[Eclectic21]

Is there a definition somewhere that tells what the difference "normal" and "legal" retirement ages?


Cheers

 

[Eclectic21]

It isn't accurate as the legal age, because French President Macron is meeting opposition from labor for wanting to raise the legal age from 62 to 64 ...

This chart seems to have closer to current and what is being proposed.

It seems Denmark is currently close to age 65 and is moving towards age 75. France shows as age 65, which Bloomberg says is 62.

It seems a bit inconsistent but I haven't dug out the full details though.


Cheers

 

[Eclectic21]

There is no "legal" age for retirement in Canada ...

Which is one of the factors of why I am wondering what the OP or where ever the title "Norman or "legal" retirement age" means by these two terms.

As for the "normal" retirement age, ask Mr. Vettese, the mathematical expert on life expectancy. That "age" retirement goal post keeps changing depending on which political party is in charge or who pays him to say what.

Personally ... for "normal retirement age", I am more likely to care about the age that a reduction to what's been earned will apply to the private/public pension that is in effect when I retire.

Which might be the same or different than the OP's title is about.


Cheers

 

[Eclectic21]

There used to be mandatory retirement at age 65 in Canada, but that was removed years ago. I remember people forced to retire at work who weren't happy about it ...

Sure ... though some at work who are working past 65 say they are not happy they will have the negative parts with no positive parts by continuing to work. Specifically, they have to keep paying into the pension while losing RRSP contribution room but the payout will not be increasing.


Cheers

 

[Eclectic21]

... so in effect, it's different for "everyone" literally for every individual.

Where "normal" means the age the pension no longer reduces the credits earned, it is the same for everyone in the plan.

Whether the individual retires at or above that age or below it for that particular pension, is different for everyone.

... Just because Joe down the street has retired from working doesn't mean you should too or that Joe wants to work 'til he drops doesn't mean you do to.

You do what's best for you and all those stats are nothing but noise.

Regardless of what someone else does ... I expect few will want to have their pension reduced by 20% by retiring before the "normal retirement age" of the pension plan.


Cheers

 

[Eclectic21]

...Now what's wrong with paying aka participating more into a private pension (if one is lucky enough to be in one now)?

Anyhow, for someone who is so focused about the money aspect as to whether to work or not in retirement age, then that's sad.

Perhaps you did not understand what the complain was?

Option One
Retire at normal retirement age in the private pension plan and collect pension.

Option Two
Continue working for five more years and pay thousands a year into the private pension each year then retire five years later.

Regardless of the option chosen, the private pension pays $x each month. The only difference is the $x being paid cost 5 x the thousands of dollars contributions more.


For someone funding their retirement from their RRSP, it would be like seeing all the investments bought in the five years of extra work being a total loss (i.e. RRSP value five years later is the same despite during the five years of contributions).


Cheers

 

[Eclectic21]

... I would say "traditional" retirement is an age range between 60-65 ...That's kinda my frame of reference.

So is the chart using your frame of reference across many countries?


Cheers