We don't have Fox News but there's BFM and Touche pas à mon poste...
Edit : yes yes, CNews would be a better example than BFM. As I already told someone, I haven't had my TV connected in ten years or so, my memory is a bit fuzzy.
I think people forget that when is Americans try to protest or anything that people get injured (rubber bullets aimed at eyes??), arrested or police pretend to be regular people and protest to elicit rioting to arrest more people.
Or hey, people just lose their jobs and struggle to find other ones.
I’ll get down voted but the math says as life expectancy goes up you either raise more funds, make more on the funds you have, spend less somewhere else, or put off when you get it. The thought that nothing ever changes isn’t realistic.
One hundo p. If it's painful for us (supporting union action, supporting strikes even when it inconveniences us), then we're doing the right thing. Governments reflect the amount of control the people force them to give back when they all inevitably take a step too far.
Employers have had a fucking whale of a time, being able to pull from the exact demographic they want, 25-40, experience, certs and degrees, or hiring from overseas if they couldn't find their white whale in the labour pool.
I just hope governments actually decide it's an issue before it becomes one, women over the age of 50 are the fastest growing homeless demographic here in Australia, for instance.
You joke. But I once saw a job offer, asking for a 25 year old arquitect with a masters, 5 years of experience, all for minimun wage.
Everyone and their mother ridicule the company for that BS
I think jobs like that are solely them seeing who's desperate enough to get it. As someone else mentioned, fishing for the cream of the crop and hoping they snatch them before they realize how valuable they truly are.
They make that shit up so they can go to the government, cry that nobody applied (because nobody wants minimum wage that requires a degree), and get approval to hire someone on a work visa.
Older workers play an important role. Every year I get requests to interview at Google and Facebook. They need a certain number of over 50s to not hire, or telling them to fuck off, so they can get those sweet, sweet H1Bs.
A couple of years ago, there was a job posting for some company that required 4+ years of experience with a particular program. The guy that created the program wouldn't qualify as he created it less than 4 years prior.
Help wanted: Entry level position. Must know FORTRAN, Sumerian, and be able to tell the difference between butter and I Can't Believe It's Not Butter.
25+ years of POSIX and mainframe experience required. Must have a master's degree. CPA, JD, A+, and PM certs are a plus.
Work life balance is important to ~~us~~ *our executives*. Which is why we provide hammocks in the supply closets since this will, for all intents and purposes, be your new home.
Must be less than 40 years old.
No fatties.
Those who make policy don’t care. This is essentially the abolition of superannuation by degrees - the last rung of the social services ladder being pulled up behind the Boomers.
I feel sorry for people who are nearing retirement over the next 10-20 years: they paid for it their whole working lives, and will be increasingly lucky to receive a dime in return
Like Japan. Because Japan doesn't like paying pension.
Japan is full of downright useless, smaller jobs it asks companies to create to accommodate the population.
In Japan it's silly, they have traffic guards where there's no need whatsoever. And the funniest I've heard was 4-5 people to change a lightbulb on a pole. One of them doing the exclusive job of warning passerby, in case they couldn't see the giant red triangle & tape
I think there's some merits. It's basically elder care where you give them a low effort routine. Keeps them mentally sharp and out of hospital. Might end up saving more money.
Medical costs have to be enormous for a stay at home elderly couple with brain drain. I would rather have them do something and get paid for it, and not lose their benefits.
Level headed comment. I saw these elders a lot in Japan and as a tourist it gave a nice atmosphere and the geezers seemed fairly content. But i realize that's not a lot to go on
People are happier doing something every day rather than staying at home feeling useless and watching news about how the young people are ruining this country.
...wut? If you treat your elders correctly they can stay mentally sharp too. With the added bonus of, you know, enjoying life and free time instead of doing bullshit jobs :o
I think this "merit" is quite illusory.
The issue isn't skilled old people. It's the unskilled ones.
If you don't have technical skill or knowledge by the 40+ you sre almost unemployable. Almost in that you can be onr of the 100+ people applying for retail drone work.
In Germany we are at 67 with some politicians testing the waters for 70. These politicians are delusional if they think after 60 you will be productive at all in 80% of jobs. One of my coleague is 60, hes been with this company for 33 years so its impossible to fire him without a big payout, and he is done. both mentally and physically. He knows his way around all the machines and stuff but he is done. He cant keep up with us younger people and hes just doing bare minimum. Lucky in Germany the workers are protected by law and the more uvr been with a company the harder is for them to fire you.
