When No One Retires (hbr.org) 414
More and more Americans want to work longer -- or have to, given that many aren't saving adequately for retirement. From a report: Before our eyes, the world is undergoing a massive demographic transformation. In many countries, the population is getting old. Very old. Globally, the number of people age 60 and over is projected to double to more than 2 billion by 2050 and those 60 and over will outnumber children under the age of 5. In the United States, about 10,000 people turn 65 each day, and one in five Americans will be 65 or older by 2030. By 2035, Americans of retirement age will eclipse the number of people aged 18 and under for the first time in U.S. history.
[...] Soon, the workforce will include people from as many as five generations ranging in age from teenagers to 80-somethings. Are companies prepared? The short answer is "no." Aging will affect every aspect of business operations -- whether it's talent recruitment, the structure of compensation and benefits, the development of products and services, how innovation is unlocked, how offices and factories are designed, and even how work is structured -- but for some reason, the message just hasn't gotten through. In general, corporate leaders have yet to invest the time and resources necessary to fully grasp the unprecedented ways that aging will change the rules of the game.
What's more, those who do think about the impacts of an aging population typically see a looming crisis -- not an opportunity. They fail to appreciate the potential that older adults present as workers and consumers. The reality, however, is that increasing longevity contributes to global economic growth. Today's older adults are generally healthier and more active than those of generations past, and they are changing the nature of retirement as they continue to learn, work, and contribute. In the workplace, they provide emotional stability, complex problem-solving skills, nuanced thinking, and institutional know-how. Their talents complement those of younger workers, and their guidance and support enhance performance and intergenerational collaboration. In encore careers, volunteering, and civic and social settings, their experience and problem-solving abilities contribute to society's well-being.
[...] Soon, the workforce will include people from as many as five generations ranging in age from teenagers to 80-somethings. Are companies prepared? The short answer is "no." Aging will affect every aspect of business operations -- whether it's talent recruitment, the structure of compensation and benefits, the development of products and services, how innovation is unlocked, how offices and factories are designed, and even how work is structured -- but for some reason, the message just hasn't gotten through. In general, corporate leaders have yet to invest the time and resources necessary to fully grasp the unprecedented ways that aging will change the rules of the game.
What's more, those who do think about the impacts of an aging population typically see a looming crisis -- not an opportunity. They fail to appreciate the potential that older adults present as workers and consumers. The reality, however, is that increasing longevity contributes to global economic growth. Today's older adults are generally healthier and more active than those of generations past, and they are changing the nature of retirement as they continue to learn, work, and contribute. In the workplace, they provide emotional stability, complex problem-solving skills, nuanced thinking, and institutional know-how. Their talents complement those of younger workers, and their guidance and support enhance performance and intergenerational collaboration. In encore careers, volunteering, and civic and social settings, their experience and problem-solving abilities contribute to society's well-being.
Fuck that (Score:5, Insightful)
I am retiring the instant I meet my relevant financial goals for doing so.
Re: (Score:2)
I am retiring the instant I meet my relevant financial goals for doing so.
That's why millennials aren't allowed to afford homes.
Re: Fuck that (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
This sounds like Exception here. Everyone must be like me otherwise they suck”.
Re:Fuck that (Score:4, Insightful)
You will quickly learn that you have an upper limit to how much relaxation your brain will tolerate. The "extreme hedonism" that people imagine, lounging around in hammocks sipping cocktails all day, leaves you bored out of your mind AND depressed after a couple of weeks (some people can't take it for even a few days).
The human brain *needs* a sense of meaning, or it goes crazy and punishes itself with depression. It gets most of that sense of meaning from having responsibility for something that matters. Our jobs provide that. We don't notice it because we just notice all the stress and obligation. And when we take a break we just notice the absence of stress. But that is because our breaks are short.
Very common stories include people coming out of retirement after a year, people turning to alcoholism after retirement, people dying shortly after retirement (sometimes by suicide and usually with depression-related symptoms), and people volunteering a lot after retirement.
Accept this. You will seek work after you retire, in one form or another. Or you will die. Odds are you will not lounge around and "bliss out" like you probably imagine.
Knowing this, consider NOT risking your financial viability in a very uncertain market (where all your retirement investments might fizzle out, costs might leap, a medical accident might eat up your savings). Instead, once you hit those goals, consider shifting your role to something that keeps your skills current while producing less stress (and possibly less income), going part time, or seeking work that is still profitable but more soul-satisfying (if not as lucrative).
