Oh God! The pensionable age is going up to 70 years.

[pyirt]

We`re all going to have work longer here in the UK to pay for the "pension short fall". Only another 30 years and more to go. (Prolly much longer for the rest of you) Oh Shit!

[Dante Hicks]

I'm sure Nodrog will be here in a minute to condemn the failings of the welfare state but yeah, it sucks.

Basically our current economic model is broken. Thankfully we have a **** load of immigrants to support an eventual aged white minority elite, but I can't see that being very sustainable (politically). Even if we somehow abolished the welfare state (without thousands starving to death within weeks) private pensions would fail too (albeit later for most and a lot later for some).

We either have to modify our expectations of old age, completley change our level of savings/investments through our youth, modify the way old people are looked after, have more kids, or some sort of combination of all of these.

I suspect nothing will be done and Europe will just rely on third world migrants to sustain it. "Europeans" (as a group of people) will eventually be confined to a doddering elderley senile population mumbling something about how they used to rule the world and how it's a shame there are so many black people around these days.

[Tactitus]

No surprise there. Government pyramid, er, pension plans are all going to crash and burn--especially with the baby boom demographic. Benefits will be reduced, taxes will go up, and the age of retirement will be pushed back.

Fortunately, I have my own retirement funds... at least until the government confiscates them.

I suppose the best thing is to die young.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

I suppose the best thing is to die young.

Well, seriously that's another thing. Right now we seem to have the idea that it's a great idea to keep people alive as long as people in pretty rubbish standards of living. Things like medical bills for the terminally ill are very high for instance.

If someone wants to live their life and make loads of sacrifices so they'll definitely to 100 that's fine. But I don't see why that should be the norm.

[pablissimo]

I fully plan to be part of some product of the Soylent Corporation by age 50.

[Evergreen]

I'm scottish, I don't have to worry about retirement.

[pyirt]

I dunno if I can get my head around working `till 70. It scares me. Wot? me at work with grey hair and a walking stick etc.. with nubile female students around in the lab. I`d feel so out of place :/

ps: on paper I`m Scottish too.

[Dace]

Originally Posted by Evergreen

I don't have to worry about retirement.

You have to work before you can retire.

[Blastoderm]

Oh well. That at least convinces me even more to move to Italy and retire at 45.

[Dace]

I have a pension plan.

BTW apparantly civil servents retire at 60 (you can apply for special permission to work for another year for a maximum of another 5 years tho).

So only another 37 years to go \o/

[wu_trax]

your welfare-state (or whats left of it) probably isnt the problem. its the whole age-structure.
if you make people safe on their own for their old-age and tell them for example to buy stocks youll get the same situation: a lot of old people will try to sell their stocks at the same time, while only a few young people want to buy new ones. the prices fall and the system collapses.
with the age structure that is developing in europe right now it really doesnt matter what system you use.

[Nodrog]

whoever would have thought that giving all your retirement money away and then counting on your children to support you was a plan likely to fail!

[Marilyn Manson]

All pensioners should be evacuated to Siberia.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

your welfare-state (or whats left of it) probably isnt the problem. its the whole age-structure.
if you make people safe on their own for their old-age and tell them for example to buy stocks youll get the same situation: a lot of old people will try to sell their stocks at the same time, while only a few young people want to buy new ones. the prices fall and the system collapses.

That's why you should be encouraging immigration (or at least, be discouraging it less). Also, didn't you get the memo on the global economy thing?

[pyirt]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

your welfare-state (or whats left of it) probably isnt the problem. its the whole age-structure.
if you make people safe on their own for their old-age and tell them for example to buy stocks youll get the same situation: a lot of old people will try to sell their stocks at the same time, while only a few young people want to buy new ones. the prices fall and the system collapses.
with the age structure that is developing in europe right now it really doesnt matter what system you use.

You could be right.; all this age structure probs with the post war "baby boom" etc. I was born at the end of it in the sixties. I think there was another boom in the eighties here which will affect a number of you ppls here :/

[skiddy]

I don't intend working till that age.

I either get an exceptionally good pension after 25yr in the forces, or I earn millions on the PGA tour.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by skiddy

or I earn millions on the PGA tour.

More like 'Pretty Gay... something'.

[acropolis]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

whoever would have thought that giving all your retirement money away and then counting on your children to support you was a plan likely to fail!

Guarantee it works out fine for them. Guarantee.

Option one, there's plenty of money to go around, and no problem ever comes up.