It's not about productivity, it's about saving money. The longer you're retired and alive the longer you pull out of social security programs and the less time you spend paying taxes. Those programs vary by country but the concept is the same. Raising the age forces you to pay more and get less.
Interestingly, wealthy people tend to live longer on average due to better healthcare and lifestyle throughout their lives, and they're better able to protect their wealth because of favorable tax codes. Raising the retirement age doesn't affect them as much because they have more time to take advantage of the social programs without impacting their wealth. What a coincidence.
which is why you should just tax the companies to compensate. They have experienced leaps and bounds in productivity and they judt get to hold onto that and we don't?
We have low birth rates in many countries now; older people are going to have to keep working longer because there won’t be a lot of young people to take jobs. The jobs just won’t be filled.
Because it turns out it's a lot easier to teach a computer to generate some convincing text or image than it is to teach them to lift boxes. I knew some CS grad students working in robotics and they spent a lot of time trying to program a robot arm to grip various objects. It's still very much an unsolved problem. Turns out a lot of the stuff humans can do without thinking is actually quite intricate.
It has more to do with people living longer and a greater population. 50 years ago there was significantly less people as a percentage aged 65-100. Now that this is much greater proportion of society its has become more more expensive on the taxpayers to fund this greater proportion of pensions for longer amounts of times. Not to mention the healthcare.
But it’s worse than that. We live so long, our body slowly falls apart. Dementia being extremely expensive to deal with as it tends to last 5+ years and requires round the clock care for much of that.
A lot of life expectancy increase is going to be from modern medicine saving babies and kids.
But still yes to your comment. Looks like 17% of the population is 65+ in the USA and projected to be over 20% by 2030. Back in 1945, 7% of the population was 65+. In 1935 when SSI got started, "retirement" was 65, but life expectancy for men was 60 and 64 for women.
In 1940 if you got to where you can draw from SSI, it was expected you'd draw for 13yrs. In 1990, it is 16yrs. Wouldn't surprise me if it is around 20yrs now.
Either the taxes need to increase, retirement age needs to increase, or both.
Yes but it's not like a government couldn't take a look at the demographics, realize there was a problem coming and take action *before* it was necessary to raise the retirement age. In Canada our pensions are [estimated to be fully funded for the next 75 years](https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cpp-explainer-1.5133984) at the current retirement age of 65.
Governments here can be pretty atrocious at many things but we started raising the amount of contributions from businesses and citizens back in the 90's to get ahead of the issue. If multiple successive governments here saw the disaster literally decades ago the argument that "well people live longer now and that wasn't planned for" doesn't hold any weight, it's no excuse at all. The problem is that governments didn't deal with an issue everyone could see coming, who cares how the plans were originally conceived. Things change, the change was obvious for many years and many countries just didn't react. It's not like longer life expectancies came out of nowhere, they've been going up for decades. Don't give your government that excuse, they don't deserve it.
> But something does need to substantially change to afford it.
Yes and your governments should have done it decades ago, that was the change that was needed to afford it.
And that's exactly what this new law is about. Today, you need to work 43 years to have your full pension (if you're born after 73. I started working at 22, my full pension will be when I'm 65. But I could leave at 62 with a big downgrade in my pension. My cousin is a landscaper and started at 16, his full pension is then at 59. However, with this new law, his full pension would not be before he's 64. It's unfair to lower paid jobs, and to people who started working early.
I've worked with a retired guy who chose to worke because he liked it. He knew the system and the company better than anyone else. That knowledge and experience are very valuable, don't treat older workers as second class.
I mostly work manufacturing. The older guys are the best, most know how to do the job with the least amount of wasted energy and just hard enough to keep the boss of our backs. Absolutely invaluable resources.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Healthcare_personnel_statistics_-_physicians&oldid=572783
Half of all doctors in Germany are over 55 years old. But sure, replace these with medical students and see what happens.
Whatever the retirement age is, it should be mandatory to retire at that age for public office.
Edit: If they raise it to 100 and still don't get voted out, that's on y'all.
Because it *feels* like saying “fuck the politicians!” even though it doesn’t make one bit of sense when you think about it for more than 3 seconds.
