And then they have the audacity to ask, “Why is no one having kids?” - This is why!! Why would we ever bring a child into this world to work from 21-70 years old!?(I know that some start working at a younger age.) That’s human slavery! And don’t get me started with the slave wage pay. This is absolutely appalling and euthanasia is gonna be a hit. People will off themselves or have someone end their lives and it wouldn’t surprise me a bit.
this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
277 points (99.6% liked)
World News
46710 readers
2634 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The essential problem is that the people working now are paying for the people that are retired. It would make more sense for the gov't to have taxed the people prior to their retirement, and have invested those taxes, so that in their retirement they would be getting out what they had previously paid in. And switching over to a system like that would require double taxation on the population now, which will make such a proposal very unopopular.
But if your retired population is growing, and you have fewer people working, then you either need to increase the retirement age--so that more people are paying into the system--or increase the taxation overall. If I recall correctly, Denmark has been seeing a negative population growth; that's a real problem for retirement schemes that rely on current taxes paying for retirees.
Is this fair to people that have been working in trades and have beaten up their body for 40 years? No. Likewise, it's not really fair to people that have working in white-collar jobs that may still be more than capable of excelling at their job, and still want to work. (My dad had mandatory retirement at 72 due to company policy; he immediately got re-hired as an on-site consultant, and has been doing that for over a decade.)
EDIT - this is a huge problem in the US. The social security taxes now on working people are immediately paid out to retirees. SS benefits go up to account for inflation, but the amount coming in is decreasing because population growth has slowed. Without major reforms, social security in the US won't be solvent by the time I retire, IF I ever retire.
The government should have been taxing the Corporations that made enormous profits from the surplus value their employees generate and then requiring said Corporations to invest annually in pensions matched to Cost-of-Living indexes.
In the US, instead we got 401ks so the poors are required to cheer the stock market and pretend they're temporarily embarrassed Capitalists, rather than the scornful reality of being wage-slaves.
Denmark has been seeing a negative population growth; that's a real problem for retirement schemes that rely on current taxes paying for retirees
And they're particularly xenophobic, so no immigration to beef up the numbers
Yeah, we're doing the same in the US... :(
Thank god in the Netherlands we are not and we did not elect a far right party as the biggest party, oh wait...
I hostely fear for the next 5 years, with far right (and anti science, anti woke, anti freedom, anti any progressive idea people had after 1950s) gaining more traction.
At the same time, politicians here in Denmark can retire at 60! Those fuckers get free housing, free transport, free food, AND after-pay. "Rules for thee, not for me!"
If only they'd also be forced to retire at 60. Instead they stay in politics and continue to make decisions based on outdated knowledge and ideals.
If they didn’t get all those benefits everyone might be able to retire earlier.
Yes, they're going to die sooner anyway. Forced retirement at 60 for politicians would be perfect.
They should be bound by the same rules as the rest of us.
The bigger problem here is that people above 50 are having very low, nearly impossible chances of finding a job if they lose one, especially with rise of AI. These people can't have a job, and now can't have a pension.
Well done, governments around the world.
EDIT: If I'm getting this right, people of Denmark can start taking out pension prior to retirement, so might not be too catastrophical.
Since 2006, Denmark has tied the official retirement age to life expectancy and has revised it every five years.
What a depressing law. Progress should mean less mandatory work, not more.
What's your name, Keynes ?
https://truthout.org/articles/what-happened-to-the-keynesian-dream-of-a-15-hour-work-week/
Economist John Maynard Keynes in 1930 predicted that the workweek would be reduced to 15 hours within a couple of generations due to advancements in technology.
It is also stupid because life expectancy is not equivalent to life quality.
Just because people live to 90 now instead of 80 doesn't mean they can actually do anything significant for those 10 years, they could be bed ridden or house bound and kept alive only because they are taking 30 pills a day. It isn't living, it's staying alive. Retirement shouldn't be tied to that.
Even if they want to die they're not allowed, like at 85 their tired of shittinf on their diaper 4 times a day and they say imw tired of this shit and want out amd they're not allowed.
capitalists gonna capitalist.
Denmark has the best labor laws in the world.
Gonna need a source on that one chief. In what way are they better than the rest of the nordics?
From what I have heard from other Swedish people working in Denmark, it's much easier to get fired there compared to in Sweden.
load more comments
(12 replies)
At the moment progress is desperately trying to keep up with rapidly increasing life expectancy among the world's poorest, that's not a bad thing but that's also why we're seeing so much progress but we're not seeing the benefits much, in the developed world our life expectancy increased long ago and the result of all that progress has mostly normalized in our society and expectations, but we make up a very small percentage of the world's actual population. Now that it's their turn, there's a lot of people who aren't dying like they used to and as a result they don't just want food, they want lights and electricity and running water and roads and cars and phones and houses and opportunities, and on the whole we want to give them access to those things and bring them out of poverty but it's just a lot to do in only a few generations. Demographics get really wild when you start to understand their relationships to larger scale things like economics and world population, and these kind of demographic changes have serious consequences when applied across literally billions of people. It gets less depressing if you make a point of appreciating the very real progress that has been made to billions of peoples lives around the world. Yeah there's a lot of bad stuff going on, but we seem to prefer to talk about that and the actual, measurable good stuff doesn't get much acknowledgement.
