Retirement Age for Politicians

"POLITICAL LEADERS ALSO MUST BE RETIRED ON AGE OF 60 YEARS." WHY?

TEN REASONS TO IMPLEMENT:

1. Dynasty system in politics will be automatically stopped.

2. Corruption will be reduced due to detachment of "Power Mania".

3. Employment opportunity will be increased in political background.

4. Pressure will be developed in political parties for keeping deserved quality leaders.

5. Minimum qualification for MPs & MLAs must be graduation.

6. Youth will get a chance to work for the country and will fulfil the present generation need.

7. To keep country always young by reducing generation gap.

8. To build peace and to reduce violent extremism.

9. For common working is between 25 to 60 years, we can say it the main stream of the country. Then why not country should run by mainstream leaders.

10. After retirement, we generally think as bonus life and people need to rest , keep good health, enjoy family life, fulfil personal hobbies and guide their young one (on need basis).

Retirement age needs to be 58 as applicable to Government employees.

It can be 68 (2 terms from retirement age) for contesting in Indian politics. They can be an adviser or in any other post in the party, but not a contestant.

I think there should be a retirement age limit in politics as the younger generation may come up with newer ideas and thoughts in improving the society and also 90.2% of the population in India are youth the.

Obama's Age = 54.

Pranabji's Age = 80.

By this, I wanna show say youth should also come forward to participate in politics.

According to me, this can develop the country rapidly if we combine the experience of old age and encouragement of new generation politicians.

Hello, friends!

I beg to differ. An ideal leader should have a lot of knowledge and experience. And experience comes with age. Based on personal experience, I have been treated better by aged doctors than young ones. I feel that is so because of all the experience they possess. The older, the better :D.

Cheers!

Hi guys, this is Somya Sharma.

I respect the points of everyone that all of you have given but after listening all of you I wanna say that there should be age limit as many guys said that mostly people loss their health and then they are not so capable to serve the country and by this youth will a get chance to serve the country.

After that I wanna say that if a person is really doing well and if he/she has the capacity to serve the country and if that person is interested so he/she must be given the chance for doing good work.

But if a person in age limit is not doing well then he must be retired because he is not able to do this work.

Many guys said that if old experience and new ideas will be mixed then country will grow rapidly.

Thank you.

Hello friends, in my point of view, I agree with this point that politics is a matter of experience and everyone knows that old is gold but question is this today India has 65% youth in all over its population 1.25 Arab and it is regarded on the world level that a nation always depends upon the bulky pillars and this is known by youths so I think leaders should be retired at the age of 60. I want to include one more point if they are being retired, we should not leave them forever but we'll have to give them a forum by which they could share his experience with us and if we needed some help we take from them. And one more thing, this type of our youths will get a chance to prove his quality and capability. Thus we will not be away our leader and the young generation too. For example in the world scenario a lot of youngsters who had changed the mentality of humans and created a new world they were {Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Napoleon, Sikandar, Swami Vivekanand, Srinivasan Ramanujan, queen of Jhansi Lakshmi bai, Shivaji, etc}. So we should give a chance to the new generation. Have a nice time thanks.

I think there should not be retirement age rule for politicians. Because a politician becomes more experienced day by day in handling the issues of people.

Talking about the generation gap, a well experienced politician has ability to think according to new generation's mind.

For example: our PM!

In my point of view, to a greater extent, I think that age limit in politics is a desirable one. We should have to make the way for the youth to bring out new ideas and thoughts. As we all know that India is in the hands of youth. It is a fact that a better-skilled one is better than an experienced person. So, youth should have to get a chance to work for their nation and fulfil present generation needs.

As per our constitution, all the citizen of India has the equal rights to stand in the election. For this criteria, the candidate must be the Indian citizen & the age of the candidate is minimum 25 years. If there is some retirement age for politicians, then in our country the older citizen have lost their right to stand in the election.

In my view, there should not be any retirement age for politicians because the aged politicians have more experience by handling the issues of people for the long period of time. Again a person's ability to serve his country can not be judged by his age. As we all know politicians have to take decision for the whole country, so experience is very much required in politics.

Again if there is an age limit for politicians, then family politics will increase in India. Suppose a politician will retire at certain age, then that politician will promote his son or daughter for his post. So a younger person without political background, can not get any type of benefit from the retirement of politicians.

At last I will say that if Mahatma Gandhi is retire at the age of 60 or 65, then it is difficult for India to get independent. So in India, there should not be any retirement age for politicians.