revolution saint

The funny thing is I'm not ignorant of your situation (you've told us often enough about it), it's not nasty - it's putting it into context, it's certainly not selfish because I have nothing to gain. I just happen to disagree with you - you'll find this happens and the older you get (so I'm told) the more often it will happen. I sympathise but there's not much I can do about the aging processs.

OK, substitute it for the reduction that you did get (I used that figure because it's the one you constantly quote) . The point still stands. Please don't call me a complete knob - it's unbecoming for a man of your advanced years.

I think all working people aged 24-45 should get a 72% concession for a few years and then the club should cruelly, viciously take it away from us. That's the only way we'll be able to understand the quite justifiable gripe of the nearly but not quite retired.

That started off as a promising joke but tailed off towards the end.

Because I've already explained that women who fall into the category of having been forced into retirement only to find that the age has risen should receive the concession - and that's the only thing you've got to argue with isn't it? Clinging to the coattails of a concession designed for women - not for you. I hope you enjoy your newly liberal, politically correct camp now.

I explained this in an earlier post. Full time students don't work so yes, they deserve it. To be honest, no, I don't think you should get a concession if you're unemployed.

You don't have to look far to see where you've said you are entitled to it. Memory not so great eh?

And this is exactly why I disagree with you. When I say entitled I'm not disputing the fact that you got it - that's obvious. I'm disputing whether a man in work (or who can afford to retire) is morally entitled to such a concession (and a big one at that). No other age group of working men get it, and why should they? I don't actually begrudge you getting it in the first place even though I was indirectly subsidising you - fair play, you got something I don't think you deserved. I do object to you moaning constantly about the loss of it though. The parallel with MPs fiddling their expenses doesn't compare - where has anyone accused you of fraud?

Or of course whether you received it or not. I have to be honest though - I think a lot of antagonism on this thread is precisely because you've had such a vocal moan about it. To a lot of people you've had a 72% decrease in the price of tickets for the last few years when your situation may not be any different to any other working person - is it any surprise that moaning about the loss of something you shouldn't have got in the first place is going to annoy people? I know you are saying it's how the change was managed and maybe you have a point on that but you are also at times coming very close to saying you are entitled to it (or at least that's my perception).

To be fair it's more Whitey I was disagreeing with - I've already said you should have been informed earlier. Personally I wouldn't have phased it in though as I still believe it was a concession you shouldn't have got. I'm not sure that makes me arrogant, nasty or childish - is that what you call everyone who disagrees with you?

No one is wrinkly baiting - we just have the temerity to disagree with you. Get over it - surely in all your many, many years you've experienced this before or have you got to the point that where you are now always right?

No, the retirement age is rising because your generation is living longer NOW. Not when I get older....now, and anyone working at the moment foots the bill. When you think about it your generation will be the last to retire at 65 and still get to live longer - you get the best of both worlds mate. Medical science, environmental issues etc will probably mean I have a longer life expectancy - I'll also be working longer which is something your generation has got away with.

I can feel sorry for women in this position and sympathise with them but let's be honest - you got this concession via the backdoor and should be grateful you got it at all. I doubt your anger when first hearing this news was motivated by women forced into retirement - it was probably fuelled by the fact you'd lost a nice little perk of being almost but not quite retired. The thing that annoys me most though is the impression that most of you feel entitled to this concession, and that it was somehow your right. What's the difference between a 59 year old in work and one of 60 in work? Nothing except for the free bus pass and all the other concessions they get. Of course when I get older I may feel differently although there will be a crucial difference - I probably won't be able to retire early and will have to go till I'm 68. I imagine your lot will be moaning about concessions for centurions by then though......

And how many times have I agreed on this thread that people who fall into that bracket should have been told earlier? So I didn't disagree with you there at all. I disagree with the concession in the first place though - I think you were lucky to get it, and even you can't justify why a particular group of working age should receive it and other age groups shouldn't.

The club could also sell more tickets by reducing prices for morons as well. In favour of that? The club isn't abolishing age related concessions - it's abolishing an aberation that favoured the 60 - 65 age group and they're annoyed by it. Ah, bless 'em, no cheap tickets anymore and yet they try to accuse us of the "I'm alright Jack" attitude? They got away for a few seasons with cheap tickets and not one of them can either justify or defend why they got them. They sure as hell can moan when it's taken away though.

Firstly don't put words in my mouth. Your perceived "I'm alright Jack" attitude is nonsense because you now come under the same conditions as the rest of us. You can't justify why you are so special but moan about it constantly, so one more chance...why should you get cheaper tickets?

Women can still work up till 65 and receive a pension, seems like they have the best of both worlds to me. You can continue to bash your head against an argument you can't defend if you like though. I don't think your argument started as a feminist defence though did it? All saints together - yes, as long as they talk sense. By all means continue in your persecuted little bubble though - makes no difference to me.

To be fair me too so I stand to gain from this.....

Oh dear god, are we advocating prices based on life expectancy now? What an utterly moronic suggestion. Do people in their 50's get a slightly reduced price as well? Or maybe serious illnesses need to be taken into consideration?

It's only going round in circles because you refuse to admit that the 60-65 age group is no different from any other working age group. You can't defend or justify it despite many opportunities. What did you expect after sooooo many moaning posts? Honestly, really?

Perfectly entitled yet unable to justify...... The second point is irrelevant until you reach the age of 65.

The over 65's do get a concession - if you think it's too low then join the argument that prices are too high and not the one that seeks to justify a concession you weren't entitled to. No one moaned when you got it in the first place but it is objectionable when you moan about it being taken away. The government thing is a complete irrelevancy and has no bearing on this topic, personally I didn't vote for a government that privatised nationalised industries, subsidise them and then place that revenue in the hands of the few but that's a topic for the lounge and not here.

So the justification is marketing? Seriously? Fact is you are NOT a pensioner - you can still work, and if your job doesn't cover the cost of a ST then welcome to our world. In many ways you were luckier than us and are still luckier than us. I agree that you should have been informed earlier and that would have been fairer but that's all we agree on.

Which is of course what everyone else is doing right now...so again why should you be different?

I agree means testing would be a stupid idea so with no justification as to why the 60-65 year olds should receive a concession I think we can agree that they've got away with it for the last few years and should be grateful. That subset of fans has been lucky - there's pretty much no chance most people younger will get away with it in future. If you'd like to moan about generational differences then let's look at the fact that the age of retirement will rise to at least 67, or that getting on the housing ladder is virtually impossible (due in no small part to the baby boomer generation buying up second homes to make profit). No other generation will be as lucky as yours and yet you still moan....