Based on projections from demographics, most of the countries in the world should be in really good shape in about 50 years, population growth should level off, and we should be able to share the benefits of progress worldwide. At least if civilization hasn't collapsed into a new dark age, and we haven't turned the planet into an oven, nuked each other out of existence, written the Earth off and fucked off to Mars, or found some other creative way to destroy ourselves by then. So at least there's like a 0.1% things will work out alright.
I'm not sure how the demographic transition in developing countries relates to retirement age in rich countries.
Like I said, it's complicated, but to get a good sense of how the global economy has shifted, you only have to look at the explosive growth of the middle class in Asian economies, their steadily increasing life expectancies, and their growing importance to the west as trade partners (It's not just China and Taiwan despite the political rhetoric surrounding both).
That middle class growth is coming from money we in developed countries are spending every day, and have been spending for decades. We depend on Asian countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam especially significantly for technology and certain foods, but also for more mundane and often forgotten things like clothes and housewares and medicine. Thailand is one of the world's largest net exporters of pet food. We don't think of the things we use every day that come from other countries, but the fact is most of them do, and many of them we would not be pleased to have to accept any substitute or disruption for.
Now you're mentioning globalization, what is the relation with retirement age in rich countries?
That's a very interesting question, the first thing to understand is that only a relatively small number of countries worldwide even have a retirement age at all, many poor countries with shorter life expectancies are lacking even the basic social supports necessary and rely on family and community groups to support and care for people who become too elderly or infirm to work (at least we hope they do to some degree, life for the poor can be brutal) and this is often baked into the fabric of their society and culture in a way which is more determined by actual ability than an arbitrarily proscribed age.
However you're right, setting retirement ages is a tricky variable that often lags significantly behind the demographic realities, and this is particularly evident recently in Asian economies where they are now struggling with retirement ages far too low for most people's realistic working lifespan and are left with inadequate workforces and unsustainable pensions as a result. This is part of why their economies sometimes don't seem like they "doing so hot" to investors and stock markets despite the massive growth that has happened, and it is a sign that investors don't really see it continuing, and it's pretty plausible they're right. They still have a lot of work to do to properly transition into developed economies. They are the "new money", they are economically powerful and very resourceful in many ways, but in other ways this is all very new to them and they have their own challenges and struggles to figure out that are not going to be easy.
Retirement age in China for example was until recently only 50 for women in certain jobs. A comprehensive regional synopsis is difficult since the actual definition of retirement ages often varies according to a complex set of rules intended to gradually phase retirement ages in over time, or by year of birth, or by gender, or by specific industry, or many or all of the above, and another important data point that skews the picture of these numbers is that the concept of retirement itself paints a different picture depending on where you are, and we need to consider whether the actual government support or pension available to a retired person is in fact realistic and sufficient, or do they need to continue working in some form in order to have a basic standard of living, which is often the case, and is subject to many of the same complicating factors in how that amount is defined for different groups.
Despite all that said about the nuanced understanding needed to consider exact numbers, I think it's fair to say that the average retirement age in newer Asian economies still tends to be much lower than in the west, mostly averaging somewhere around 60, although it can be lower in some cases, with many western countries now pushing towards 70, but both are still trying to catch up to actual demographics and gradually increase those ages for the reasons I mentioned.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Having relatives that died when they were 70 and seeing stuff like this is quite depressing.
My ex's grandma slept 5 hours a night, worked a full time seamstress job and cooked and cleaned and raised her kids and grandkids. She enjoyed just 1 year of retirement before Covid hit.
Yeah, we need to make sure to live our life now and do what we want. Work less, live below our means to save up, take a chance and travel or whatever it is one wants to do, if we are able to. Don't postpone it. I'll live my life as if I won't get a retirement at all.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Right bcz 70 year olds are known for being spry young chickens in great physical health.
Let's see them force a bunch of 69 year olds to work cause I know I would just fart in their direction if they tried.
They're not going to "force" you to work. You always have the option of just starving to death.
Freedom^TM^
load more comments
(3 replies)
This is what the anti-immigration right wanrs to do to you, folks!
The main economically meaningful aspects of "retirement age" in Denmark AFAIK is that:
- You get entitled to receiving the public, state-paid pension.
- Private pension schemes that vest at this point or later are tax deductible. (you still pay taxes when it's paid out, but due to the progressive tax code you end up paying less)
By far the most relevant of the two is the latter, as practically everyone is covered by pension schemes included in employment contracts.
As such you can still retire any time you want, but it will be more burdensome for you to it earlier than at the age sanctioned by law.
No, it means only people with good pensions can retire early. Incidentally, this is by design those with high wages since these are the basis of earning pension. However, the ones that may actually need to retire early due to the stress of hard menial labor are not in this group of high earners.
In effect we will see people at offices doing easy work close their pcs and have an office retirement party at an age of 65 that poor Olga of 70 years (or more) will have to clean up.
In the US medicaid starts at 65, but you can get lucky and have workplace pension that start early. You only get "full retirement" with Social Security/state pension if you wait until 67 and many wait until then. Which seems similar to Denmark.
"I've paid my taxes all my life. There should also be time to be with children and grandchildren," Mr Jensen told outlet DK.
I can't speak to the history of government supplied pension in the EU, but in the USA, our version (Social Security) was never meant to provide "a time to be with children and grandchildren". The expectation was that most people would die before being unable to work, and Social Security provided a means for the elderly that lived to be housed and fed until they died. Social Security was designed to prevent living elderly from being in absolute poverty never to provide a time of respite before eventually dying.
we need more robots!!!
view more: next ›