3 ms·
This program is solvable, with something like Australia's mandatory superannuation or Singapore's Central Provident Fund, where people are forced to save a cert
by logicchains 8y ago
This program is solvable, with something like Australia's mandatory superannuation or Singapore's Central Provident Fund, where people are forced to save a certain percentage of their income for retirement (and the money is actually saved, they're not just given IOUs for money that will be taken from future young people).
- iguy 8y agoBut the discipline to stick to such a solution is difficult. Bending the rules just a little more to spend more money this election cycle is always going to be extremely tempting. In addition, the situation is a bit better in this regard for small countries, who can just invest elsewhere. If the whole world tried to do this, it's not clear what they could invest in, as what they want to withdraw in 30 years time is actually the services of cooks and nursing staff etc. who must be of working age at that time.
- Mirioron 8y agoWhy force it though? Shouldn't it be up to the people whether they want to save it or not? In Eastern Europe this is a concern because many people have lived through their savings evaporating. What's to say that something similar doesn't happen in the future? Furthermore, how would you even implement it? Do young people right now have to pay for the upkeep of the old generation right now and will then have to additionally pay for their own retirement fund? It seems to me that somebody's going to get screwed here.
- chr1 8y agoThere is no way to actually save money. You perform work for others in exchange for IOUs that you hope to exchange for someone else's work later. If at a later point there are not enough people to do new work, you can't exchange your money(==IOUs) for goods anymore.