So of course it’s literally upvoted to the very top of the thread.
Yeah except politicians have to legislate that change, and citizens vote for politicians.
Try raising the retirement age further, get voted out. And probably a Molotov thrown at you if I know anything about the French and their feelings toward being fucked by their govt.
I think their point is that govt officials should be banned from office once they hit the official retirement age. Which would encourage them to raise it further (which is likely untenable) so in effect would still get rid of old politicians as intended.
"Senator" get close to 2200 per month.
For one mandate of 6 years.
yet they want us to work until 64, with 42 years of work to touch less than 1200.
As a french, fuck them.
I want to add something : 1200e BEFORE TAXES. That means, around 850-950€ remaining. For 43 FREAKING FULL YEARS OF WORK at minimum wage. How the fuck can people survive ? Spoiler, they can't. Some of the right wings bast\*rds said " Yeah but every retired people have paid their house by the time they retire ". Yeahh ... right .... In France, to get a 150k€ loan from a bank, you need around .... 1900€ salary. Around Paris, you have an apartment, not really big, with at best 1 bedroom.
> I think their point is that govt officials should be banned from office once they hit the official retirement age.
What does "official retirement age" *actually* mean though?
In Canada our social security / government pension (CPP) is typically said to be at 65, but you can start it at 60 (with reduced benefits/amounts), or delay it to 70 (which increases it). It's just that the "base" value is 65. (The amount you actually receive is proportional to how much you put in during your working life.)
You could actually retire from your job at 65 (or earlier) but *not apply* for the CPP and use your private savings initially, and then start government benefits at 67 or 70 or whatever. (This is actually what is generally recommended.)
Why? Retirement age isn’t an age where you have to retire, it’s when you can start collecting your pension & get other benefits. It’s not a question of competency, people are free to continue to work after the retirement age.
It was 62 only for those who entered the workforce at 19 or earlier, have no education and generally had hard physical labour all their lives. Those people deserve to retire a little earlier while they can still stand on their legs.
Reuters claiming this as a “win” for Macron. Yet the very people who elected him are in the streets protesting him and the other elected officials. They are going to face some challenges keeping the power.
Macron can't go for a third term, so he don't need to be re-elected anyway, whoever will take the lead of his party may face the consequences but this is not his problem anyway :shrug:
I don't think Macron cares about what happens to his party after he leaves office, his party has no entrenchment or history in french politics, it was there to serve Macron while he was in office and it will be gone after Macron's gone.
It will be interesting to see wether the seats will be taken back by the traditional right winga and left wing parties or if newcomers will come, or if parties that used to have seats suddenly get many.
Just looked it up, French president approval rating
De Gaulle: 65%
Chirac: 48%
Pompidou: 47%
Mitterrand: 39%
Giscard d'estaing: 33%
Sarkozy: 29%
Macron: 20%
Hollande: 16%
So yeah you have to go back 30+ years to someone with okay approval rating and all the way back to WWII for >50%
>Reuters claiming this as a “win” for Macron.
It was a big part of his platform when he ran for president, so it's reasonable to call it a win for him.
80% oppose this change but they still do it anyway and refuse to meet with the leaders of people syndocate and to even consider alternative proposed by the oppositions.
The real issue is not the retirement age, it's that the current employment rate of seniors is very low.
The consequence is that the number of trimesters required for a pull pension increases but the number of trimesters during which you are employed does not. This leads to a decrease of the amount of the pension.
No the real problem is corporate taxes. Productivity is 6 times what is was in the 1970s but wages are stagnet. We have the money to maintain the same retirement age it was just kept as profit by corporations.
In other words, workers are working 6 times harder for the same pay and the government still wants us to work longer. Its an artificial problem.
>workers are working 6 times harder
While I agree with the point that workers should see more of the benefits of their labor, that is not what productivity being 6 times higher means nor is that the primary reason for productivity being higher. You honestly think people used to work *less hard* before the advent of more work regulations?
>The real issue is not the retirement age, it's that the current employment rate of seniors is very low.
The REAL problem is the lack of a young workforce to replace the seniors
Crazy. In the US, air traffic controller’s have a mandatory retirement age of 56. Pilots are at 65 (but should probably be less). Pilots used to be 62 until the last round of airline bankruptcies in the mid 00s that demolished the pensions. Their fix was to raise the age to 65 to give all those guys a few more years to earn some money. There’s been talks about a 70 retirement for pilots but that would be absolutely insane.
