It should absolutely be raised ... to suggest otherwise is crazy to me. It was set at a time when we could, ya know, actually afford to pay for the retirement of people over 65, because there weren't many!
It was also set at a time when per capita income was about a tenth of what it is today.
But we use that exact same argument for why the minimum wage should be indexed to inflation. Do all the math, and figure out what makes sense. If the degree to which income is "too low" is equal to or greater than the degree to which the retirement age is "too low," I really don't care how we try to make it work. But the age we set in the 1930s doesn't make sense for today, plain and simple. That's not a partisan opinion.
You do bring up a good point with your second post, but I'm not sure how many 64-year olds are attractive to hire, either ... that's just kind of a problem you'll have with any arbitrary cutoff.
