A clear majority for freedom to leave: 56 % believe you should be able to retire whenever you want, against 33 % opposed and 11 % with no opinion.
Gender separates sharply. Women carry the « yes » on their own, by a wide margin. Men supply no supportive vote at all: they split between refusal and having no opinion.
By age, the 18-24s and the 45-54s back freedom of choice heavily. Conversely, the 25-34s and the over-65s oppose it unanimously: two brackets that usually diverge end up on the same side here.
The debate is the day's most structured, and it comes down to one objection and its answer. The objection, carried by the most endorsed voices of the refusal camp, is twofold: if everyone leaves early, who works? And above all, rules exist. Leaving without having contributed enough means asking the State to pay, when it can no longer afford to.
The majority camp's reply shifts the debate towards adjustment rather than a gift: nobody is asking for a pension without contributions. The idea is to leave the choice open, either going earlier on a reduced pension or working longer to raise it, with each person bearing the consequences of their decision.
One reply completes the argument on employment: vacated posts would be filled by incoming generations, exactly as workforce renewal already works, all the more so as automation reduces the labour needed for certain tasks. The thread ends up opposing two visions of the system: a collective rule to protect, or an individual dial to adjust.