You will find it more fulfilling in the long run if you stay relevant to the world. Abandoning the world will leave you feeling isolated and unwanted.
So, there you go.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Fuck that (Score:5, Insightful)
Or just don't try to find fulfilment through work. Hobbies, crafts, volunteering, learning, and family are all much, much, much better than work. For 90% of people, the only thing work is good for is to earn money so they can do other things.
exactely ! (Score:3)
Re: Fuck that (Score:5, Insightful)
Retiring does have to mean relaxing.
For me, it means no longer being a wage slave. I can do what I want, when I want, within reasonable limits. I will no longer need to worry about earning money. That doesnâ(TM)t mean I will not be working st something or doing something productive with my time.
Or you could just write OSS software (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, there are some folks who don't know what to do with themselves if they're not working. But they myth that most folks are that way is, well, a myth. One I suspect the wealthy put in our heads like the old "Idle hands are the devil's plaything" bullshit.
Re:Fuck that (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, lots of us don't really need employment to have plenty of work to do. I spent about a year doing a tiny bit of contracting work, lots of extra traveling, and otherwise generally doing nothing besides working on personal creative projects. The freedom was absolutely amazing, and at no point did I ever feel like I stopped working, or really even slowed down. I would expect the same to be true when I retire for good in a decade or three.
Re:Fuck that (Score:5, Insightful)
You will quickly learn that you have an upper limit to how much relaxation your brain will tolerate. The "extreme hedonism" that people imagine, lounging around in hammocks sipping cocktails all day, leaves you bored out of your mind AND depressed after a couple of weeks (some people can't take it for even a few days).
Cool story bro. Is that what US employers tell you as an excuse to only give you two weeks vacation? From here in Europe I can tell you a month plus is no problem and people want more. Those I've talked to who's taken 3/6/12 month sabbaticals all seem to have enjoyed it too.
Very common stories include people coming out of retirement after a year, people turning to alcoholism after retirement, people dying shortly after retirement (sometimes by suicide and usually with depression-related symptoms), and people volunteering a lot after retirement.
Anecdotal stories yes, but most people who retire simply retire. The mortality tables show no jump or peak at general retirement age. They do more volunteer work but for most that's at a fraction of a full work week and quite possibly a way of winding down, not proof they need it permanently. In fact I just checked the stats here in Norway and only 39% of our retirees are active members in any volunteer organization. Only 30% claim to have done any volunteer work. Of course that covers all retirees, directly post-retirement is probably higher but most of our elderly do fine just being retired.
Re: (Score:3)
Cool story bro. Is that what US employers tell you as an excuse to only give you two weeks vacation? From here in Europe...
No need to be a dick. Plenty of us in the US get more than two weeks. At 15 years with my company, you get five weeks a year.
FWIW, I've had several well off coworkers retire and come back. Mostly because they didn't have a plan, and decided they could only golf so much. I'll be taking my own shot at it in just a few months, While I don't have specific plans, I'm looking forward to finding some volunteer work just because I enjoy helping people.
Re:Fuck that (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. Americans are weird types. They take pride in their "hard work", sometimes you can't believe what kind of nonsense they have to do. Really few holidays a year. NO vacations (walmart gives their new employes ZERO days of vacations, they "earn" them by working years and years there. They're forced to do weird shifts. They are all hurr durr "free market will solve it dont give me no regulations that's for communists, if you dont like your job quit!" and then they have Amazon workers on food stamps. yes, people employed full time earn a salary that doesn't cover their minimal expenses. they are EXPECTED to work overtime). weird people. And they think *that* is what makes them the world's largest economy (it's not). They think *they* have the best standard of living. Most of them have never been in another country, and they seem to think you can just "move" to Canada. weird people, indeed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Fuck that (Score:5, Interesting)
I am retiring the instant I meet my relevant financial goals for doing so.
I got laid off in June 2017, but am debt-free (including having my mortgage paid off) and financially independent for my current and foreseeable situation, according to my spreadsheets where I track everything -- think FIRE [wikipedia.org], though not that young. My wife died in 2006 ( Remember Sue... [tumblr.com] ) so it's a little quiet.
As it turns out, I've been contacted by a number of employers and recruiters recently and had one in-person interview and several phone interviews that all look like they'll progress further. I've got 30 years experience and been a system/application programmer and system administrator on just about every version of Unix, several versions of Linux and Windows and am big into automation and am getting inquires to do DevOps [wikipedia.org] work. I'm thinking of going back to work. Some extra coin in the piggy bank wouldn't hurt and I'll get benefits and, eventually, 18 months of COBRA -- which was *way* less expensive than plans on the ACA marketplace, because I have too much passive/investment income to get subsidies.
