Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mugsy" data-source="post: 2052746" data-attributes="member: 18914">Cute Donner - but an all to typical non-response to a serious question.&nbsp; How was it computed that if the entire population kept retiring, i.e. ceasing to produce income and basically expecting it to be provided by government, at 62 that such was a sustainable system?&nbsp;&nbsp; I&#039;ll tell you how - lifespans were assumed to be shorter which reduces total payout requirement AND more importantly there was an assumption that birth rates would be relatively constant thus ensuring that the retiree population would remain relatively small compared to the productive population.&nbsp; However as we went from a pyramid to something more like a cylinder the burden of old people retiring early and living longer has become too great so...Cut benefits orMaintain benefits but restrict the eligible population orstart benefits later (which is already happening)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mugsy, post: 2052746, member: 18914"] Cute Donner - but an all to typical non-response to a serious question. How was it computed that if the entire population kept retiring, i.e. ceasing to produce income and basically expecting it to be provided by government, at 62 that such was a sustainable system? I'll tell you how - lifespans were assumed to be shorter which reduces total payout requirement AND more importantly there was an assumption that birth rates would be relatively constant thus ensuring that the retiree population would remain relatively small compared to the productive population. However as we went from a pyramid to something more like a cylinder the burden of old people retiring early and living longer has become too great so... Cut benefits or Maintain benefits but restrict the eligible population or start benefits later (which is already happening) [/QUOTE]

Verification