Shoe by Gary Brookins and Susie MacNelly for November 27, 2013

Not fair!!! Heh, heh.

Yeah, that’s what I figured.

It’s going to be 66 for me!

I guess 105 is better than a mandatory death requirement when you reach 70. The way things are going these days…

When Prussian Chancellor Otto von Bismarck invented social security, he chose 65 as the age because hardly anyone lived that long.

They raise it to 105 and they don’t have to worry because very, very few would ever make it and they have an interest free bank to draw from to pay for ‘cousin’ Mike’s street to be repaved and ‘aunt’ Susie’s bridge to be rebuild not to mention the 3rd home in Aruba !!

It would be better if they lowered it to 60, remove the compensation limit and stop counting capital gains differently than wages.

Amen brother. I was actually told by one place i applied that I was “psychologically unqualified” to unload grocery trucks.

exactly!

All ya have to do is get 2 back surgeries, a triple bypass, then let them stuff a defibulater in ya

Ouch !!!!!! 8^(

Shouldn’t start something you can’t finish.

Next they will stop Social Security Disability and Survivors’ benefits. Why should they get money, let them starve and/or freeze……

Don’t give the morons in Washington any ideas!!!

That’s why I took early retirement…so I knew I’d get at least some benefits.

My Dad “retired” at 65…but worked until he was 87…after 72, he could make as much as he could and still draw full benefits…which had to be re-figured annually to include his extra earnings.

What.

Yes, age discrimination is alive and well, but employers try to camouflage it.