to me what is worrying is not that pension funds are crying about trouble (although it may end sadly for those to be covered) what is worrying is that people k

to me what is worrying is not that pension funds are crying about trouble (although it may end sadly for those to be covered) what is worrying is that people keep the current economical system which creates the need for pension funds. if all immobilia were rent only, and the rent was continuously redistributed per capita to the population, then everyone would enjoy the average rent: housing: everyone sleeps somewhere and the total expenditure on housing is fairly redistributed, food: everyone eats something and the farmers use the bulk of their income to rent the land, so the population gets a significant fraction of their food payed back energy: wind and solar take up space, competing with farms and housing, and the energy companies spend the bulk of their income on renting that land ecology: we can democratically agree to leave a fraction F for nature of different degrees of wildness, and only put up the the rest for human rent in such a world, why do I need a pension fund? when I am old and less mobile, I can be satisfied with smaller housing, less transportation to compensate for my probable inability to work. If you look at how elderly are [mal]treated in elderly homes etc, I would prefer to be in control of my fair share of average rent, so that if I don't like a place I can go rent somewhere else. Instead of having to gamble today if insurance company X will be solvent in the future, or even if it is, if the resulting pension will even cover for food, housing, ... while with average rent, while the average rent does not devalue with respect to the average rent other people receive... why would I need health insurance? in the current world I would need it because of unexpected lump payments to hospitals etc, but in the system of average rent (under correct compliant conditions), I could set up a standard smart contract for health: "if you treat me now, part of my future income will be diverted for a duration long enough to cover the medical bill", or I can choose to disagree at the moment itself! The current system requires you to predict in advance for all possible medical urgencies, and across all available treatments if you agree on average. There are situations where I would decide against a certain proposed treatment, with another treatment not being covered. But then why did I pay medical insurance for the last X years?? With a system of average rent, your expense is a free trade at the moment it arises and you are capable of consulting your feelings about a certain proposal, instead of having to guess in advance if you will like what is compatible with your insurance plan...