4 ms·

Pensions should be banned. The entire notion of a guaranteed income is unrealistic and incredibly expensive. People need to save and manage their own spending a

Pensions should be banned. The entire notion of a guaranteed income is unrealistic and incredibly expensive. People need to save and manage their own spending and savings responsibly. Taxes for redistribution make sense within some range of policies but simply telling people they’ll be guaranteed a certain income? With various loopholes to maximize pensions? It’s no surprise that many pension funds are in the red. And the pensions mentioned in the article are an example of this. It mentions that two workers supporting each pensioner is a problem. How? If that’s the case wouldn’t these two workers eventually need four workers to support them as pensioners? What makes this different from a Ponzi scheme?

Ekaros 7mo ago
Also I somewhat question that money will have same purchasing power in future if either of population and productivity growth fails. The idea is that you save now and in future there is enough labour to buy... Which is likely to fail. You can make numbers look like anything. But that does not solve the issue that people need to be willing to do something for you for price you can pay.
robocat 7mo ago
Savings is an insidious lie to ourselves. It makes zero sense to an economy. X people working, and Y people not working leads to the outcomes you see as obvious. Trying to say some people are not saving enough becomes meaningless when looking at a whole economy. Or you are saying that people should increase their time worked or reduce their disposable spending which is saying they hardly deserve any rewards for their hours. As someone who has legitimately tried to save enough for my retirement, it is obvious that my savings will be taken away through government taxation changes (the "tax the rich" movement will insidiously spread to taxing middle class savers in New Zealand). The government can't afford to pay for retirees so it will grab resources from whoever has them which I expect to be the "savers" you mention. An economy can reduce spending on retirees, and increasing the retirement age is the most convenient way to do that. The proper way out is to increase the productivity of the economy. Perhaps you are not acquainted with the common retirees that are skimping on all expenses - trivial things like enough heating or food. I have a retiree friend living in his car (and still working hard).
- laughing_man 7mo ago
  Once people get the idea saving just makes you a sap the numbers will get dramatically worse. This is my argument against needs-based pensions: If I only get a pension when I don't have money, trust me, I will not have money when I retire.

Ekaros 7mo ago

Also I somewhat question that money will have same purchasing power in future if either of population and productivity growth fails. The idea is that you save now and in future there is enough labour to buy... Which is likely to fail. You can make numbers look like anything. But that does not solve the issue that people need to be willing to do something for you for price you can pay.

robocat 7mo ago

Savings is an insidious lie to ourselves. It makes zero sense to an economy. X people working, and Y people not working leads to the outcomes you see as obvious. Trying to say some people are not saving enough becomes meaningless when looking at a whole economy. Or you are saying that people should increase their time worked or reduce their disposable spending which is saying they hardly deserve any rewards for their hours. As someone who has legitimately tried to save enough for my retirement, it is obvious that my savings will be taken away through government taxation changes (the "tax the rich" movement will insidiously spread to taxing middle class savers in New Zealand). The government can't afford to pay for retirees so it will grab resources from whoever has them which I expect to be the "savers" you mention. An economy can reduce spending on retirees, and increasing the retirement age is the most convenient way to do that. The proper way out is to increase the productivity of the economy. Perhaps you are not acquainted with the common retirees that are skimping on all expenses - trivial things like enough heating or food. I have a retiree friend living in his car (and still working hard).

laughing_man 7mo ago
Once people get the idea saving just makes you a sap the numbers will get dramatically worse. This is my argument against needs-based pensions: If I only get a pension when I don't have money, trust me, I will not have money when I retire.