[epoxia]

You can concoct these make believe hypotheticals, or you can look at countries where this is the reality (South Korea; high elderly poverty), and how there is no "elderly employee accident crisis". Whether it is right, moral, just etc. is the issue. I would just say to not wait until retirement to "live your life".

[8fingerlouie]

What does the unemployment statistics say about craftsmen in the age bracket 60-70 ? Or any other line of work ?

Many craftsmen in Denmark are working contracts where they get paid more the faster they finish the job, and nobody wants a 70 year old dragging down their hourly wage just because they can't keep up, so the 70 year old will just have to "keep up", either making mistakes along the way, or wearing out their already worn out bodies some more.

There are options for "early" retirement at 70, provided you've spent 46 years employed. That means you started working at 24 at the very latest, and was not unemployed for longer periods.

Saving up for your own retirement is also hard with low to medium income wages in a country where you pay 40-50% income tax, 25% sales tax and retirement funds are taxed at deposit (meaning capital gains will be lower).

[throwaway2037]

    > South Korea; high elderly poverty

It is interesting that you selected South Korea as your example. There are as rich as Japan, but have much worse social benefits, including national pension. I don't understand why.

[AngryData]

I think South Korea is just a horrible example for almost everything in general anyways. There are South Koreans still alive that remember when it was still 90% peasant farmers living a 15th century lifestyle, that basically did a single skip through industrialization, and it is now one of the most technologically advanced countries on Earth. And it is still plainly evident by all the fairly unique major social and cultural problems they face today.