this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
283 points (91.5% liked)

Technology

59308 readers
4851 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Living to 120 is becoming an imaginable prospect::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

How are we supposed to afford paying pensions that long if people retire before 70?

[–] Sheik@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

By properly taxing companies and rich individuals? Besides, those leaving to 120 would most likely be among the richest of us. Do they really need a pension at all?

[–] RobertOwnageJunior@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

It should be though, we need to demand change rather than just saying “oh they’ll never do it” and giving up.

[–] happyhippo@feddit.it 2 points 1 year ago

Sorry, but if one can dream of properly taxing companies and rich individuals, there's plenty of other shit to fix with that money first.

Making living until 120 sustainable is not on the list, or very, very low on it.

[–] XEAL@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's the neat part, you will now work until you're 85

[–] Che@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If political leaders can work into their 80s, you can also.

[–] ram@bookwormstory.social 13 points 1 year ago

Their work amounts to sitting in a hearing non-coherent and voting yes when an aide tells you to. Real people on the other hand spend all day actively doing work for pennies.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Universal basic income. Make work optional.

[–] brunofin@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If work is optional then who is paying that income?

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 10 points 1 year ago

I would advise to look up some information yourself. You can either read about the pilots and their results or find a video if you prefer that format.

And these final things to consider:

  • optional != won't be done
  • work isn't just one definition: housework is unpaid for example but it is still work
  • UBI doesn't mean all expenses are paid for, it's "basic" - luxury goods like iPhones aren't "basic"
  • it's a complex issue, inform yourself with pro and contra sources
[–] Che@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

Should have pulled themselves up by the bootstraps.

[–] vidarh@lemmy.stad.social 1 points 1 year ago

By fully funding them. The return from a lifetime annuity bought at 65 is just marginally higher than a reasonable expected safe return from the same investment. (A lifetime annuity pays out on the basis that the provider needs to guarantee an income until you die, so if it returns so much that it eats too much into the capital, it'll be unprofitable for the provider). At the margins, the expected remaining life years of someone at 65 in a developed country is long enough that you can't safely offer that much more without eating away too much at the capital too quickly.