Text 4724, 63 rader
Skriven 2010-02-07 06:40:08 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 4671 av Ward Dossche (2:292/854)
Ärende: Age
===========
Ward Dossche wrote to Robert Bashe on Saturday February 06 2010 at 21:44:

WD>>> Pension can be had from age 60 on I believe. So if you live until
WD>>> 100 and you worked 40 years, you will also get 40 years of pension.

RB>> Whoa! I agree with the first sentence, that's the same as in Germany
RB>> - however, you have to be disabled to retire that young on a full
RB>> pension, _and_ you may not earn more than a certain amount in
RB>> addition to the pension until age 65.

WD> I will turn 60 on Nov.17th of this year. I can apply for a full
WD> pension on that date.

In that case, I suspect Belgium will be next on the list of countries with
economic problems. I don't know of any other place where the regular retirement
age is that low. In the USA and Germany, the regular retirement age has even
been increased in recent years.

I also note you didn't comment my remark about the length of contribution being
unrelated to the length of pension payment. Presumably I was right on that one.

RB>> I doubt that he had to do on the government pension alone. He
RB>> probably gets a pension from the railroad as well -...

WD> Nope ... one single pension from the government.

So who was the employer? In Germany, the railroad was run by the government up
to around 15 years ago (if I remember correctly) and thus all the pensions were
naturally paid by the government. In the case of a private employer, you could
and can get a government pension (paid for by contributions from both the
employee and the employer) plus a pension from the private employer.

RB>> Aside from that, government workers - and I assume that applies to
RB>> your Dad - are also forced into early retirement in Germany.

WD> My dad, due to the extreme irregular hours that he worked, was granted
WD> the right to retire at 55.

Aha - rotating shifts or something like that? OK, that's a special case.

RB>> Please read the above paragraph in the light of the fact that many
RB>> people have _two_ pensions: one as a result of contributions into the
RB>> compulsory government system, and another from their former employer.
RB>> We shouldn't confuse the two, as they are financed in completely
RB>> different ways.

WD> I'm not confusing the two, you don't understand the system her.

That's why I'm asking questions and explaining the system here for comparison.

WD> The former employer pays into the same government-scheme, hence you
WD> get only 1 pension.

The employer also makes contributions to the government pension plan here, but
many companies - particularly the large corporations also provide their
employees with a company pension. The system in the States is comparable except
for the regular retirement age and the fact that many companies there have
meanwhile abandoned company pensions.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)