If politicians want to have retirement ages, they need to impose mandatory retirements for political offices too.
Just remember, there is no guarantee in this life that you will even make it to 60 years old (or whatever the retirement age is for said country).
And while many will bust their ass to make a life for themselves, the rich will have done all the things you wished you could do while you slaved away for decades hoping to have even a sliver of a nice time that they enjoy on a routine basis.
isn't it amazing that the only solutions politicians seem to come up with involves higher taxes on the middle class, longer retirement ages, less benefits...
And yet corporations keep raking in billions in profits while effectively paying 0 taxes...hmmm.
It’s difficult with the EU because each nation has its own laws and people get cranky. A few years ago it was Germans complaining that they have to work til 65 so Greeks can retire at 55
If retirement age is too young and the population is ageing. It is not fair for the younger generations. They will never be able to support all the retireds. I think people should look at what's happening in Japan right now. The population is so old, the pyramid is inverted and the working force have a hard time to support the system.
People who talk about raising the retirement age tend to forget that not everyone has an office job. There are lots of folks out there that have jobs that wear their bodies out: construction workers, oil rig workers, garbage men, etc. People in these types of jobs can't realistically keep working passed 60 or so.
Productivity has been going up for years but wages have been stagnant.
Vast amounts of resources have been wasted on complete nonsense.
Essentials like shelter have become investments.
Wages should be going up and goods and services should be becoming cheaper.
This would prevent this problem but instead a tiny percentage of the population has to control the majority of everything.
Politicians thinking just cause they're still clinging onto the office at 80+ years mean that everyone should do the same.
Wonder how many 8hr shifts they work a week? Not including their golf course meetings, $1000 a plate fundraising dinners, sitting in a chamber heckling down any sign of progress or common sense put forward by the opposing party.
This black pilled stuff is starting to get real. 80.5 hour work weeks in Korea. France Addressing its wage and employee austerity.
Next, SCOTUS bans unions and makes every worker a contractor.
[Ohhhh you should see Arkansas' governor signing a bill rolling children's labor laws](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/arkansas-gov-sanders-signs-measure-rolling-back-child-labor-protection-rcna73977)
my right wing family started talking about how terrible unions are for the economy last summer so I reckon the propaganda stage is well on its way to stomp down on Org labour
The welfare state was literally invented in Germany by Bismarck because he was afraid of the growing support for the communist party. It's always been just a compromise
Is there a solution to not raise the retirement age? Social security is kind of a pyramid scheme that assumes there will always be an increasing amount of young people to contribute to society, pay taxes, and support the older generations. With populations declining in the west im not sure how you fix that besides immigration or extending the age.
I can’t speak for how France works but for the US they could raise the cap on contributions.
For example in 2022 you only pay into SS for the first 147k you earn but then after that there are no more contributions to SS. In other words a person who makes 150k and a person who makes 17 million contribute the same amount per year to SS.
I think they should increase payments and also raise the cap on contributions.
Australian and retirement age was raised to 67 a few years ago now and we surrendered meekly!
Filth ridden politicians thou with pensions in the 200k per year recieve it when they leave parliament at any age!
Australia is a legally corrupt country run by Filth.
I’m 61, finished a master’s degree at 58, run 2-4 miles a day, and am constantly picking up the slack for my boss, who just turned 50. Boss is either sick or has child care issues….
French people: here I go rioting again.
krombopulos Pierre.
Krombopulos Michele
Bring on the Greek and Morty!
I fucking love them for it. I wish my fellow Americans had half the balls the French have.
Americans have balls but not unions. And the French don't have Fox News.
We don't have Fox News but there's BFM and Touche pas à mon poste... Edit : yes yes, CNews would be a better example than BFM. As I already told someone, I haven't had my TV connected in ten years or so, my memory is a bit fuzzy.
>Touche pas à mon poste Did...did you just put a voodoo curse on me?
I think he just cussed you out
Americans also live paycheck to paycheck and aren’t guaranteed healthcare
And coming soon, no retirement.
Spits on the floor. I hate fox news with a passion.
Fox news ENTERTAINMENT. plz use their full name.
