Tumgik
#retirement age
mapsontheweb · 2 years
Photo
Tumblr media
Retirement Age by Country, 2021.
by royal.maps
193 notes · View notes
alpaca-clouds · 9 months
Text
There is something wrong about the narrative...
Tumblr media
You know this kind of graphic, right? The population pyramid. And I do have a problem with it.
No, not with the pyramid itself. The pyramid is okay and valid. It just shows how the population looks in regards to age. No, my problem is with the narrative around it: "The pyramid is top-heavy and now the pension and care does not work anymore!!"
Technically this is wrong. And yes, the pyramid originally was exactly about that. About showing how the work done by the young people would pay into the system, so that old people could retire at some point and get care. Because originally, of course, we needed that bottom-heavy pyramid to make sure that there were enough people to do all the important work and take care of older people reliant on care.
Only... that it really is not true anymore, right? It more is like... it is just again the system being broken. Because capitalism sucks.
Let me address the two supposed problems with the entire pyramid and what not: 1) "Who is gonna pay for it?" and 2) "Who is going to do the care work?"
Who is gonna pay for the retirement?
See, the theory over here in Germany is technically that during your work time you pay into the social security net and should get back later what you paid in. But, obviously, you technically do not just save up for your own retirement. The money you pay into social security right now gets paid out to the people currently receiving their retirement benefits.
Hence the problem: When more people are on retirement benefits, while fewer people pay into the social security, the math does not work.
But... Like literally all problems related to people suffering from poverty (like a lot of old people are doing) it could be easily solved by redistributing the immense wealth of the super rich. Literally nobody needs to have more than 1 billion dollars. Heck. Nobody really needs more than 10 million, if we are really honest.
And no, giving that money to the rich does in fact not help the economy, if we are going by pro-capitalist logics. Redistributing the wealth, does.
Really, we do not even need retirement funds, if we just gave out UBI for everyone. (Or went communist.)
And that we can finance by taxing the rich. Also taxing any sort of stock trading.
But who is going to do the care work?
See, here is the other issue, where just capitalism is the problem. Because technically there is not a lack of people who would be able to do the care work and would be willing to do it, if only the jobs in care work would be a) fairly compensated and b) actually respected in society.
See, when we look at the job market today, we see in fact a lot of "bullshit jobs", as David Graeber calls it in his book by the same name. Meaning: Jobs that produce nothing of societal value. Jobs, that society could do well without and that quite often aim to enforce the hierarchies of capitalism. Literally.
Hence, heck, even if we had too few people to work in care (something that technically really is not true), we could easily just get rid of those kinds of jobs. In general there are a lot of jobs that only exist to give the appearance of keeping people busy. (The story of why the 40 hour work week is bullshit is a story for another day.)
But yeah, the reason why most people are kept away and pushed out of the care industry is just how underpaid and overworked everyone there is.
See, caring for people is actually something that many people find fulfilling. But not under those circumstances. So, better the circumstances and you will have enough folks to work in care.
So, yeah. Whenever someone keeps whining about "top heavy pyramids" just tell them: "The problem is not birth rates. The problem is capitalism."
19 notes · View notes
tenaciousgay · 1 year
Text
The protests going on in France right now are based. The government there want to raise the retirement age "because we cannot afford pensions", with similar thoughts going on in right wing governments in other EU countries too.
The right want us to work until we die. They will take our retirement from us, justifying it by saying the country cannot afford it, while continuing to subsidize the 1% with tax breaks and subsidies. Fuck them.
45 notes · View notes
nando161mando · 13 days
Text
Tumblr media
Remember when the French almost burned everything down for raising the retirement age from 62 to 64?