Unless a family member gets sick (Score:5, Informative)
But it's a good thing we didn't gut the social safety net [google.com] and that nobody [msnbc.com] is doing anything [washingtonpost.com] that could impact your plans to retire.
I'm sure knowing all that is a real load off the old minderooni.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is when you move to a less-developed country, buy some property to pay your way, and enjoy the fact that cars, food, and everything else are 25-50% of US prices.
Not true. Food is cheaper, services are MUCH cheaper, but manufactured and internationally traded goods like cars are NOT cheaper. A car in China or India is at least as expensive as a car in America. A housekeeper, cook, or nanny, on the other hand, costs very little.
The trick is to live like a local. Eat local food. Get a bicycle (or rent an Ofo or MoBike). If you want to take a car, instead of driving use Ola or Didi (way cheaper than Uber in America).
Re: Fuck that (Score:2)
True. The other benefit of buying such a car is that you also don't have to save as much money for retirement since it won't be nearly as long.
Re: Fuck that (Score:2)
I live in Alaska.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
it's time to medicare lower age! (Score:3)
it's time to medicare lower age!
Re: (Score:2)
Well as a culture, we need to find more ways to support people, then punish them. After a lifetime of work, the new generation deserves their chance, and they should be allowed to take their time off, and change their lives to a retirement lifestyle. Which isn't just a vacation for the rest of their lives, but being able to do things they wanted to do earlier on.
Healthcare is the crisis (Score:2)
it's time to medicare lower age!
Most countries already do this and provide public health coverage from birth. However, this is not going to fix anything and health care is the crux of the crisis with an ageing population. While 60+-year-olds can certainly be extremely productive and useful members of society they need considerably more healthcare than 18-year olds. As the population ages there are fewer low-cost young people and more high-cost elderly people and so the cost per-person is going to steadily rise.
This is going to hurt ev
Re: (Score:2)
forgot one part.
In the US fewer and fewer people will be able to afford coverage and most people's coverage will likely get more and more restricted.
After that ER will fill up with people will not pay and some will turn to the jail / prison to be there dockers.
...every elder a role model? (Score:2)
So somewhat we managed to eradicate all old curmudgeons.
Re: (Score:2)
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill.
Re: (Score:2)
I see no need. Much of the youth of today will just annihilate themselves. Skill? What skill? We can stand by and watch and then continue with business as usual.
Retire on what? (Score:3, Informative)
I've invested as much as I possibly can in my 401k for decades. I don't eat out, I have a small home, and don't carry debt. Two stock market crashes have robbed over 2/3rds of my balances in retirement over time. Regardless of picking an exclusively index-fund, the losses have not been proportionally made up with gains. The short of it is - this is by design. The powers that be LOVE their "public good" slush funds. You're not actually supposed to collect from them, just pay in forever and then die for the good of the collective.
Re: (Score:2)
Two stock market crashes have robbed over 2/3rds of my balances
So you didn't have insider contacts that told you when to get out and maybe even short the market?
"The time to buy is when there is blood in the streets." - Baron Rothschild
Re: (Score:2)
" maybe even short the market?"
You can't sell short and cover in a 401k. And most benefit plans have a fairly limited amount of funds available. All you can do is exit your position and get the days closing value.
Shitty investments? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Your balanced mutual funds didn't recover since the last two market crashes? The market as a whole rebounded in an average 1.5 years after the last few crashes. What kind of dog shit mutual funds do you own?
And yet I know a guy who lost it all in 1999 and 2007. Then since he was in his 70's by that time, he simply retired on what was left. What is your wisdom for him? Seems that the masters of the univers like yourself are immune from aging like the rest of us mortals are not.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, you're right. If it hits at the wrong time, you can be fucked. At the same time, a year and a half to get back what you lost isn't all that bad. But, there have to be special (shitty) circumstances where somebody would have to dump their entire portfolio immediately after a crash. Most people should be able to just wait a bit longer.
What I have found to be the issue is that many or even most people are horrible with money management. Even people who are really smart. I've seen it so many times that it can't be a fluke.
