11–20 of 1001 posts
This is because of their low birth rate primarily right? I think the system has failed at this point, when you are expected to work that long.
And this is the case in all western countries.
It is just being realized in different ways.
Fundamentalle there are 3 ways to cope
1. reduce pensions
2. Raise taxes
3. Decrease amount of benefit receivers.
Denmark choose number 3
This is because of their low birth rate primarily right? I think the system has failed at this point, when you are expected to work that long.
Sustainable population and economic growth at that rate can't happen indefinitely.
Some people have been vocally saying this system in unsustainable long term, just that Europeans governments never wanted to publicly admit this due to fears of loosing elections, so they kept kicking the can down the road.
This is because of their low birth rate primarily right? I think the system has failed at this point, when you are expected to work that long.
It is. And this is the case in all western countries. It is just being realized in different ways. Fundamentalle there are 3 ways to cope 1. reduce pensions 2. Raise taxes 3. Decrease amount of benefit receivers. Denmark choose number 3
I’m not sure how I feel about this. I’m based in the Nordics and my estimated retirement age at the moment (where I can get my state pension) is 67y 4m. Whilst I understand the burden the aging population is having on society (lifespan) it doesn’t seem like there’s much proactive government input into people’s healthspan. Maybe instead we should try investing in this area (reducing the burden on services) instead of…
Now people live way longer, but the retirement age never got adjusted properly to the new reality. So 15-20 years of retirement is the new normal.
In addition, way fewer young payers for the now old.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this really changes the information? Ok, so if you're near retirement now you're fine But if you're younger, you can look forward to not retiring until 70, as if the younger generation hasn't been shit on enough Amazing stuff. One last ladder for the older generation to pull up behind them before they die, I guess
Won't be a long wait till it gets raised to 80. The demographics of many nations are pretty grim.
Only for a short period were western population growing so fast relative to small number of retirees that transferring that responsibility to government was a no brainer.
With diminishing demographics anywhere except maybe Africa, we'll need to be more creative once again. Raising retirement age is just one of many hard but inevitable policies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this really changes the information? Ok, so if you're near retirement now you're fine But if you're younger, you can look forward to not retiring until 70, as if the younger generation hasn't been shit on enough Amazing stuff. One last ladder for the older generation to pull up behind them before they die, I guess
Won't be a long wait till it gets raised to 80. The demographics of many nations are pretty grim.
With a growing population of pensioners and a declining population of taxpayers many EU countries are walking towards a future where it is abundantly clear that the state can not finance pensions. Especially when at the same time their companies loose their economic competitiveness.
I do not believe that raising the retirement age in 15 years will be of any major help here. And it seems especially outrageous for the younger generation.
I’m not sure how I feel about this. I’m based in the Nordics and my estimated retirement age at the moment (where I can get my state pension) is 67y 4m. Whilst I understand the burden the aging population is having on society (lifespan) it doesn’t seem like there’s much proactive government input into people’s healthspan. Maybe instead we should try investing in this area (reducing the burden on services) instead of…
This is because of their low birth rate primarily right? I think the system has failed at this point, when you are expected to work that long.
The social pension system always was a Ponzi scheme where the ones who got in first(boomers) get the biggest share of the pie(10-20 years of life left after retirement), while those coming into the system last(millennials+) and pay for the current retirees will get rug-pulled(5-10 years of life left after retirement). Sustainable population and economic growth at that rate can't happen indefinitely. Some people have…
It’s not really a Ponzi scheme, it is completely possible for the system to be balanced, it’s just very very hard to get people to vote for you if you say they’ll have less tomorrow
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is. And this is the case in all western countries. It is just being realized in different ways. Fundamentalle there are 3 ways to cope 1. reduce pensions 2. Raise taxes 3. Decrease amount of benefit receivers. Denmark choose number 3
The trap is the worse the imbalance gets, the harder (1) gets electorally