Hacker News Reader

Comment by outside1234 | Hacker News Reader

This is bad - can lead to a death spiral in terms of retirement funds.

The population imbalance is temporary. We don't always need to run a Ponzi scheme of infinite growth. We desperately need population collapse.

While I agree with you about not needing a Ponzi scheme of infinite growth (great phrase), population collapse is drastic.

We have

- a serious mismanagement of resources via a nat'l resources deficit: https://www.activesustainability.com/environment/natural-res...

- a horrible distribution of food globally (as an example, the US wastes 40% of its food: https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs)

- more than enough land to go around.

"Ponzi scheme" is such an excessive indictment and mischaracterization of exchange of goods and services. Human population has no clear correlation to quality of life.

In the words of Ludwig von Mises, "If the tailor goes to war against the baker, he must henceforth bake his own bread."

Society can maintain a balance in this way without population restriction. Greater population grants us the luxury of more specializations and ideally more free time and more comforts.

You have said nothing couched in quotes.

I offered some reasons why you might be wrong for the sake of discussion.

Even without my reasons, "you are wrong" suffices because the onus is on you to provide proof of an assertion, otherwise it's false by default. Providing proof of a negative is nonsense.

You are arguing by quote, quotwashing what you actually want to say isn't productive. It is an appeal to authority. Make your own arguments.

"If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants"

Deep.

People can always retire later I guess. Pensions are kind of a luxury if someone is fit and healthy.

France is trying this. It's not going well.

Ehh, the French will find any reason to have a riot. The Japanese will not riot for any reason, ever.

Ummmm, Japanese people have rioted before. While riots have been very rare in recent decades, the decades after WWII had riots, including the rather legendary riots over the construction of Narita Airport (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanrizuka_Struggle).

There was even a riot in 1973 that broke out by train commuters who were enraged that they couldn’t get to work due to striking train workers back when the JR system was nationalized:

https://youtu.be/7QUfszx22w4

Ironic that the 1973 riot was against striking workers. I think that's the exception that proves the rule!

I checked. They will, for some reasons, sometimes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Riots_and_civil_disor...

Ok, perhaps very occasionally. That list has nothing from the last 50 years and includes spontaneous folk music concerts, though. I'm sure France has had more civil unrest in the last 5 years, than Japan has had in the last 50.

The likelihood of someone being fit and healthy drops significantly as age increases. An apt analogy is attempting to use a part in a machine after its replacement interval. Yea, it may keep going, or it may fail spectacularly and cost your more than using a new replacement part.

Simply put, most people past a particular age are going to have reduced economic output due to frail bodies and weak minds.

I am proposing that parts are replaced based on condition, not an arbitrary fixed service interval. Condition monitoring increases efficiency. Also, if it ain't broke, don't fix it: retirement can often cause its own problems, just as replacing parts unnecessarily in a machine can cause problems.

So you're telling me now for my best benefit I should fake the condition of my parts to be worse then they actually are?

People would need to be honest, that's a weakness I guess. Maybe it could work in Japan. You may need a strong shame culture to prevent abuse.

I have to assume you're not 60 and still working and thinking about how to pay your bills.

Pensions are used by corporations to keep their spend and employee population predictable. It's lovely when it works out for the employee but its not the primary goal. I would debate whether its a luxury when you've locked yourself out of market growth in the hopes of a soft landing when older.

Also "If someone is fit and healthy" is far more than a series of personal decisions and age catches up with you fast. Once you also combine with that the changes in tech, and in the workplace in general, you'll see fewer and fewer options for that luxury pension

Reply on news.ycombinator.com