SINCE the onset of the welfare system created by the Labour Party in the late 1940s, there have been things we have held precious and morally correct in terms of human rights. However, in recent times there has been a systematic destruction of so much of this.

The latest is the plan to raise the state pension age to 70 and eventually 75 years by 2035 ("Warnings over ‘despicable’ increase to pension age", The Herald, August 19, and Letters, August 20). The idea that all the over-65s are languishing in the luxury of being supported by the country and offering nothing in return is so far from the truth.

First, many pensioners continue to pay taxes and therefore contribute to the infrastructure of the society we live in.

Secondly, if you take a look around, you will see many grandparents looking after young children, allowing their parents to go out and work to support their young families. The children are the future wealth of our country and therefore grandparents' input is important to their own people as well as a wise investment for the wider community.

Thirdly, there are thousands of people of pension age give up their free time to work as volunteers across many sectors , including education, NHS, charity shops (which raise money for many worthwhile projects both here and abroad), counselling services and many more. They offer their skills and experience in all these areas, free of charge and with goodwill. Many people's lives are transformed for the better because of their commitment.

Fourthly, there is a secret army of pensioners who day in and day out look after their sick relatives including often their middle aged children who have severe disabilities. They also tend to sick neighbours who have no one else to help them. This caring and often exhausting work is done with very little recognition and it is people like that who are attempting to look after others "from the cradle to the grave" as was promised.

And then there are the others who do not do any of the above as they themselves are too ill or frail after a life of hard work. Many of them live in isolation and loneliness. People have made the link between a nation's greatness and how it treats its most vulnerable. Its also stated that how we treat our weakest members of society is a reflection of its government. We ordinary citizens are left politically powerless. No more room for debate. Just a yes or No on a ballot paper, no informed choices and the winner takes it all. I hope we can somehow change things and retrieve the nation's humanity.

Margaret McVey, Giffnock.

SEVENTY-FIVE should become the new retirement age, according to a Conservative think tank. No doubt that will fill some with horror, others will be positively gleeful about it.

This kite takes its roots from the preponderance of pensioners whose benefits are beginning to depend upon what is looking more and more like an inverted pyramid.

There will be quite a few current pensioners who would approve of extending their working lives which give companionship, shape, purpose and meaning to their existence. Some others like me will find that, before they reach 75, they will feel like they have hit a brick wall, having neither the patience nor the energy to slog away at the daily grind. I hit that particular wall at the age of 69.

It is time to pose the question: Do we work to live or do we live to work?"

The response will vary according to the individual according to their circumstances, both internal and external.

As digital technology and robotics take over the less demanding jobs in our economy, there will be a pool of people who may find it difficult to obtain meaningful employment.

It would be up to the Government to promise them their pension rights from an earlier age than 75, provided they were willing to offer their services to carry out charitable work daily to keep them usefully employed.

Maybe under those circumstances that is when the universal basic income would come into its own.

Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.

IAIN Duncan Smith's Centre for Social Justice think tank claims that increasing the pension age to 75 is the responsible thing to do. But the fact is by then 40 per cent of men are dead and the average man has only four years left to enjoy his retirement.

I was six months over 65 when I retired and for the next decade played the near daily golf I had longed to do since I joined the workforce. But in the years after 75 my mobility and length off the tee plummeted and I now need a buggy to play the links.

In the early 1960s I won a US sports scholarship and agree with the scribe who wrote "Californian college life in the years before Vietnam was as close to heaven on earth as we have come". But golf in the first decade of retirement at 65 runs it close.

Rev Dr John Cameron, St Andrews.

I WONDER how many 74- year-olds Iain Duncan Smith consulted before he came up with the wheeze to keep folk employed until they reach that age?

Andrew MacKenzie (Revd), Dumfries.