3 ms·
How exactly are they hurting themselves when they can clearly see the impossibility of the system surviving long enough for them to benefit from it?
by kazagistar 9y ago
How exactly are they hurting themselves when they can clearly see the impossibility of the system surviving long enough for them to benefit from it?
- crdoconnor 9y agoThe Robber baron Jay Gould once put it as "I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other". The middle and working classes are much less powerful political bloc if they are fighting each another (young/old). Hence the steady flow of articles like this one pitting "boomers" against "millenials" and vice versa. The provision of decent pensions, free education and social welfare was affordable in the 50s-80s when the country was much poorer and the idea that it has become less affordable because we live slightly longer after many decades of massive economic growth is, to put it bluntly, economically illiterate. The money is there.
- int_19h 9y agoWhat was the difference in birth rates between 50s-80s and today? That's the more important metric in this case.
- crdoconnor 9y agoThe dependency ratio went up from 15% in 1960 to 22% today. The GDP per capita, by contrast, has increased 300% in 2005 adjusted dollars. This is the metric that answers the question "why are pensions deemed unaffordable?", not birth/aging/death rates: http://retired.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/productivity.png http://retired.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/productivity.png