Option two, there are simply way too many old people, and not nearly enough young working folks to support them. In which case the system collapses. On the young people. Because let's face it, if there were so many old people the young couldn't support them, there would also be enough old people that younger people's votes would be insignificant, especially noting that they don't vote anyway.

Old people will get what they want when they want and how they want it come rain or shine or nuclear war or complete government bankruptcy, even if the army has to be called in to steal the pants off of indignant Randians.

[IncubusGod]

Well this is the main problem facing the entire Western world. The problem seems more immediate in the U.S. their Baby Boom happened exactly at the end of WWII, the rest of Europe had it over the next few years when the recovery was kicking in.

Basically I'm supprised governments aren't cutting all contraception programs, encouraging people to have loads of kids, getting people to smoke more, do more extreeme sports past the age of 60 and open a Soilent Green factory.

Ironic thing is that the right wing governments of Europe may have to rely on the single mothers they decry producing kids to pay for their pensions.

[pyirt]

Originally Posted by IncubusGod

Well this is the main problem facing the entire Western world. The problem seems more immediate in the U.S. their Baby Boom happened exactly at the end of WWII, the rest of Europe had it over the next few years when the recovery was kicking in.

Basically I'm supprised governments aren't cutting all contraception programs, encouraging people to have loads of kids, getting people to smoke more, do more extreeme sports past the age of 60 and open a Soilent Green factory.

Ironic thing is that the right wing governments of Europe may have to rely on the single mothers they decry producing kids to pay for their pensions.

Yep; yet again you could be right. Is this a cynical point of view though? We need more "kids" children, immigrate`s here in the UK to pay for peoples pensions.

[IncubusGod]

Originally Posted by pyirt

Yep; yet again you could be right. Is this a cynical point of view though? We need more "kids" children, immigrate`s here in the UK to pay for peoples pensions.

Well we have a different population structure to the UK and the rest of Europe as we didn't experience any post war boom. We only stopped loosing population at the end of the 80's so it's my generation that's gonna be the one to struggle here. By the time that happens we can all look at what's happened to every other western european country and take corrective action

(that being invading your countries and taking over from your old decrepid 70 year old soldiers )

[Dead_Meat]

I intend to slip on something in a department store and intentionally break a wrist or something else that'll look bad but will heal in a few months or so.

The litigation from this will allow us to retire and live happily ever after.

[Dead_Meat]

Oh yeah, almost forgot;

I'M SO OLD THEY BROUGHT ME OUT OF RETIREMENT

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by acropolis

Guarantee it works out fine for them. Guarantee.

Yeah. Immigration, greatly increased taxation, and a few changes will probably save them. Perhaps people will wake up in time though, who knows.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

That's why you should be encouraging immigration

Well yeah although most people don't actually want more (third world) immigration.

Although in the long-long term that's a bit of a stupid strategy unless we're going to import Martians or something. Or are we relying on inventing robots or something?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Well yeah although most people don't actually want more (third world) immigration.

Although in the long-long term that's a bit of a stupid strategy unless we're going to import Martians or something. Or are we relying on inventing robots or something?

Yeah but then they'll take over and rule the world and enslave humanity and kill the old people and elevate some of us to be rulers by proxy and force us to copulate furiously and keep us in vats where we don't have to move and we're fed by machines an.........





...........so...........








ALL HAIL OUR NEW ROBOT OVERLORDS.

[Nodrog]

Encouraging immigration is a really bad idea actually - all it can possible achieve is to make a fundamentally broken system survive a few years longer. Short term solutions like that serve no purpose other than to paper up the cracks.

[Dante Hicks]

What would you suggest Nod?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

What would you suggest Nod?

I'd suggest making old people work for a living. Although I'm not nod so I'm unsure if I'm allowed to answer this

[queball]

We should live the foreigners where they are, institute a global tax that goes towards English pensioners, and hope a lot of poor countries get richer soon.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

I'd suggest making old people work for a living. Although I'm not nod so I'm unsure if I'm allowed to answer this

What, even if they have savings? That seems a little unfair.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

What would you suggest Nod?

Acknowledging that the welfare state is a fundamentally bad idea and moving in the direction of scrapping it gradually over the next 30 years or so. Immigrants could certainly plug up the holes while this transition is occuring, but they would by no means constitute a permanent solution.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

What, even if they have savings? That seems a little unfair.