Stage 1: The 20's - They can't be bothered to save for retirement, or have some rationale that there is not point. When I was in my early 20's, the rationale was that inflation was going to make any savings worthless. Stage 2: The 30's - Baby needs a new pair of shoes. Family matters will suck up as much money as you
At least two big lessons there (Score:3)
Well you asked for the advice, so I'll give you some.
The scenario you mentioned hits on two big things you should learn in your first few hours learning about investing.
First, balance your investments. The percent you have in bonds should be *very roughly* equal to your age, so he should have had over 70% in bonds, which don't lose value. In fact they can increase with the stock market goes down.
Second, don't panic and sell everything at once when there is a dip. If the market is headed down from a high and
Huh? Up 200%, 300%, 1000% (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you tracking it in ten-minute intervals and counting every little fluctuation as gain that you "lost" 10 minutes later when it went back to the price of 20 minutes before?
The Dow is up 200% over the last 10 years, 300% over the last 20, and over 1000% over the last 30 years. Anyone who invested in index funds funds "for decades" at least tripled their money (two decades), if not a ten-fold gain (3 decades).
If you were gambling picking individual companies, of course you could poorly. You claimed an index fund though, anyone can see what the indexes have done in 5 seconds on Google.
Ergo you're full of shit.
Furthermore, you claimed it was in 401K. Given a typical 50% employer match, which ALSO grew by 300%-1000%, the total return on 401k invested in index funds has been well into four digits.
My Dad had his retirement wiped out (Score:3)
The real problem is the cyclic nature of our economy. We have a boom/bust about every 8-12 years. e.g. there's been a major crash every 8-12 years since I was bo
Your dad either didn't have a 401k, or panicked (Score:3)
*You* choose when to sell stocks amd bond in your 401k. You do NOT need to sell all your investments the day you retire, and it would be stupid to do so.
You have to withdraw a little bit (of cash, not stocks) after you turn 71 1/2, but basically you decide when to sell.
As you stated, the economy and the market are cyclical, on a cycle of about ten years. If your dad decided to sell everything at the bottom of the market, I feel for him. That really sucks. He made a really bad decision, probably based on fea
Re: (Score:2)
In 2002, stocks went from 13,000 to 8,000. Currently the market is around 26,000. If you really lost 2/3rd of your money from the stock market losing 40% of its value but then tripling, you are possibly the worst investor of all time, buying at the high point possible on margin, and then selling it all at the worst possible point.
Putting a stop on the promotion path. (Score:5, Interesting)
Really the biggest problem I see, is how Gen X and Millennials are getting blocked out of their advancement tracks. When people in their 60+ are not retiring, that is creating a workforce where it is difficult to for the younger folks to advance in, because these promotion jobs are already covered by people with more experience.
Plus the next set of problem, is these older people are not planning on retiring, so this means, they are not taking promising young people under their wing, mentoring them the tricks of the trade, to be ready to step up and continue on the work. Now these people are working to their death, without a transition plan in effect.
Re:Putting a stop on the promotion path. (Score:5, Insightful)
When people in their 60+ are not retiring, that is creating a workforce where it is difficult to for the younger folks to advance
This is a variation of the Lump of Labor Fallacy [wikipedia.org], and is economic nonsense. There is not a fixed number of jobs in the economy, nor a fixed number of opportunities to be productive, and late retirements do not "hold back" younger workers.
Re: (Score:2)
He's not saying "be productive". He's saying "climb the corporate ladder".
Re:Putting a stop on the promotion path. (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not saying "be productive". He's saying "climb the corporate ladder".
This is still "zero sum" thinking. It is only true if you assume that corporations don't grow, and new corporations don't form.
A higher retirement age means more people being productive, and a BIGGER ECONOMY. This leads to more economic opportunities, not fewer.
Furthermore, older workers tend to save more and spend less. This means more investment in capital, which increases the value of labor.
Much of the stagnation in wages over the last few decades has been because of too much consumption, too much debt, too little savings, and too little capital investment, which has been worsened by declining workforce participation. Wage stagnation has NOT happened in countries with high rates of savings and investment.
Pushing people into premature retirement is exactly the opposite of what makes sense. America needs higher workforce participation, not lower. We should be encouraging older people to stay in their jobs as long as they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Much of the stagnation in wages over the last few decades has been because of too much consumption, too much debt, too little savings, and too little capital investment, which has been worsened by declining workforce participation. Wage stagnation has NOT happened in countries with high rates of savings and investment.
