4 ms·
I'm unsure if you're being facetious so I'll take your comment at face value. Government isn't a static thing - especially one that is elected by the people (f
by jfthoi 3y ago
I'm unsure if you're being facetious so I'll take your comment at face value.
Government isn't a static thing - especially one that is elected by the people (for the people). Sooner or later members within said government will also consider retirement. So even if you can elect a government that disagrees with #1, you won't be able to hold it for too long.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago"People ought to be able to retire" ... I assume that you mean the idea that people who have worked most of their lives should be able to stop working something in the age range of 60-70, and then enjoy at least a moderately comfortable life until death. If that assumption is correct, this is a relatively new idea, at least in the sense that government has any active responsibility for it. I can absolutely guarantee you that there are currently elected members of the US Republican Party, and similar political parties in other countries, who do not agree with the concept that government has any role to play in this. Don't work hard enough during your life? Your problem. Don't save/invest appropriately ? Your problem. 100 or 150 years ago, the idea that there would ever be a US government that would take notable steps to try to ensure a moderately comfortable life during retirement would have seemed like a pipe dream. It remains something upon that some political ideologies do not agree with.