Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Something has to give. If we have fewer longer living people, then we need them to work more years.

That's only on the premise that these young people are paying for my pension, which is a falsehood. I am the one who has paid for my pension. It's not my problem that the government/pension fund ran away with my money in the hope that some future shmuck will put more in their pyramid scheme, and then they can guarantee my payoff. That model is obviously not sustainable with people living longer and people having less children.

You know which model is sustainable? The model where I pay each month for my pension, and instead of these money fully disappearing immediately to pay for somebody else's pension, the government/pension fund is required to keep a certain % liquidity on that money, so that I am not dependent on any future generations entering the work force. Banks work like that, by law they are guaranteed to have a certain % of everybody's deposits in terms of liquidity, I don't see why pension funds don't emulate this.

The government and the pension funds should be, however, transparent whether they can change to a sustainable model or not, and that change shouldn't come in terms of draining more money from younger generation's taxes, nor by raising the retirement age. It should only come from the govt/pension funds speculating less with our money, because it's their responsibility to make it right, and not ours.



It's not really about the money, that's just the mechanism of exchange.

The root of the problem is a growing retired population depending on a shrinking group of workers to provide the goods and services they need.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: