ALEX BRUMMER: I’m still working at 75 and the benefits are incredible. The British Army of economically inactive over-50s should give it a try…

This summer, at a celebratory party in a friend’s splendid flower garden, I was greeted by a finger-pointing acquaintance. I expected him to chide me for some terrible sin committed in these pages. Instead, the pedantic retired City professional chided me for still sitting at the keyboard at 75. He seemed to think it was my solemn duty to go to the golf course or play tennis, to read more and to devote more time to charitable causes.

My decision to continue working, when so many friends and colleagues have hung up their notebooks, traded in their suits for ill-fitting casual clothes and handed in their company cars, is, I know, exceptional. After all, as a younger colleague, John-Paul Ford Rojas, reported last month, some 3,622,000 citizens aged between 50 and 64 (mere lads by my standards) have become economically inactive by not looking for more work.

Former Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt acknowledged that this was a huge waste of talent and labour in an economy where official figures show 884,000 known vacancies were advertised at the end of July. There is little in common between Hunt and his successor, Rachel Reeves, but getting Britain working again, as part of a “growth” agenda, is clearly something politicians from both parties must agree on.

The short, cynical answer to an acquaintance’s persistent question about retirement was to say money. However nice it is to be a salaried employee, contributing to the national welfare as a fat taxpayer, that is not the main reason. Having saved in a decent pension scheme for most of my working life, over 50 years in journalism, money is not the main issue. It is no longer the motivator as it was in the 1990s, when I was faced with a hefty John Major-era mortgage of 13.75% and funding three children in private schools.

The questioner was also wrong to somehow suggest that by working I might be neglecting my fitness or my contribution to society through charitable work. My daily routine always begins with a visit to the gym or a workout in Richmond Park (close to home), and I am chairman and trustee of two community charities.

The main reason I continue to work is that I believe my economic and geopolitical journalism still has something to offer today. It is as relevant as it was five decades ago, when I was writing about the sterling crisis, the winter of discontent and Britain’s request for a loan from the International Monetary Fund in 1976.

That painful experience and the fact that I lived through and wrote about the US elections in the 1980s and the financial crises that spread over the years have provided me with some wisdom. It seems that you, dear reader, and my editor, who has not yet shown me the door, still appreciate it.

I recognise that I am in an enormously privileged position. Despite having had my own health problems (I spent 2023 undergoing cancer treatment), I have never had to take time off work, unlike those less fortunate. Indeed, the intellectual challenge and rigour of journalism helped me get through six months of chemotherapy and the unpleasant side effects that accompanied it. Nor, as with a cohort of economically inactive people, have I had to be a carer for elderly relatives. That stressful task fell to others.

Part of my work ethic is down to my heritage and role models. My dear late father Michael retired at 65 but immediately started another career working with my brother. At 90, he would hop on the bus or train (reasonable, he had stopped driving when he retired) and travel into the heart of Sussex to watch and bid at antiques auctions. As for role models, legendary investor Warren Buffett is still going strong at 94.

And among our friends in the United States, two of our closest friends were distinguished professors at the University of Virginia until they were 80, and recently retired for health reasons. They are still reading, researching, and writing.

Admittedly, working in a spacious office in central London, with the freedom to comment on the country’s financial and economic affairs, is far more rewarding than many other jobs.

Age can be a barrier to working in construction, the energy industry, caring professions and other fields that require physical stamina. Journalism can require people to work long hours on complex subjects, as well as the stamina and willingness to go out and interview and report.

However, keeping the flag flying high at work is excellent for mental health. However, it must be acknowledged that the tensions and stress of the pandemic and its consequences have made life difficult for some of the 400,000 people who have been added to the list of economically inactive since COVID-19.

Going to work is much more stimulating than working from home. In the office, you can interact with much younger people, understand their interests and access their ideas. Social interaction is stimulating. More importantly, it’s great for mental agility. I admit that doing crosswords, Sudoku, Wordle and chatting over a pint at the Pig & Whistle are all good things, but I think a lifetime of experience of reporting and commenting can be invaluable to your own output and that of your colleagues.

In Britain, age and wisdom are highly valued in any walk of life. In America, older people, in all kinds of positions, from the boardroom to those working in hospitality and even in the White House, are respected and even revered. In the UK, we do not adhere sufficiently to the Protestant work ethic. Work is good for physical and mental well-being. Britain’s army of economically inactive people, some of whom are lazy rather than hard-working, need to be persuaded to give it another chance.