4 ms·

> Pension is a Ponzi scheme. Explained in terms of economic theory, if everybody works and saves in time period 1, and retires and receives pension in time peri

> Pension is a Ponzi scheme. Explained in terms of economic theory, if everybody works and saves in time period 1, and retires and receives pension in time period 2, then... their pension is worthless, because there's infinite inflation, because no more goods and services get produced. You've created an impossible situation which will never exist and then offered it as an example of why taking care of the elderly, something humans have done since before recorded history, is flawed. As Bill and Ted would say: Bogus!

pfannkuchen 1y ago
I think what they missed is that people typically work for much longer than they are retired. If the periods were of equal length, I think the Ponzi scheme thing would be true. As is its sort of a modified fractionated ponzi.
- broken-kebab 1y ago
  Ponzi, or no Ponzi, it's still an illusion: let's assume that we all generate enough money saved in those funds during our productive years to sustain ourselves in senior periods, even counting in the almighty inflation. The problem is it's not money you need when old, and frail, you want somebody doing work for that money. So the whole scheme still requires enough young workers entering the market, and them be willing to perpetuate it. Which is kinda not guaranteed if each gen is smaller then the previous one.
  - timschmidt 1y ago
    > Ponzi, or no Ponzi, it's still an illusion What do you think money is? > you want somebody doing work This is one reason why the robotics work going on right now is so exciting. Without the demand for elder care, it wouldn't attract as much investment or development.
    - imtringued 1y ago
      >What do you think money is? Money is basically a coupon for labor. If there are no vending machines (read young workers) for labor coupons, then you won't get labor, no matter how many coupons you accumulate. Holding money does not teleport people into the future. (= the store of value myth)
- celeritascelery 1y ago
  Seniors are also really expensive. By some estimates you spend half of your lifetime healthcare cost in the last five years of your life. It typically takes multiple working people to support a single senior on government benefits.
- tomp 1y ago
  Do they? 0-25 education, 25-67 work, 67-82 pension, it's almost equivalent (42 working, 40 not working)
  - timschmidt 1y ago
    Education isn't work?
tomp 1y ago
> why taking care of the elderly, something humans have done since before recorded history Well yeah, but before government-organised pension, it was your kids taking care of you when you get older, so the system was much more balanced (or rather, only imbalanced on the micro scale, not at a mega scale we see now...)
- kulahan 1y ago
  This is missing the elderly with no young to support them for whatever reason, so some level of government support is necessary. You can’t just have old people dying in the streets of course.
  - zeroCalories 1y ago
    Sometimes you gotta know when the parties over and it's time to leave.
  - buckle8017 1y ago
    Those people literally dug their own graves.
    - timschmidt 1y ago
      NIH / WHO put infertility at somewhere between 10% and 17.5%. You've condemned a sixth of the world's population through no fault of their own.
      - buckle8017 1y ago
        Adopt some orphans.
        timschmidt 1y ago
        George Washington chose to found a country instead. Beethoven and Chopin wrote some music. Queen Anne united a Kingdom, and Queen Mary II assented to the 1689 Bill of Rights. Frida Kahlo painted some art. Virginia Woolf wrote some literature. Helen Geisel edited Dr. Seuss. Rosalind Franklin helped discover DNA. Jean Purdy helped develop IVF. All infertile due to no fault of their own. Perhaps you should consider moving out of the country, avoiding classical music, literature, and art, foregoing all DNA-related medical developments and IVF, and meditating on empathy as you do so.
csomar 1y ago
> You've created an impossible situation which will never exist It can and does, albeit in slower motion (ie Japan, South Korea) > why taking care of the elderly, something humans have done since before recorded history, is flawed. Humans took care of THEIR elderly. The system was made to take care of THE elderly. Pretty sure most people don't want to see old people begging for food on the street but also prefer not to pay much to have it resolved (varies by country and culture)
- timschmidt 1y ago
  > It can and does, albeit in slower motion (ie Japan, South Korea) Read what he wrote again. The scenario he created (everyone works, then everyone retires) has never and will never happen. Humanity is more likely to be wiped out by a meteor. > Humans took care of THEIR elderly. Point me toward the non-human elderly being supported by the social safety net. We're all related. You just have to look back far enough. > Pretty sure most people don't want to see old people begging for food on the street but also prefer not to pay much to have it resolved (varies by country and culture) I agree with you here. People don't want to help others, and don't want to suffer the consequences of not helping others. People are conflicted creatures who suffer from a long https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
  - csomar 1y ago
    > The scenario he created (everyone works, then everyone retires) has never and will never happen. It can happen in a generation, if all of that generation decides to have zero offspring. This is why it is happening in slow motion. There are still people having kids but not enough for sustaining the current population levels. > We're all related. We are also related to bugs. Humans generally care for their very close relatives (kids -> parents -> cousins...) and emotionally care for the rest of humans.
    - timschmidt 1y ago
      > It can happen in a generation, if all of that generation decides to have zero offspring. All of humanity has never decided to do the same thing ever. Society follows a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution , and there will always be folks who decide to do other than everyone else. Oppositional defiant disorder is a thing. You're living in imaginary land. > We are also related to bugs. Yes. And many very intelligent people besides myself think that we should be taking better care of the environment and all the other creatures in it besides ourselves as well.

