« Productivity vs immigration | Main | Personality matters »

April 10, 2011

Comments

Jennifer

"Since 1981, life expectancy for UK males has increased from 13 to 18.3 years - a 40.8% rise." --> may wanna correct that ;)

Other than that, interesting point that you make. With regard to the transfer resistance, I believe that another factor fuelling this problem may be the decreasing faith of current workers in the system. At least in my country (Germany), people are doubting whether they will even benefit from public pensions once they retire, or are afraid that those pensions will not be high enough. As a result, more and more people turn to private pension funds and feel that the money they contribute to the public ones is "wasted".

Jon

Looking at the source data I think those figures are life expectancy from retirement age. I.e. in 1981, someone who retired at 65 could expect to live for 13 more years to live to 78. Someone who retires today at 65 would on average live 18.3 more years - to a bit past 93.

Left Outside

It is a question of how we want to distribute our leisure time. Do we (I)want it all at the end of our lives or do we (I) want to work longer with more leisure during my working life.

I prefer the latter, but it is not possible for me to easily work out how to transform that into pubic policy.

My favoured opinion (of which there are many) for retirement, which I often propose while drunk on a weekday evening is PREtirement. Everybody gets a guaranteed, reasonably generous income until their 30, then you work until you die.

Cliff Tolputt

Mm! 93 suggests you'll be living on borrowed time (sorry Jon), but I'm all for it.

Jennifer

Thanks for clearing that up Jon, that makes sense!

chris

Sorry Jennifer. Thanks Jon. I meant the extra life expectancy at age 65; ie it's risen from 78 to 83. I've made the correction.

chris

@ LO - I've long thought the opposite - that work should be confined to the under-30s, as they're the ones with the energy.
The solution here - of course! - is a citizens' basic income, which would allow folk to take breaks as they want.

Alex

"Thanks to Baumol's cost disease, the relative cost of healthcare and education also rises as we get richer"

Only because the cost of everything else gets cheaper.

gastro george

"Workers will be reluctant to pay higher taxes to future pensioners, perhaps because they feel they (me!) got a better deal than they did - for example by getting a free university education."

This is a classic diversionary tactic. Workers today get a worse deal because they are not getting their share of productivity increases. Blaming pensioners is just trying to get them to sign up to a "cost cutting agenda" that will end up with them being even worse off.

Rozer

This is a classic diversionary tactic. Workers today get a worse deal because they are not getting their share of productivity increases. Blaming pensioners is just trying to get them to sign up to a "cost cutting agenda

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad