Pension at 70? Throw a party.

CLAPTON

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

I've never seen any thoughtful (or unthoughtful) people worry about the shortage of goods and services, and the competition between workers and pensioners therein.

You're moving in the right direction at last though when you discuss GDP, you just need to make the leap of logic of whether it's better to have a large proportion of that GDP funding pensions, or whether it's worse.

Eventually you might even figure out the link between investment and job creation.

Keep going, you'll get there in the end.

The link between investment and job creation?:

Vast amounts of investment is specifically aimed at replacing labour with machines/automation

nickj_2

we're living longer , the money's gotta come from somewhere ,,,,it means working longer ... deal with it

System

nickj wrote: »

we're living longer , the money's gotta come from somewhere ,,,,it means working longer ... deal with it

I agree.
The only potential problem is if all the illnesses of old age continue to cut in at the same ages, rather than advancing in line with life expectancy.

But that isn't the case, is it? All these globe-trotting 70 and 80 year olds are enjoying prolonged good health way beyond the expectations of previous generations.

BobQ

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

I agree.
The only potential problem is if all the illnesses of old age continue to cut in at the same ages, rather than advancing in line with life expectancy.

But that isn't the case, is it? All these globe-trotting 70 and 80 year olds are enjoying prolonged good health way beyond the expectations of previous generations.

Just because there are globe trotting 70 and 80 year olds does not mean that others of their generation are not afflicted with debilitating medical conditions.


One problem we have is that millions of the younger generation will never earn enough for long enough to make provision for a comfortable retirement or to sustain them for a prolonged period of declining health.

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

Why is it so difficult to see the future problem is with the ability to produce enough goods and services so that everyone can have a decent standard of living.

We don't have a problem with book keeping entries : lots of people have shown how to deal with them.

Makes perfect sense for individuals to ensure they will have sufficient share of the available goods and services but in aggregate it wouldn't work by everyone building up book keeping entries.

I am interested in the distinction between 'goods and services' and 'book keeping entries'.

Was it the latter which enabled the banks to bring us to our knees?

China appears to be able to produce many of the goods which the western world craves. But China's understanding of 'Human Rights' is as primitive as any other.

You pays your money, and you makes your choice.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

I am interested in the distinction between 'goods and services' and 'book keeping entries'.

Was it the latter which enabled the banks to bring us to our knees?

China appears to be able to produce many of the goods which the western world craves. But China's understanding of 'Human Rights' is as primitive as any other.

You pays your money, and you makes your choice.

TruckerT

the context here was the demographic changes that lead people to say that state pensions, NHS , care for the elderly will be 'unaffordable' in the future


goods and service are real things like food, clothing, heating, lighting, fuel, doctors, medicines, care, transport etc. (the yearly total is often summarised as GDP)

booking entries are essentially money



the connection is that if we are unable to produce sufficient goods and services in the future due to the lack of working age people (i.e. per capita GDP falls) then that will make us (on average ) poorer.

This will show itself in several monetary ways i.e. taxation will rise if government decided that the elderly and other unemployables are to be provided with a decent standard of living;
wagess for working people will fall if companies are to produce sufficient profits for 'funded' pension schemes.


Unfortunately many people don't realise the actual problem is producing sufficient goods and services but think the problem is taxation and think that 'funded' pensions will solve the problem.


and , no it doesn't really have anything to do with bankers or China and you don't get to pay your money and make your choice

Loughton_Monkey

CLAPTON wrote: »

......goods and service are real things like food, clothing, heating, lighting, fuel, doctors, medicines, care, transport etc. (the yearly total is often summarised as GDP)

booking entries are essentially money
......

Assuming by the unusual term "booking entries" you mean "book-keeping entries", then you're having a real laugh aren't you?

How do you think they calculate GDP?

Simple! Add up every single "book-keeping" entry for production of goods and services, adjusted by exports minus imports.

:T

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

the connection is that if we are unable to produce sufficient goods and services in the future due to the lack of working age people (i.e. per capita GDP falls) then that will make us (on average ) poorer

But we have a coupla million unemployed. Where is the shortage of working age people?

And if working age is to be extended by a year or two every decade, then the number of working age people will increase.

I have the impression that China does very little for her unemployed, or for her elderly. China is also widening her empire, just as European countries widened their empires in earlier times (using force rather than funds).

What goes around, comes around. If and when China adopts the principles of democracy, then they will be at the top of a slippery slope towards unaffordability.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Assuming by the unusual term "booking entries" you mean "book-keeping entries", then you're having a real laugh aren't you?

How do you think they calculate GDP?

Simple! Add up every single "book-keeping" entry for production of goods and services, adjusted by exports minus imports.

:T

you either understand the difference between real goods and services and money or you don't

you either understand the close connection between real goods and service or you don't


you understand how taxes, wages, profit, pension payouts, inflation respond to a fall in real per capita goods and services or you don't

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

you either understand the difference between real goods and services and money or you don't

I'm not sure about services, but many people say that we gave up making real goods soon after WW2.

Money, on the other hand, became super-dominant, and we paid the price in 2007/8.

TruckerT