Retirement Age Policy
Written by Pham Thi Le Na
Timing: 10 minutes
The issue whether government should set a limit on the retirement age remains controversial. Some people believe that there would be infeasible for different people who have different needs while others claim regardless of distinctions in people’s priorities, this policy guarantees fairness for all. I agree with the former view.
It is undeniable that the nature of work has a big say over people’s length of working time. While some builders, cleaners find that they can only work till the age of forty for their assiduous and tedious labor, politicians who gain experience through time can only reach their zenith in their sixties or seventies, as in the case of Hilary Clinton or Geogre. W. Bush. As for writers whose inspiration springs up at any time of their life, whether young or old, the limitation on their age retirement would stifle their creativity and render them less discouraged to pursue this career.
Another reason for the absolute impossibility in the implementation of this policy is the variance in people’s priorities. Unlike women who may be concerned with their families rather than their own jobs and cut-short their career by staying at home and taking care of their families, some scientists are able to dedicate their entire life to the cause of giving birth to revolutionary ideas and would feel unfair if they are supposed to say goodbye to their unfinished dreams.
Equally important, the current state of health and economic scenario of the whole nation should be taken into consideration when it comes to the decision of setting age retirement. In case of people handicapped, it would be far-fetching for them to prolong their career till the required age, as opposed to others who struggle with cancer and are reluctant to terminate their desired career. Regarding the picture of workforce of each nation, say, Vietnam where young labor is redundant, this policy is workable. However, Japan is likely to
Timing: 10 minutes
The issue whether government should set a limit on the retirement age remains controversial. Some people believe that there would be infeasible for different people who have different needs while others claim regardless of distinctions in people’s priorities, this policy guarantees fairness for all. I agree with the former view.
It is undeniable that the nature of work has a big say over people’s length of working time. While some builders, cleaners find that they can only work till the age of forty for their assiduous and tedious labor, politicians who gain experience through time can only reach their zenith in their sixties or seventies, as in the case of Hilary Clinton or Geogre. W. Bush. As for writers whose inspiration springs up at any time of their life, whether young or old, the limitation on their age retirement would stifle their creativity and render them less discouraged to pursue this career.
Another reason for the absolute impossibility in the implementation of this policy is the variance in people’s priorities. Unlike women who may be concerned with their families rather than their own jobs and cut-short their career by staying at home and taking care of their families, some scientists are able to dedicate their entire life to the cause of giving birth to revolutionary ideas and would feel unfair if they are supposed to say goodbye to their unfinished dreams.
Equally important, the current state of health and economic scenario of the whole nation should be taken into consideration when it comes to the decision of setting age retirement. In case of people handicapped, it would be far-fetching for them to prolong their career till the required age, as opposed to others who struggle with cancer and are reluctant to terminate their desired career. Regarding the picture of workforce of each nation, say, Vietnam where young labor is redundant, this policy is workable. However, Japan is likely to