If we didn't spend so much time trolling each other this board would have successfully amalgamated objectivism, communism and libertarianism long before now. And discovered at least two cures for cancer.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

That's why you should be encouraging immigration (or at least, be discouraging it less). Also, didn't you get the memo on the global economy thing?

doesnt help much, a few years later they will be old and will want pensions

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

Acknowledging that the welfare state is a fundamentally bad idea and moving in the direction of scrapping it gradually over the next 30 years or so.

Ending welfare wouldn't actually stop the "demographic problem" as such; although obviously it would prevent some of the minor issues like state pensions running out of cash and such.

[Nodrog]

Why would the 'demographic problem' actually be a problem without the existence of the welfare state?

[Dante Hicks]

Because individuals wouldn't have enough savings to live in any reasonable fashion beyond retirement.

Even if we could imagine a system where John Doe's taxes were given back to him (retroactively or something combined with any interest he would have earned) he wouldn't have enough money to support him through his latter years.

Of course, this depends what you're defining as a "problem" of course.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Even if we could imagine a system where John Doe's taxes were given back to him (retroactively or something combined with any interest he would have earned) he wouldn't have enough money to support him through his latter years.

What? Most people pay far more into their pension than they get back from it, especially when you consider the interest they would have earned if it were privately invested.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

What? Most people pay far more into their pension than they get back from it, especially when you consider the interest they would have earned if it were privately invested.

At the moment private pensions are "subsidised" by most pensioners receiving public health care (and auxillary services). I presume you're talking about getting rid of the whole shebang (apologies if you're not).

[acropolis]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

What, even if they have savings? That seems a little unfair.

when did you become such an apologist for the well-to-do? people shouldn't be able to buy their way out of conscription, and the elderly shouldn't be able to buy their way out of the salt mines in our eutopian future society.

Originally Posted by wu_trax

doesnt help much, a few years later they will be old and will want pensions

i don't get where this idea that temporary fixes and jury-rigging are useless.

did people forget that we'll all be dead before too long?

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Well yeah although most people don't actually want more (third world) immigration.

Their loss, I guess.

Although in the long-long term that's a bit of a stupid strategy unless we're going to import Martians or something. Or are we relying on inventing robots or something?

In the long-long term there is no problem. Eventually, birth rates will stabilize and you won't see disproportionately large numbers of old people relative to the population as a whole like we're seeing now with our rapidly-falling birth rates (even assuming that you want to keep the whole young->old transfer of wealth thing going).

I suppose we might see some sort of dramatic extension of the human life span, but even there, it wouldn't make much sense to have everyone retire at age 60 if the average life span is, say, 600 years (unless people are all really, really productive during their working years).

[Boogster]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

whoever would have thought that giving all your retirement money away and then counting on your children to support you was a plan likely to fail!

I have a cunning plan:

Become a Catholic and marry another Catholic.
First priority: make many babies - you are uninhibited by any barriers.
Sell your children on ebay.
Sell your house.

Retire early and live on your newly-made riches - You're a self-made man, living the American Dream!

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Eventually, birth rates will stabilize

Stabalise at what though? If it stabilises at the level in some European countries then the population will still be declining even if the birth-rate overall was steady.

[Intrepid00]

Originally Posted by Boogster

I have a cunning plan:

Become a Catholic and marry another Catholic.
First priority: make many babies - you are uninhibited by any barriers.
Sell your children on ebay.
Sell your house.

Retire early and live on your newly-made riches - You're a self-made man, living the American Dream!

I know someone that did something similar but more moral (also Catholic) who paid for his kids higher education, but first he made them fill out a contract. Upon graduation they have to pay him $100 a month till he dies. Factor in 7 kids and you have a nice retirement plan going.

Also, isn't expected life span a of a male 75 now. Well, lets make it more fare and raise it for women who get to live longer. If we only get 5 years, so should they.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Stabalise at what though? If it stabilises at the level in some European countries then the population will still be declining even if the birth-rate overall was steady.

Stablize in the sense that birth rates will eventually equal death rates. If the birth rate stablizes at a level below what's needed for replacement then the population declines and eventually dies out (you did say "long-long term" right?). Naturally, an extinct population has the simplest pension system of all.

I think it would be premature to say that birth rates have really stablized yet though.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Stablize in the sense that birth rates will eventually equal death rates. If the birth rate stablizes at a level below what's needed for replacement then the population declines and eventually dies out

Yeah, I'm counting that as a problem although it's easy to see how it'd be viewed as a good thing really.

I think it would be premature to say that birth rates have really stablized yet though.

Agreed. They will probably decline further among "native" Europeans.