?)

Teachers,many of them get burnt out, nurses, doctors etc, etc and it isn't just the professions. I've known brickies struggling at 55 knackered from hard labour as well as miners and other manual workers...the extra year could mean death.

"You also apparently missed the bit where he said that top wage earners would eventually have to have their salaries approved by the chancellor if they exceeded that of the Prime Minister, which would knock on to lower pensions." (Is that the politics of greed and envy?)

Actually I didn't miss it, but I gave it little thought of merit. What he was saying in oblique terms was that as PM and Co he was going to be the top wage earner !! Anyone else would have to ask if they could have more money than him. (Can you seriously see the boss of network rail, the boss of the BBC going up and asking to keep their present salaries? Not a chance !! What is going to happen when the boss of Tory controlled Buckingham county council on £220,000 a year gets told.....sorry mate you've got a pay cut after his pay freeze? It won't work, it won't wash and it won't be carried through. These people would go to the private sector with it's huge rewards (for failure) such as banking etc. (The Tory friendship club in the city is always there)

If you have read my posts you will know that I have always thought working towards equality was a good thing, greed over care for others bad. I have experience of the Tories, on a more personal level than I wish to discuss here and I don't trust them for their self centrered, divisive, ruling class attitude that generally pervades and will eventually rise again to show the old Tory is still there. Unlike new labour which changed from left to middle right(Sickeningly), the Tories have little place to move to. They will certainly not move to anything left of where they are now. I do not think they can move much further to the right, past Thatcher anyway. Their creed will always remain the same.

You will also know I have nothing good to say about B Liar and express disapointment as to how things have turned out for the ordinary people of this country.

And as for Cameron. The only thing he lacks is real power, he already has the money !! (£30,000,000 is enough to last anyone a lifetime, ask BLiar and his greedy Mrs!)