Financial Armageddon has a post on pensions arguing for an increase in the age.
From my research on pensions what I found was that not only has the age declined, but at one time there was a means test -- you had to prove you couldn't provide for yourself.
I forget all the details of what I found historically, but there was Butan age of 70 as well. When the age was set to 65 average life expectancy was 63. I think it is around 84 now.
Back in the 80s I did some lobbying that our pensions were unsustainable and they needed to freeze the age 65 rate and make it so you apply anywhere from 65 to 75. What seniors can collect now is so grossly unsustainable. In Canada we have Canada Pension Plan, Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement. The latter two aren't funded the way CPP is funded and come right out of the tax payer's pocket. The income level that they start being clawed back is a dream income for many workers these day. If a person collects the full amount for everything and lives to the life expectancy age they would collect about a half million in benefits.
The latter two aren't clawed back fully until income is over something like 110k.
But, instead of planning for what is coming and being fair, they lowered the eligible age to 60.
Instead it will be done the hard way, chipping away at it and screwing people's financial planning. Imagine if it had been fixed in the 80s. Government debt would be even lower and my friend who is planning to retire at 60 would probably go to 65 instead. I am still trying to convince her to realise that what she thinks she's getting could change...