Err no. The overwhelming cause of the stagnation of wages over the past 40+ years is allowing an unlimited amount of legal and illegal immigration of people willing to work for slave wages.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Really the biggest problem I see, is how Gen X and Millennials are getting blocked out of their advancement tracks. When people in their 60+ are not retiring, that is creating a workforce where it is difficult to for the younger folks to advance in, because these promotion jobs are already covered by people with more experience.
So much this! In addition to people being stuck in jobs because of no promotion path, it means that we would see 70 year old people in manual labor careers. They can't move up, they can't retire, so they will be trying to work manual labor as their bodies deteriorate.
Plus the next set of problem, is these older people are not planning on retiring, so this means, they are not taking promising young people under their wing, mentoring them the tricks of the trade, to be ready to step up and continue on the work. Now these people are working to their death, without a transition plan in effect.
We already have the beginnings of this. The bean counters have largely eliminated mentoring programs in order to reduce overhead - and usually hire more bean counters. So very often a person who does retire now will be called back into work a
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure why you sound pissed. You're already ready to retire, so you don't need the job. You can just keep upping the salary to whatever you want. You have a captive customer, and don't care if they find their way out of the
Re: (Score:2)
i.e. I got mine. Fuck everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
Well if you were to train someone on your company, chances are better your legacy would be better intact, then selling to some corporation who will observe it, take your customers. I expect you put a lot of effort in making your company succeed to a point where you could sell it, vs going bankrupt. However with a new guy in charge, they could buy the company from you over time, but your name and legacy is in tact.
If you are going on a Google Search as your source, you are probably not really understandi
Re: (Score:2)
Not the only impact (Score:4)
There are only a few fixes for this: 1) forced births combined with forced adoptions; to increase the population AND place the kids into families capable of supporting them or 2) increased immigration; bringing in more immigrants and quickly incorporating them into the legal workforce. 3) restructuring medicare taxes by increasing the income cap, increasing the retirement age, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
2) and 3) seem doable. Well, 2) would be except for the White Fright asshole has unleashed. Not many Norwegians wish to move to the U.S. Damn, and they are so nice and white so as to not upset the locals.
SS and Medicare should have no income caps. SS is already going to start going through an age index if it hasn't already. That should be a bit steeper. However, it will generate some big issues, not everyone can physically or mentally continue work in their later years. On the plus side, continuing to work
There's plenty of money (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody lives forever. (Score:3)
I worked for a company where a maintenance guy who was closing in on 80 and could have retired at 60 refused to leave and refused to train a successor. "If I train a replacement, I'll get replaced." (False. That would be age discrimination.)
He ended up having a stroke and died soon after. He had never documented the hacks and workarounds that kept most of the long-since-discontinued machines running over the years and that knowledge died with him. The capital investment the company had to make after things started breaking immediately surpassed every dollar the guy made during his lifetime.
And he had been making some damn good money.
The machines were only part of the expense. Most of the tooling had to be remade and people had to be trained on the new stuff, plus the new stuff had to be re-qualified for some processes involving mil and medical products.
Re: (Score:3)
I worked for a company where a maintenance guy who was closing in on 80 and could have retired at 60 refused to leave and refused to train a successor. "If I train a replacement, I'll get replaced." (False. That would be age discrimination.)
So, what exactly is the excuse that our prominent lawmakers have for continuing to work beyond their mental and physical capacity?
That maintenance guy affected a single company. A lawmaker continuing to work when they shouldn't can affect an entire nation. Due to the funding issues with our Social Security program, we sadly can't afford a forced retirement policy. So, is the answer more mental and physical screenings for those who wish to work well into their golden years? The elderly will hold consider
Re:Nobody lives forever. (Score:4, Informative)
We need the workers (Score:2)
Medical advances and knowledge (primarily the emphasis on diet and exercise) are allowing many people to be productive well past traditional
Re: (Score:2)
Or, I'm sad to say, we could simply die off. The extension of the human life span is another reason for growing numbers of retirees. Population pressure reducing the number of births is another reason that younger workers don't enter the market as much. Women's liberation, freeing vast numbers of women to enter the market is another, especially as working mothers are more and more part of the workforce. The working mothers would not be as much of an issue if the fathers of their children stayed home to care
Re: (Score:2)
I find it laughable when people think out world is overpopulated. You can drive exceeding the speed limit for hours without seeing another soul. If that's not enough - look at the sky, the universe is big enough for everyone.
e=mc2 tells us energy should certainly not be an issue. This is all a big engineering problem.
I hope everyone can roll up
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need wall to wall humans for the Earth to be overpopulated.
