That sounds like the perfect justification to promote senior flat sharing:
Employing a cleaner is not impossible if you share the cost.
There are a lot of things speaking for sharing a flat as a senior. What kills it for me is: Having flatmates 
When I was young that was great fun. Thinking of doing it again already causes me nightmares.
It does, because it discriminates men, it’s sexist.
Sure, could have resolved that by giving both a widow pension and not taking it away from women.
Pure egoism. Just like the resistance against pension age for women.
The feminist’s demand for equality is immediately irrelevant when it means loss of privilege for women.
Well, since they are now trying to save money everywhere by cutting things, adding even more benefits is not on the cards.
Wait - why was the pension age for women lower than men to begin with? Statistically, women live longer than men so I’d expect them to either retire later or have lower pension income compared to men to account for the longevity.
If I chose to retire early, the hit to the pension amount is quite significant so the 3-4 years of additional expected life if not adjusted for would be quite a bonus for women.
With equal pension payments, with actuarial adjustments men should retire at 61 and women at 65.
With budgets constrained, maybe this could be the next target for cost savings.
I guess that was the idea of EUGH when giving the verdict and definitely the idea of the guy who called on it.
I was rather surprised about the reaction of our government too.
On the other hand (as you seem to argue mainly for eldere people) Die Witwen- und Witwerrente entspricht maximal 80 % der Altersrente. Kann jemand gleichzeitig zur Witwen- oder Witwerrente eine AHV- oder IV-Rente geltend machen, wird nur die höhere Rente ausgerichtet.
The widow's and widower's pension corresponds to a maximum of 80% of the retirement pension. If someone can claim an AHV or IV pension at the same time as a widow's or widower's pension, only the higher pension will be paid
So it seems nobody really ever got the widower’s rent all life?
What are you talking about? I am resistant to a system change because I have been paying in on the basis of a certain outcome which is constantly changing to my detriment. Nothing to do with gender but sure make it a gender thing.
The AHV changes all the time.
Were you also against it when the AHV age was lowered to 62 for women? Against the 13th payout?
I’d call that an unnecessary use of rhetorical questioning. Just go up to the first replies 
Welcome to reality. Never make deals with the other sides duty being due a few decades away while yours start immediately. 
The second pillar sounded like sent from heaven when it was invented/implemented. Now they’re aiming at the 3 pillar if I heard right. I don’t care, I cashed mine in already.
I remember joking that I would spend my life with AHV dangling in front of my face like a carrot I could never reach. Now I will make it by losing only a few months of it. Plus they even upped it by a 13th payment. So - as always - I’m a ‘darling of fortune’.
“They” didn’t do it, “We” did it. And they are desperately trying to punish us for it.
True, we did it. By “they” I mean for once most of the population agreed with me or I could not have done it.
cheers, @BelgianMum 
This is a risk when trusting the government. Pensions and other benefits are huge liabilities and politically it is difficult if not impossible to reign in benefits to make it sustainable. When you’re money is locked in, you are subject to changes over a long time and adverse changes are expected when government finances are not good.
I’m not, I guess they would have liked to cut it anyway, but couldn’t do it politically. The court case gave them the perfect cover to do it.
With post-covid inflation running high, families are squeezed so I think there is very little ability for governments to cut back without facing huge backlash. I guess raising taxes is the only option they will have.
I think it makes sense but structured another way:
I’ve never been to retirement homes, but I guess they must be some version of this.
I know one of those places, but forgot the name in German. I helped a grand child to clean the apartment after someone living there died.
So, it looks like an apartment building. Apartments are spacious and each resident is living in a 1 room apartment + living room + kitchen. There are common areas for socializing and eating. There are 2 nurses during the day, 1 during the night. For some reason beyond the salaries of the nurses, the rent is absurdly expensive.
I guess the reason is buildings like this are designed for rich customers and their living standards in terms of apartment furnishings, floor space, green areas in a densely populated urban area. In reality, retired people that needs buildings like this are anything but rich. So, some optimization can be done to reduce the monthly rent.
That’s pretty much like every retirement home I’ve ever been in and I’ve visited a few.
My gran’s was a small, self contained ‘studio’ with its own bathroom and a kitchenette for making meals, snacks, drinks etc.
They had a communal dining room which they signed up for on a weekly basis so they weren’t obliged to eat there all the time. My gran never had breakfast there.
The less mobile residents were on the ground floor and the more active ones on the upper floors so they could use the stairs if they chose to do so although there was a lift available.
All the flats were equipped with emergency pull cords in both the bathroom and living area which they could use to call for somebody if the needed to.
They are exactly this.
I’d prefer - and there are similar things coming up - buildings with small flats for one person (and couples) where you live independently with aivalability of help - little to a lot depending of the stage of health/age one is in, common areas for socializing, a cozy restaurant and a shop (like Migros, Coop where you can get all your daily things).