4 ms·

Life expectancy doesn't increase much; life expectancy in good health is decreasing, thanks to worsening work conditions. Are you supposed to work with crutche

by wazoox 7y ago

Life expectancy doesn't increase much; life expectancy in good health is decreasing, thanks to worsening work conditions. Are you supposed to work with crutches, canes and walking frames? In the meanwhile, during the past year the plutocrat class has seen its fortune soars immensely. This is revolting, this is a shame, and this has to stop. Now.

sokoloff 7y ago
Eyeballing the graph, it looks like it’s growing about 10 years every 30 or 40 years. That’s fast enough to put a drain on the system to pay for a decade longer of pension for the average participant.
- wazoox 7y ago
  There is no such animal as an "average participant". For a start, a low-wage male worker has a life expectancy of 74 while his manager has a life expectancy of 84. Conveniently, the managers pension system have amassed a huge cash pile of 150 billions (that the government -- these evil bastards -- plan to snatch away instead of spending it to pay pensions for the poor and the sick).
- Amezarak 7y ago
  Almost all the gains in life expectancy are due to less children dying. Life expectancy for sixty year olds has increased by a single digit number of years in the past century and is stagnating or declining in most countries. The argument that we have to work longer because of increased life expectancy is absolutely a rip-off. People who survived to retirement are not living much longer than they were a hundred years ago.
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    I see different data for France at least. https://www.ined.fr/en/everything_about_population/data/france/deaths-causes-mortality/life-expectancy/ https://www.ined.fr/en/everything_about_population/data/fran... Seems that life expectancy at age 65 has increased by about 1 year (a little over 5%) from 2008 to 2018. That 5% increase in pension coverage has to come from somewhere. It will come from reduced benefits, increased pension taxes for the working, and/or increased working times for the working. There does appear to be some natural limit, but it does not seem that almost all gains are from a reduction in childhood mortality.

by wazoox 7y ago

sokoloff 7y ago

Eyeballing the graph, it looks like it’s growing about 10 years every 30 or 40 years. That’s fast enough to put a drain on the system to pay for a decade longer of pension for the average participant.

wazoox 7y ago
There is no such animal as an "average participant". For a start, a low-wage male worker has a life expectancy of 74 while his manager has a life expectancy of 84. Conveniently, the managers pension system have amassed a huge cash pile of 150 billions (that the government -- these evil bastards -- plan to snatch away instead of spending it to pay pensions for the poor and the sick).
Amezarak 7y ago
Almost all the gains in life expectancy are due to less children dying. Life expectancy for sixty year olds has increased by a single digit number of years in the past century and is stagnating or declining in most countries. The argument that we have to work longer because of increased life expectancy is absolutely a rip-off. People who survived to retirement are not living much longer than they were a hundred years ago.
- sokoloff 7y ago
  I see different data for France at least. https://www.ined.fr/en/everything_about_population/data/france/deaths-causes-mortality/life-expectancy/ https://www.ined.fr/en/everything_about_population/data/fran... Seems that life expectancy at age 65 has increased by about 1 year (a little over 5%) from 2008 to 2018. That 5% increase in pension coverage has to come from somewhere. It will come from reduced benefits, increased pension taxes for the working, and/or increased working times for the working. There does appear to be some natural limit, but it does not seem that almost all gains are from a reduction in childhood mortality.