3 notes · View notes
carlossainz5533 · 1 year
Text
I’m still convinced that wasn’t Luka’s last wc - I’m convinced he’ll pull his 40y/o ass out of nowhere and still play the wc
27 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
From a protest against raising the retirement age in Bordeaux, France. X
21 notes · View notes
ahedderick · 1 year
Text
Normal Retirement Age
   Apparently increasing Normal Retirement Age is a recent political issue in not only the USA but France, as well. None of the USA posts I’ve seen mention that this already happened, quite some time ago. Social Security normal retirement age is generally thought of as 65, but for Baby Boomers it starts creeping up past 66 and Gen X and later are at 67.
Tumblr media
   I don’t know how long this has been in effect, but definitely since I was working with retirement plans in the 1990s. I’m not saying it’s good or defending it in any way, just trying to let folks know this isn’t new. From my perspective (over 50) on aging and my own health, I don’t think folks should be working past 60 unless they’re in a field that they truly enjoy.
   Out of my recent ancestors, my parents and grandparents, age at death was 61, 63, 67, 70, 83, and 89 (ish). I can’t look at that and plan for a lengthy retirement. This is only one of many issues we need to address urgently in this unfortunate country, I know, but there it is.
17 notes · View notes
edwardos · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
13 notes · View notes
Text
Sen. John Kennedy should feel lucky that we allow his head to remain attached to his neck.
Tumblr media
It’s time for American workers to start taking pointers from the French
Tumblr media
10 notes · View notes
eaglesnick · 1 year
Text
Second-rate Britain 7
The UK pension and life expectancy controversy rumbles on.
Kemi Badenoch, Secretary of State for Business and Trade, was interviewed by Amol Rajan on the Today programme (31/03/23) about her new trade deal in the Pacific. This much-heralded deal is worth 0.08% of GDP. The governments own figures calculate that leaving the EU cost us 4% of GDP so Badenock's deal is hardly doing to make up the loss in EU trade.
What has this got to do with pensions and life expectancy?  A lot. Without a vibrant economy, good pensions become unaffordable and ordinary people are made to work longer and longer, to the point where many will die before they reach official retirement age.
I mention Kemi Badenoch because she is one of many self-proclaimed right-wing politicians in Sunak's administration, and our pensions and life expectancy are directly linked to their beliefs and behaviour: beliefs inform and shape legislation.
Badenoch, and right-wing politicians like her, are ideologues. They put belief before evidence when drawing up the laws we have to live by. We all know the terrible damage Liz Truss, an ideologue in the extreme, did to our economy: so extreme even her own party couldn’t stomach her!
Badenoch is as bad.
When asked by Amol Rajan if this year’s economic figure of 0.1% growth was acceptable she replied:
“Even getting 0.1% GDP (growth) is actually us managing the economy well”.
Really? The IMF reported Eurozone growth at 3.5% for 2022. If Badenoch’s 0.1% growth is managing the economy well what does a failing UK economy would look like?
Rajan put two points to Badenoch.
“In the decade to 2007 Britain’s productivity growth was second only to America in the G7. In the decade to 2019 growth stalled to just 0.7% a year making Britain the 2nd slowest in the G7."
These economic figures, said Rajan, translate into:
 “…real felt human experience…After 13 years of your party being in power life expectancy in this country is rising for the rich people and falling for the poor people. Can you think of a more severe indictment of your parties record in power than that?”
Badenoch then made a number of excuses for her party failing to grow the economy, and on falling life expectancy for the poor said:
“We have done and spent so much on things like the NHS and education. Obviously it is very disappointing.”
Apart from this being a totally misleading statement regarding monies spent on the NHS and education - spending has actually fallen in both these sectors as a percentage of GDP over the last decade – her reaction to life expectancy falling for the poor as being “disappointing” is callous in the extreme.
But she isn’t the only callous right-wing politician in the Tory ranks.
“Jacob Rees-Mogg suggests state pension age should be raised to 72” (Daily Mail: 30/3/23)
Rees-Mogg, like Badenoch, is an ideologue of the worse kind: they simply REFUSE to acknowledge facts.
Reese-Mogg, according to the Mail,
…”argued that for the age to reflect improvements in life expectancy since 1940 it would need to be four years higher than the 68 currently being mooted.”
