3 ms·
Don't you think that your formula needs a productivity term somewhere? How is that when we talk about this, nobody mentions that if the gross domestic product
by RobertoG 9y ago
Don't you think that your formula needs a productivity term somewhere?
How is that when we talk about this, nobody mentions that if the gross domestic product per capita goes up enough, there is not problem.
The 'savings' perspective makes only sense in the personal sense.
I mean, the problem is not money. If in 20 years we have robots, infrastructure, cheap energy, etc enough for feeding and taking care of everybody there is not problem.
If we don't, never mind the 'savings' that you have, because the real limit are real resources.
- konschubert 9y agoThis whole thread is weird. People think that paying retirements through social security means that future generations have to shoulder the burden. But if they instead "save" the money, somehow they won't have to? In the end, the bread that goes on the table in 50 years will be produced by a farmer of the future generation. Savings and social security are just two different ways of writing the same contract.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]