Time to get serious about 'retirement'

By JIM THOMPSON
HCP columnist

If you are of Judeo-Christian perspective, you may not struggle with this column as much as secularists may. I suspect, however, even if you are a dyed-in-the-wool secularist, I can at least persuade you the Bible has many good teachings.

In other words, you may not think them Holy, but nevertheless there is a lot of good advice in those pages. For instance, one can look at the Ten Commandments and take two perspectives, the first being they are great advice; the second that they are Holy Dictates you had better follow. If you can’t even get yourself into the “good advice” group, you can quit reading now, for the premises here will make no sense to you.

Not so long ago, in the United States we had “blue laws.” These were laws, dating from colonial times, prohibiting certain secular activities on Sunday (or the Sabbath, but usually Sunday).

It is believed they may have gotten their name from a set of laws of this nature published in colonial New Haven, Conn., on blue paper.

For you youngsters, these came down from those times and were in effect in some states until at least the early 1980s.

Various families, such as mine, practiced stiffer versions.

We fed livestock on Sunday and could go fishing, but never, ever did you mow the grass on Sunday.

Work in the fields took place only in the situation where extreme weather had forced you into Sunday work either to plant or harvest.

In 1881, Otto von Bismarck introduced the retirement age of 65 years old in Germany. He set a retirement age to counter the winds of socialism spreading through Europe.

He set it at 65 because almost no one lived that long. Throw the people a bone on which they can never chew—a pretty clever political move, wouldn’t you say?

Now, going back to the Bible, and, by the way, I have been reading it, having it taught and preached to me, for nearly 63 years now (but do not consider myself an expert), what does it say about time off from work?

Well, it says we are to not work on the Sabbath, or Sunday, pretty clearly in the Old Testament.

It speaks of the Year of Jubilee, or every 50th year as a year of freedom, a time of restoration, debt forgiveness, the enslaved set free and other amnesties. Sounds like something the modern world could use. It also speaks of the Sabbatical Year, every seven years, which is a year of rest.

So, what do we do in our modern, we-know-better-than-any-of-our-ancestors lives?

Well, we have pretty well blown up the Sabbath – the casual observer crossing this country couldn’t tell Sunday from any other day of the week.

If you followed the idea of the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee (and skipped them, accruing them for later on) by the time you were 65 you would be due nine or 10 years of rest.

I, personally, take it more serious than this. I can’t find anywhere in the Bible where it says thou shalt retire.

I don’t believe the concept is Biblical and I don’t believe it from a secular point of view, either.

I’ll be 63 this July, so I have reached an age where I can say with authority what I think should be the retirement age, if there is one.

So, here it is: 80. The age of 80 fits well with Bismarck’s idea, considering today’s longevity, and gives me comfort regarding the precepts of the Bible.

The 65 retirement age, as pertains to Social Security, is clearly unsustainable and indefensible.

The seniors in this country are going to have to take this bull by the horns and deal with it while they can.

The younger generations, those holding the seats of power, are going to be forced, from an economical viewpoint, to deal with it if we do not.

I don’t like their obvious solution – euthanasia. The rumblings have not hit our shores yet, but they are coming.

In Japan, almost one quarter of its 128 million people are 60 or older.

This is projected to grow to 40 percent over the next 50 years. Back on January 22 of this year, Taro Aso (age 72), Japan’s Finance Minister, said the elderly should “hurry up and die.”

Later in his remarks, he referred to elderly unable to feed themselves as “tube people.”

Now, I am not in favor, in my personal case, to extend life when there is no quality to it. However, in my family, I saw my mother enter a vegetative state as a result of pneumonia. It was very memorable – she went unconscious on the day Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 (I kid you not) and
regained consciousness on Valentine’s Day the next year – over 90 days later. (And she was never in a nursing home. When Medicare kicked her out of the hospital, Dad took her home).

She lived another six years, fairly productively, with my dad taking care of her.

So who is to say what to do in such cases? Further, I fully agree, one case does not make a trend.

But I digress.

The point here is the 65 retirement age makes no sense. And for those of you who say the government promised it to you, I say, ask the Native Americans about government promises.

I possess no great perspicacity, but I can tell you when I received my first paycheck in March 1970, 43 years ago, and saw the Social Security deduction. I said I will never see that money. It may be through my own choice, but so be it.

The point is, if we elderly don’t take on this subject and propose our own solutions, our juniors, in power with the right levers, are going to decide it for us, in ways perhaps unpleasant and not aligned with our personal value and belief systems.

Jim Thompson, formerly of Marshall, is a graduate of Hillsboro High School and the University of Cincinnati. He resides in Duluth, Ga., following decades of wandering the world, and is a columnist for The Highland County Press.