I agree with you a lot, General, but I think you and a lot of other people that think the age 60 rule will stand are in for a rude awakening.
The government dropped the ball with pension reform YEARS ago, now they're going to have to live with it. The PBGC is going to require a Federal bailout, the aviation community is in shambles, and it is, in large, a product of failure of the Federal Government to pick a side. Either they side on "free enterprise" and stop bailing out airlines when they go belly-up and/or protecting airlines when working try to engage in self-help, OR the government decides to re-regulate the industry. Pick one, this mix and match of which rules apply to which airline isn't working - hasn't for the last 20+ years.
In this case, where you stand has a LOT to do with how involved you are and what you have to gain. If you're age 60, have no pension (or a $2,400 a month check and you were planning on $12,400 because YOU EARNED IT, IT WAS PART OF YOUR HOURLY COMPENSATION THAT A PORTION OF IT WENT TO YOUR PENSION, then you probably feel justified to keep working if you want to.
Similarly, you should be allowed to retire if you DESIRE at age 60. Megadeath, I hear you, I will HOPEFULLY be set enough to disappear at age 55, but if I'm not, it should be my choice to keep going to 60, 65, as long as I can hold the medical.
BonesF15, I think you're right on the mark. I see Congress, the Senate, and the President all signing legislation that allows an Age 65 pilot to fly, then I see the FAA stepping up and saying "Fine, but just like an EKG is required at certain age groups, we'll simply add to that list and past age 60 require a $1,500 physical every 6 months to keep going including stress EKG and EEG, cardio enzyme, tighter blood pressure ranges, etc, and rule out about 60-70% of the over-60 pilots anyway."
Don't think they'll be able to stop the FAA from doing that, which will have an added plus: if older pilots want to keep flying they'll have to keep themselves in better shape, reducing their health-care costs dramatically.
PurpleTail, the above should satisfy your safety concerns, and I agree with you completely, I see some age 40 pilots who scare the crap out of me - they look like a walking cardiac risk then they fly with 19 year old 400 hour wonder-kids and I'm thinking (I don't want my family on THAT airplane when his kicker cuts out).
The ICAO rule is set to go into effect whether anyone likes it or not. A lot of Indian and Chinese airlines will go to hiring age 60-63 pilots who have thousands of hours in the 747/757/767 A330/340 and simply convert their FAA licenses over to their own country's ICAO equivalent with an equivalency exam and the normal sims required for new-hires and those guys will start flying all over the world again. THAT'S the loophole for US pilots for now, and once the U.S. government (and the FAA) sees that there's no way to prohibit these guys and gals from doing it, they'll probably cave in.
No reason to shut the barn door AFTER the cows have exited the building. Age 65 is coming whether you like it or not, gentlemen.