Typical Guardian editorial

So the ECJ decides to ignore reality in order to produce more equality.

The Guardian applauds.

As one commenter there puts it. We not only have laws against sexual discrimination, we also have laws against ageist discrimination.

If annuities have to be equally priced, despite different likely life spans, why shouldn\’t a 20 year old be able to buy an annuity at the same price as a 70 year old?

9 comments on “Typical Guardian editorial

  1. In terms of morality rather than current UK law, there’s an obvious reason why the two might be treated differently – everyone gets to be every possible age, whereas you only get one shot at gender (blah reassignment surgery, etc, but not really).

  2. Are the ECJ and ECHR trying to piss us off so much that we leave? If so, Bravo! Keep at it lads!

  3. Obviously everyone doesn’t get to be every age, many people don’t even make it to retirement.

  4. But when I was 20 the EU wasn’t passing laws that I should get fed money. Unless I get to be 20 again, here’s hoping, I have been deprived of that equal opportunity.

  5. Everyone who buys an anuity is hoping to get to a certain age, otherwise they’d be better off not having it.

  6. “Everyone who buys an anuity is hoping to get to a certain age, otherwise they’d be better off not having it.”

    And your point is?

  7. I suspect that age will be next.
    If so, you can kiss goodbye to all forms of life insurance and annuities (except perhaps we could expect a resurgence of the tontine?).

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.