Look at depletion of natural resources; pollution; global warming; potential for pandemics and epidemics; ability for the human race to feed itself once the cheap oil runs out; etc.
not for me (Score:4, Insightful)
Social Security ratios continue to drop (Score:5, Informative)
People certainly are "retiring" in terms of collecting Social Security old age benefits.
There were about 2.8 workers for every Social Security Old Age old age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI) beneficiary in 2017. This is down from 3.7 in 1970, and 5.1 in 1960. Te ratio had been stable, remaining between 3.2 and 3.4 from 1974 through 2008, but now going down quickly.
The Social Security trustees forecast that the ratio of workers to beneficiaries reaches 2.2 by 2035 when the baby-boom generation will have largely retired.
Re: (Score:2)
And note that Social Security runs out of money [fool.com] by 2034 - just before the ratio reaches its lowest level, meaning that SS taxes will have to be significantly increased (fewer workers paying in AND no more "trust funds" available) because it will be political death to cut benefits.
I wish that Congress would lift the limits on IRA contributions - that would go a LONG way to making it easier to slowly reduce SS benefits over the next 20-30 years as people would be encouraged to save more of their own money up-
This is easily fixable (Score:2)
Soylent Green (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or us wealthier older folks could just use some of you younger ones for spare parts and helping us slow down the aging process.
Only owners can retire (Score:4, Interesting)
I won't retire (Score:4, Interesting)
The American working class got shafted since Clinton. The double whammy of Clinton Democrats and the GOP both siding with mega corporations against me left me screwed. H1-Bs flooded the market and my wages plummeted. I think the Berniecrats will eventually fix it, but I'm pretty sure I'll be dead by then.
Kids are expensive (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
intergenerational collaboration (Score:3)
[older workers] complement those of younger workers, and their guidance and support enhance performance and intergenerational collaboration.
That may happen, but one harsh condition is that younger workers accept the idea that their elders have something valuable to share. Too often in IT we see old known problems solved again from scratch.
I don't see how this will work (Score:2)
How are they going to say "get off my lawn" when there are no lawns in an office building?
Wrong. We're not wanted. (Score:4, Interesting)
Whether that's true, in the tech halls they DON'T actually want us. They throw us out for the latest naive fad lickers they can find. IT is based more on fashion than science & logic*, and younger people are stupid enough to fall for and act sufficiently enthusiastic about every trend that comes under a PHB's nose.
Yes, there are exceptions, but I don't wanna hear them; and git off my lawn!
* I rarely see any solid studies that the newer shit is better, only babbling theory that sounds nice on paper. It's always keep up with Jones' first, science later.
Re:But UBI? (Score:4, Informative)
While the Racist Right just blames the fact that others are taking their jobs, while they are just unqualified and not skilled enough to do the work. Also it seems these work shy Left areas, seem to have a much higher level of productivity, then the areas predominately right.
I have seen people who are Left leaning, who are very hard workers, and often work harder then their jobs needs, I have seen Right leaning people who are also just as hard workers. I have seen Left leaning people who are lazy and just wants to get paid for minimum work, I have seen Right leaning people who are also just as lazy.
You seem to be confusing political leaning, with other traits which are not correlated.
Re: But UBI? (Score:4, Insightful)
But, see, if you cherry-pick the cases of good behavior among people on your side, and equally cherry-pick the cases of bad behavior on the other side, you can turn it into "proof" of your side's moral superiority!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Trump kicked out the illegals and there are tons of jobs available. You need to look to the future instead of living in the past gramps.
Tons of jobs, as long as you're looking for jobs picking fruit, mowing lawns, flipping burgers, or emptying waste baskets after hours in office buildings.
The high paying jobs you wanted to come back are still in China, because everyone still wants a $99 air conditioner from Walmart.
And the really good jobs required you to go beyond getting a high school diploma and expecting to get a job at the steel mill or the Ford plant.
But I'm sure Twitler will bring those jobs back Real Soon Now.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
High taxes on cheap Chinese shit will level the playing field
And result in high taxes on cheap American shit being sold to China. Like soybeans. We used to make a lot of money selling those. We had a natural monopoly since it cost too much for other countries to catch up to us - gotta buy a lot of expensive equipment to match our productivity.
Then Trump decided Mercantilism was a good idea. (Hint: We figured out it was a terrible idea in the 1600s).
Now the US has given away it's soy monopoly. And it will still be gone even if Trump declares victory and cuts tar
Re: (Score:2)
And because of idiots like you, the US will get an UBI far, far too late.
