There are now more people over sixty-four than children younger than five
Isn&#x27;t 64 a rather arbitrary number?<p>65 used to be retirement age (for men at least), it clearly needed raising years ago, but was hard to do politically in many countries. It is finally being raised. When pensions were first introduced they were meant to run 5 years, not 20.<p>In the UK, at least, you could argue we&#x27;re left paying for a generation of Baby Boomers who are swanning about on cruises, golf days and health spas on pensions they never paid even half towards.<p>Most are perfectly able to work for another 10 years at least (and if you&#x27;re younger than 50 you&#x27;ll have to work those extra 10 years), but for some reason we need economic migrants for economic growth. Even though we&#x27;re not building anywhere near enough homes, schools, hospitals and transport infrastructure for this mass immigration, and we&#x27;re not training enough nurses, doctors, teachers. We are effectively just shunting all the economic problems of the end of continual growth 20 years down the line. We even scrapped bursaries for student nurses! Utter madness.<p>And then, rather ironically, it&#x27;s this same generation who overwhelmingly voted for Brexit to even further destroy their children&#x27;s and their children&#x27;s children prospects because they&#x27;re not happy about the changing face of the Britain they&#x27;re not even going to live in.