(I am using Canadian data – that's where I live, but this should be true generally)
Sometimes you'll see the argument about how we need to raise the retirement age, because when they first came up with “pensions” the average life expectancy was only 69 years. Today, life expectancy in Canada is nearly 80.
The logic behind this argument is that pensions used to only have to pay out for 4 years on average, but now have to pay out for 15. Hence the need to raise the retirement age.
One part of this argument is technically true – “Average life expectancy at birth” was about 69 years in 1965 when the Canada Pension Plan was invented today it's 79.
There's just one problem – THAT LOGIC IS UTTERLY WRONG.
Figures about “Life expectancy at birth” are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to the number of years the average retiree is going to collect a pension.
Instead, look at the average man who actually reaches age 65;
-
In 1920, they could (on average) expect to live until about age 78.
-
By 2010, they can (on average) expect to live until age 83
That's an increase of only 5 years in nearly a century.
Improvements in “Average Life Expectancy” have mainly come from lower rates of child mortality, and lower rates of maternal mortality. When you have a lot of people dying at age 0-10 (child mortality) and women dying in their early 20s (maternal mortality) that drives down the “average” a lot.
Almost all the increase in life expectancy has come from narrowing the gap between “Life expectancy at birth” and “Life expectancy at 65” but there has been very little increase in “Life expectancy at 65”. For a man who actually reaches working age, the number of years they're likely to collect a pension has changed only a little.
Even more important for public policy, in the past more deaths happened among people who had used a lot of public services (education, child-rearing, hospitals for birth, etc…) but who hadn't been working long (i.e. children and young women).
That means now, every person who is born and educated is more likely to work for decades and contribute back, especially with women joining the workforce. People have far more productive years on average, thanks to not dying at a young age.
That means we should be able to afford EARLIER retirement now, not later, based on health and “expected lifespan” indicators. Anyone arguing that “longer lifespans” mean we need “later retirement” is betraying a total lack of understanding of statistics and social policy.