2 ms·
> Always remember that the world was fine with 2bn people just 100 years ago. But then leaders started promising the old people (majority of voters) wealth tra
by lotsofpulp 2y ago
> Always remember that the world was fine with 2bn people just 100 years ago.
But then leaders started promising the old people (majority of voters) wealth transfers from the young people.
And that will cause friction, because these wealth transfers only made sense with growing proportions of young people.
- PaulHoule 2y agoThose wealth transfers happened informally before the government formalized them. Social security takes a burden off young people as much as it gives to old people. Elder abuse is widespread in Confucian societies like Japan and China, it's the dark side of a culture that professes filial piety but actually breeds resentment in the young.
- lotsofpulp 2y agoA wealth transfer from child to parent / relative is different than a wealth transfer from young person to the collective of old people, apportioned wealth based on complicated and changing formulas. There exists an arbitrage opportunity where one can avoid the costs and compromises of coupling/parenting, and still retain some of the benefits. > Social security takes a burden off young people as much as it gives to old people. I don’t see it this way. If I were given the choice, I would not pay the government at all, and I would not expect anything from the government in the future. I already don’t, by way of knowing that my future benefits will be decreased in purchasing power via devaluation of currency and increased retirement age and changes in the benefit formula. And it wouldn’t change my burden at all, because I didn’t ask to be born, hence I don’t owe anyone in their old age (nor does anyone owe me in my old age).