Re:But UBI? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm what most people would refer to as a communist, I'm actually a pragmatist. I believe that everyone should do their part and the ecosystem of the economy should be built to facilitate that. This means that publicly funded medicine is required because people have to be healthy to work. This means publicly funded schooling because without an education, I might as well just replace a person with a machine. I also believe strongly that most jobs are simply not worth paying a proper salary for, so the government has to be in a position to subsidize those workers since in a free market, why would I waste my time and money to employ someone if there's no possibility of making a profit?
Also, I make a lot of money compared to most. I also pay 50% tax plus another 25% sales tax on most things I buy. I still have more disposable income that most.
I just came to work at 2am on a Monday morning. I worked Saturday, I worked Sunday, I work pretty much all the time. I'm certainly not work shy. I raise my children with three core beliefs.
- Treat other people the way you would want to be treated if you were them. (this is an enhanced version of do onto others since not everyone is the same)
- If there's work to be done, don't try to figure out who to put on the job. Do it. If that means standing in a pile of shit with a shovel to make fertilizer, start shoveling but make sure to have a few more shovels around. When people see you... a person they will hopefully see as being "above that station in life" with a shovel working, they'll ask "Why are YOU doing this, surely you can get someone else to" and they'll respond "The job needs to be done and I had a shovel." and some people will realize... if for no other reason than being embarrassed to do otherwise will grab a shovel and help.
- Nothing has ever been accomplished through competition that could not have been done better through cooperation. When we chose to go to the moon, it was a great achievement, but we would have done it faster and better if we combined the minds of the Americans and the Russians instead of having them work relentlessly in private from one another. If you absolutely must compete, try to outwork your competition and achieve more than they do. With competition as your motivation, we sent people to the moon... and we stopped because we won and said "screw it". With cooperation, we put a space station into orbit and it's been there A LONG TIME and keeps getting better. It has been a major contributor to further cooperation that will bring us back to the moon and further on to Mars because we've cooperated to find a common cause. Never use competition as a motivation. It's ok to measure your performance in comparison to someone else. It's also ok to be proud that you are doing well. But it is NEVER acceptable to compare yourself to someone else and consider yourself better than them because you have managed to achieve more. Instead, it makes it your duty to help them increase their capacity.
Economics are substantially more complex than "If this then that". Elderly can't retire because people don't die. That's a far accurate though grossly incorrect observation. We all need to work because we all need money. We all need money to become worth less to allow us to digest the high debt we incur to buy things which used to be much cheaper when people needed less money. Inflation is a necessity to allow people to prepare for retirement.
I bought a house 15 years ago for about $400K at today's exchange rate. My neighbor with precisely the same house (they're town houses) sold theirs for $900K this past week. The house hasn't doubled in size. The neighborhood didn't get an attraction to increase demand. The house simply increased in monetary value because the money has deflated in value by a considerable amount. In fact, the house is really worth less since we bought the houses brand new and now they're 15 years old with wear and tear on them. People paying $900K would have paid a million except they nee
Re:But UBI? (Score:5, Insightful)
My job doesn't pay as much as I would like. Waaaaaaaaaaa!
Dude, "some might call it slavery" is ridiculous. You are looking at it *all wrong*.
Slaves cannot refuse sex. You can. Slaves cannot quit and choose a different employer. You can. Slaves cannot refuse to be beaten. You can. Slaves cannot choose where they live. You can. Slaves cannot vote. You can. Your analogy is juvenile.
You like having things, like clothing, food, electricity? Well, somebody has got to produce all of that for you. You think THEY want to work for free? THAT would be slavery. No, you MUST give something back for all the effort they have put forth on your account. YOUR job is how YOU pay them back. The "tokens" are just a means of facilitating the exchange.
Yes, we have a problem wherein too much wealth and power are concentrated among too few people. But your analysis of the situation is idiot-level wrong.
Actually... (Score:5, Interesting)
Slaves cannot quit and choose a different employer. You can.
Actually, there are plenty of people who cannot withstand a disruption in employment. This is a problem that UBI seeks to fix.
Slaves cannot choose where they live. You can.
Actually, some people do not have enough money to move. This is a problem that UBI seeks to fix.
You like having things, like clothing, food, electricity? Well, somebody has got to produce all of that for you.
Actually, automation has gotten to the point where the efforts of a dozen people can feed thousands of people. It won't be long until it's down to just one person. Clothing is almost entirely made by machines. Electricity? Well damn dude, that shit is provided by the Sun.
