Hacker News Reader

Comment by ukj | Hacker News Reader

I guess I'll be making damn sure to negotiate a pay raise based on the fact I've chosen not to have children!

Where do I sign to veto my paternity leave?

Or, you know, businesses and societies could leave that as a courtesy to just those that did chose to have children -- a group of people that every society that cares about sustaining itself forward should encourage and respect.

Sure. Everybody likes grand gestures. Nobody likes paying for them.

As a social responsibility it's not on private businesses to cover the cost. Pay for it through taxation.

Until then - my choice is a competitive advantage.

I'm going to guess you will get more growth in your career by learning how to be empathetic than negotiating with such an asinine argument.

And I am going to guess that knowing when to be strategically empathetic in a negotiation is going to get me even further.

> strategically empathetic

aka, the sociopathic mentality.

Exercising my freedom of choice is sociopathic?

Empathy is not the be all and end all. https://www.amazon.com/Against-Empathy-Case-Rational-Compass...

Also, shame on you for imposing empathy as a social norm!

https://psychcentral.com/lib/neuroscience-sheds-light-on-why...

Many countries have maternity leave as a payroll tax (for both genders). Even China has this.

>Sure. Everybody likes grand gestures. Nobody likes paying for them. As a social responsibility it's not on private businesses to cover the cost.

That's just a law away. Some countries do have private businesses to cover the cost.

Private businesses are not holy cows.

Exactly the reason why this is a government issue and not a business issue.

Other people's children will be paying for your social security payments when you retire. You're welcome!

The only reason other people will pay for my social security is that my contribution is used to pay for previous generation's SS.

The scam is that I'm paying for their much better retirement that I will have, considering how population evolves.

Citation needed that they will have a better retirement.

I was born the year with the most births in my country. We're paying my parents' generation retirement now. But when we will retire in 15..20 years, it's my son's generation (much less people) that should pay for us. Also we live longer and longer.

So unless drastic measures are taken now, crap retirement is waiting for us. No need to be a math genius to see. Some people is confident that the problem can be solved with taxes, but that's just wishful thinking.

Obvious solution: increase people that will pay in the future. Problem is we have a sky high unemployement. Even if we allow more inmigration, there are no jobs for them.

Another one: using a "capitalization" system. Instead of spending, save what we pay for later. Problem is no party will do that. A few weeks ago there was a massive demostration demanding retirement is updated with inflation. Everybody agrees that our elders deserve the best. Even a gradual transition to capitalization (the most reasonable measure) would cause the party defending it to sink.

Edit: in my previous comment there's a "that" where there should be a "than", maybe that caused a misundertanding?

So pensions are a pyramid scheme? I don't think the world can bear the exponential population growth required.

You neglect the technological progress. It will be cheaper for you to retire as pleasantly as the boomers, despite having less money.

This is a fallacy because there isnt some level of comfort people want to hit to comfortably retire, it will always be relative to the society around them.

Is there not? I just want my basic needs met, have someone to talk to and perhaps some forms of entertainment.

I don't think I'm in a minority.

There is no social security in the country where I live. I am financially independent at 35, perhaps because I avoided having children thus far.

Thanks, but no thanks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com