pfannkuchen 1y ago

I think what they missed is that people typically work for much longer than they are retired. If the periods were of equal length, I think the Ponzi scheme thing would be true. As is its sort of a modified fractionated ponzi.

broken-kebab 1y ago
Ponzi, or no Ponzi, it's still an illusion: let's assume that we all generate enough money saved in those funds during our productive years to sustain ourselves in senior periods, even counting in the almighty inflation. The problem is it's not money you need when old, and frail, you want somebody doing work for that money. So the whole scheme still requires enough young workers entering the market, and them be willing to perpetuate it. Which is kinda not guaranteed if each gen is smaller then the previous one.
- timschmidt 1y ago
  > Ponzi, or no Ponzi, it's still an illusion What do you think money is? > you want somebody doing work This is one reason why the robotics work going on right now is so exciting. Without the demand for elder care, it wouldn't attract as much investment or development.
  - imtringued 1y ago
    >What do you think money is? Money is basically a coupon for labor. If there are no vending machines (read young workers) for labor coupons, then you won't get labor, no matter how many coupons you accumulate. Holding money does not teleport people into the future. (= the store of value myth)
celeritascelery 1y ago
Seniors are also really expensive. By some estimates you spend half of your lifetime healthcare cost in the last five years of your life. It typically takes multiple working people to support a single senior on government benefits.
tomp 1y ago
Do they? 0-25 education, 25-67 work, 67-82 pension, it's almost equivalent (42 working, 40 not working)
- timschmidt 1y ago
  Education isn't work?

tomp 1y ago

> why taking care of the elderly, something humans have done since before recorded history Well yeah, but before government-organised pension, it was your kids taking care of you when you get older, so the system was much more balanced (or rather, only imbalanced on the micro scale, not at a mega scale we see now...)

kulahan 1y ago
This is missing the elderly with no young to support them for whatever reason, so some level of government support is necessary. You can’t just have old people dying in the streets of course.
- zeroCalories 1y ago
  Sometimes you gotta know when the parties over and it's time to leave.
- buckle8017 1y ago
  Those people literally dug their own graves.
  - timschmidt 1y ago
    NIH / WHO put infertility at somewhere between 10% and 17.5%. You've condemned a sixth of the world's population through no fault of their own.
    - buckle8017 1y ago
      Adopt some orphans.
      - timschmidt 1y ago
        George Washington chose to found a country instead. Beethoven and Chopin wrote some music. Queen Anne united a Kingdom, and Queen Mary II assented to the 1689 Bill of Rights. Frida Kahlo painted some art. Virginia Woolf wrote some literature. Helen Geisel edited Dr. Seuss. Rosalind Franklin helped discover DNA. Jean Purdy helped develop IVF. All infertile due to no fault of their own. Perhaps you should consider moving out of the country, avoiding classical music, literature, and art, foregoing all DNA-related medical developments and IVF, and meditating on empathy as you do so.

csomar 1y ago

> You've created an impossible situation which will never exist It can and does, albeit in slower motion (ie Japan, South Korea) > why taking care of the elderly, something humans have done since before recorded history, is flawed. Humans took care of THEIR elderly. The system was made to take care of THE elderly. Pretty sure most people don't want to see old people begging for food on the street but also prefer not to pay much to have it resolved (varies by country and culture)

timschmidt 1y ago
> It can and does, albeit in slower motion (ie Japan, South Korea) Read what he wrote again. The scenario he created (everyone works, then everyone retires) has never and will never happen. Humanity is more likely to be wiped out by a meteor. > Humans took care of THEIR elderly. Point me toward the non-human elderly being supported by the social safety net. We're all related. You just have to look back far enough. > Pretty sure most people don't want to see old people begging for food on the street but also prefer not to pay much to have it resolved (varies by country and culture) I agree with you here. People don't want to help others, and don't want to suffer the consequences of not helping others. People are conflicted creatures who suffer from a long https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
- csomar 1y ago
  > The scenario he created (everyone works, then everyone retires) has never and will never happen. It can happen in a generation, if all of that generation decides to have zero offspring. This is why it is happening in slow motion. There are still people having kids but not enough for sustaining the current population levels. > We're all related. We are also related to bugs. Humans generally care for their very close relatives (kids -> parents -> cousins...) and emotionally care for the rest of humans.
  - timschmidt 1y ago
    > It can happen in a generation, if all of that generation decides to have zero offspring. All of humanity has never decided to do the same thing ever. Society follows a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution , and there will always be folks who decide to do other than everyone else. Oppositional defiant disorder is a thing. You're living in imaginary land. > We are also related to bugs. Yes. And many very intelligent people besides myself think that we should be taking better care of the environment and all the other creatures in it besides ourselves as well.