You think THEY want to work for free?
You do know that some people do things just for the betterment of the world right? I write code and give it away so that other people don't have to.
No, you MUST give something back for all the effort they have put forth on your account.
Who said people didn't want to give back? If you provide people with that which they need to survive then they can make better decisions about their future.
Yes, we have a problem wherein too much wealth and power are concentrated among too few people.
And what is your solution to this problem? Should we just hope the wealthy have a change of heart? We tried labor unions and look what happened to those. You are standing in the way of progress. Be careful because it may run you over and drag you with it.
Re: But UBI? (Score:2, Informative)
Then become your own master, dipshit. It's really easy unless you are a total fucking moron.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the point besides trading our time and efforts for a token created by those who would "employ" us
Did you know that 42 million Americans are self-employed?
Re: But UBI? (Score:5, Insightful)
How many of these self employed are actually employed by someone who makes them mark as self employed in order to evade some regulations?
Re: (Score:3)
If you don't want to work, don't work.
Re:But UBI? (Score:5, Insightful)
The option is to go back to existence before such tokens were invented.
It was utterly brutal. Most children didn't make it alive to reproductive age. If they did, females were stuck doing nothing but doing the procreating for as long as their bodies held together, because if you wanted any security should you survive, you needed to have enough children alive at the end of your procreative cycle that survivors would be able to take care of you in addition to their other responsibilities. Because when you lack such tokens, there's no handy way to monetize any skills not directly related to either surviving, or supporting the immediate surviving. "Ideas, inventions and contributions" that did not serve such people were simply ignored as useless.
Invention of money is one of the key breakthrough of human societies that allowed us to invent the "monetizing the future" aspect of work. Which meant that work that didn't have immediate impact on survival became doable without starving to death.
Re: (Score:3)
Labor has been devalued as long as it is allowed.
The 1800's labors for a company were in essence slaves. Living in Company Housing, having to pay their rent back to the company, buying food and everything from the company stores. If a worker get injured or fired, it was nearly a death sentence, because it wasn't a case of getting an other job, but spending the rest of your life homeless, barring extensive effort in finding new work.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
If a worker get injured or fired, it was nearly a death sentence, because it wasn't a case of getting an other job, but spending the rest of your life homeless, barring extensive effort in finding new work.
Your family would often take care of you. This happened to several members of my family in the 1800's. Instead of paying 20-30% in income tax to the government to take care of the invalid, they paid 20-30% of their income to take care of their invalid relatives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Complete bullshit statistics !!! (Score:5, Informative)
There's an entire branch of applied mathematics, known as actuarial statistics, that literally does nothing but figure these things all day long. And since corporations pay them a ton of money to do these projections, they've gotten pretty good at them. As in, amazingly good.
Re: (Score:2)
There's an entire branch of applied mathematics, known as actuarial statistics, that literally does nothing but figure these things all day long. And since corporations pay them a ton of money to do these projections, they've gotten pretty good at them. As in, amazingly good.
They're just extrapolating though, like if you look at historic [wikipedia.org] fertility rates in the US you might think in the 1930s that it's around 2.0, in the 1950s 3.5 and in the 1970s 1.8. Countries have had huge "mood swings" and despite being somewhat correlated with GDP, HDI and whatnot there's a lot of variation. The rate of medical advancements increasing lifespan the next 30 years is also far from given. Maybe someone will set off WW3, that'll throw all projections out the window.
The main reason it's almost ce
Re: (Score:3)
Of course they're just extrapolations. What else could they be? We're talking about the future. We don't have any "facts" about the future. The weather report for tomorrow says "sunny and pleasant", but there could be an earthquake that swallows up my whole town.
Actuaries take the history of a host of variables and try to make the best guess they can. They are right a lot more often than not. For someone to take a prediction and say, "Well, they don't know for sure" d
Re: (Score:2)
Hundreds of statisticians just read your statement and blew their brains out when they realized that their work is in vain.
Re:What's the point of retiring? (Score:5, Insightful)
I could literally retire right now and not run out of things to do for the rest of my life, no matter how old I may get.
If you define yourself only by your work, I have nothing but pity for you.
Re: (Score:2)
20 years ago the baby boomer generation was 34 to 52 years old. None were of retirement age. Only half of them are of "retirement age" now, being 54 to 72 years old. Half of them should still be working now.
Who ever told you that back in 1998 couldn't math.