In the same way Badenoch has publicly stated that there is no institutional racism in Britain (please read the reports on the Met and the Fire Service), Reese-Mogg ignores the figures for life expectancy for the poor.
If the Tories remain in power we in Britain face the prospect of watching younger French retirees sitting on Mediterranean beaches sipping champagne while we, providing  we are lucky enough to live long enough, will be slaving away into our seventies.
5 notes · View notes
gwydionmisha · 1 year
Link
7 notes · View notes
Photo
Tumblr media
Republicans are unclear on the concept of negotiating.
         Republicans in the House have been telling anyone who will listen that they will take the debt ceiling as a hostage to force Democrats to cut spending on Social Security and Medicare. Hostage-taking is inconsistent with good faith negotiations—a concept that appears to elude Republicans.
         Rep. James Comer repeated the hostage threat over the weekend when he said the following on a Sunday talk show: "So, the Senate is going to have to recognize the fact that we're not going to budge until we see meaningful reform with respect to spending."
         President Biden has stated several times that he will not negotiate with Republicans over budget cuts if they use the debt ceiling as a hostage. Republicans are shocked, offended, and puzzled that Biden will not negotiate with them if they threaten to destroy the global economy to get what they want. GOP Rep. Don Bacon whined on ABC's "This Week" about Biden's refusal to negotiate with terrorists:
When President Biden says he's just going to refuse to negotiate with Republicans on any concessions, I don't think that's right . . . . President Biden has to negotiate. He can't say he refuses to negotiate.
See Talking Points Memo, G.O.P. Complains That Biden Administration Won't Negotiate With Terrorists On Debt Limit.
         As I noted in yesterday's newsletter, Republicans are quickly coming to understand that they have painted themselves into a negotiating corner from which there is no graceful escape. If your opening offer is a "Take-it-or-leave-it" demand tied to a nuclear threat, if your opponent refuses to "Take it," you have nowhere to go after your opponent says, "No thanks. I'll leave it."
         The absurdity and unreality of the GOP threat to cut Social Security is driven home by recent polling. A CBS News / YouGov poll conducted last week found that 7 in 10 Americans rate "protecting Social Security and Medicare" as a "high priority" for the 118th Congress. Guess which demographic group ranks protecting Social Security and Medicare the highest? Answer: White Americans with no college degree (78%). (See page 65 of 77.) Guess which demographic group most strongly supports the Republican Party? White Americans with no college degree. It would be political suicide for Republicans to cut Medicare and Social Security.
         Republican House members have begun to change their rhetoric by saying they will "protect" Social Security—but in the same breath, talk about raising the retirement age for qualifying for Social Security benefits to 70. When Republican Rick Allen of Georgia was cornered in a Capitol hallway by a reporter last week, Allen justified raising the Social Security retirement age to 70 by claiming that people "actually want to work longer." Uh, no, they don't—at least they don't want to be forced to work longer before becoming eligible for Social Security. And to be clear, raising the retirement age is the same as cutting Social Security benefits. See Justifying Attack on Social Security, House Republican Claims People' Want to Work Longer' (commondreams.org).
         Here's my point: Republicans are backtracking on cutting Social Security so quickly that they are saying stupid things like, "People want to work longer" to justify cutting benefits. While none of this guarantees that Republicans won't crater the world economy, they now understand that their heated campaign demagoguery is indefensible. Whether they can work themselves out of the wet paper bag into which they have inserted themselves remains to be seen. But the dynamic has shifted in favor of rationality.
Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter
4 notes · View notes
Text
i'm going to start killing financial "experts"
0 notes
squaredawayblog · 26 days
Text
Blue-collar workers can't always delay retirement to increase their monthly benefits, even if it’s in their financial interest to do so.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
0 notes
hasanabivideos · 1 month
Text
youtube
0 notes
Text
craving pathetic wet old women characters. where is the feminism
11K notes · View notes