• tetris11@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    Yeah, but that’s only a problem if elderly orderlies is an underpaid job that no one wants, and if people can’t afford to live on it when choosing such a profession.

    If the economy adjusts or society adjusts such that caring for the elderly is a highly sought out and secure job that can easily pay a mortgage, what’s the issue?

    This is what I mean when I say they will crash and their economy will adjust.

    • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 hours ago

      There aren’t enough tax payers paying into the system to sustain the end of life care, retirement funds/pensions/social security equivalents that an elderly population that large. when you have a 1:1 ratio of people paying in vs paying out your assistance levels will be extremely weak.

      No nation can sustain that large of an elder population. It’s not economically viable.

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Under the current system. All retirement vehicles dependent on the investment market will crash horribly. Anyone with retirement funds in such a crash is doomed. Which will force a reset and a switch to a new financial system (see: Turkey’s various resets over the last 50 years, or Greece in the last 10). Money will be lost. The system will reset, re-valuate the demand for such services, and people will be paid in a new currency to plug the supply.

        • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          This has nothing to do with retirement funds in a stock market.

          The issue is entirely one of taxation. You need 2-3 people working for every retired person taking payments from the system. If you have 1:1 you cannot afford to do this which means either a massive die off of the elderly or a growing massive national debt.

          • tetris11@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            Or you reset the currency, like Turkey has done many times before no? You swear off your debts, print new money.

            • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              No, because the issue is supply based. Changing the currency will never create a larger amount of money coming in than us leaving. Changing your currency also has very bad outcomes for your future ability to obtain loans which are critical for most nations.