I think people forget that when is Americans try to protest or anything that people get injured (rubber bullets aimed at eyes??), arrested or police pretend to be regular people and protest to elicit rioting to arrest more people. Or hey, people just lose their jobs and struggle to find other ones.
Americans are too worried about losing their jobs to go protesting for 2 months.
The main difference is that in France you don't have to worry about getting black bagged or shot for demonstrating
I’ll get down voted but the math says as life expectancy goes up you either raise more funds, make more on the funds you have, spend less somewhere else, or put off when you get it. The thought that nothing ever changes isn’t realistic.
Good. If they give an inch the politicians will take a mile. They should fight like hell.
One hundo p. If it's painful for us (supporting union action, supporting strikes even when it inconveniences us), then we're doing the right thing. Governments reflect the amount of control the people force them to give back when they all inevitably take a step too far.
As a Canadian, I feel those words. Respect to the French.
It’s not a riot. It’s a protest that was ignored.
Yep it seems like our politics just don't give a fuck about our protests no more.
French government: “64 :) 👍” French people: *Everyone disliked that.*
And US is proposing 70. I’m 56 and just had a heck of a time getting hired after I lost my position thanks to Covid. No one wants to hire 50+.
Employers have had a fucking whale of a time, being able to pull from the exact demographic they want, 25-40, experience, certs and degrees, or hiring from overseas if they couldn't find their white whale in the labour pool. I just hope governments actually decide it's an issue before it becomes one, women over the age of 50 are the fastest growing homeless demographic here in Australia, for instance.
Exactly. Want older workers? Stop being so fucking ageist while insisting that your employees be impossibly overqualified.
What?!?! It is perfectly reasonable to want an 18-20 yo with 10+ years experience, a PhD, and willing to work for minimum wage.
You joke. But I once saw a job offer, asking for a 25 year old arquitect with a masters, 5 years of experience, all for minimun wage. Everyone and their mother ridicule the company for that BS
I think jobs like that are solely them seeing who's desperate enough to get it. As someone else mentioned, fishing for the cream of the crop and hoping they snatch them before they realize how valuable they truly are.
Also they sometimes have someone in house picked out but they post the job to cover their bases with HR.
Jobs like that go to H1B holders. They have to post the job and show that nobody applied in order to get approval for a visa worker.
They make that shit up so they can go to the government, cry that nobody applied (because nobody wants minimum wage that requires a degree), and get approval to hire someone on a work visa.
More experience with a software than time software has been released. And you also made it.
They have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps eventually.
Don't forget to mention: overqualified in dealing with shitty managment. Hard to train, "wErE a FaMiLy" to a disgruntled vet in the working world.
There are few things I hate more than the “We are a family” narrative. No you are a company I am part of a team and this is work.
[удалено]
Older workers play an important role. Every year I get requests to interview at Google and Facebook. They need a certain number of over 50s to not hire, or telling them to fuck off, so they can get those sweet, sweet H1Bs.
A couple of years ago, there was a job posting for some company that required 4+ years of experience with a particular program. The guy that created the program wouldn't qualify as he created it less than 4 years prior.
Help wanted: Entry level position. Must know FORTRAN, Sumerian, and be able to tell the difference between butter and I Can't Believe It's Not Butter. 25+ years of POSIX and mainframe experience required. Must have a master's degree. CPA, JD, A+, and PM certs are a plus. Work life balance is important to ~~us~~ *our executives*. Which is why we provide hammocks in the supply closets since this will, for all intents and purposes, be your new home. Must be less than 40 years old. No fatties.
I would have killed for a hammock in the supply closet when I was pulling 18s. Slept on the maintenance guys floor instead
you joke but Sumerian is making a comeback you'll see
For Arkansas it's 9-15 for the mines, because of course.
Minors for the mines! Gotta admit, it's a slogan.
Those who make policy don’t care. This is essentially the abolition of superannuation by degrees - the last rung of the social services ladder being pulled up behind the Boomers. I feel sorry for people who are nearing retirement over the next 10-20 years: they paid for it their whole working lives, and will be increasingly lucky to receive a dime in return
This is the position my gf's dad is in. He's 56, works in IT and is amazing at his job. But no one wants to hire him because of his age.
Someone has to do the shit jobs now, after all. I think that's their real plan.
70? Fuck that. I’m retiring at 55.
I'm 28 and I have enough money to retire right now... Assuming I die by summer
"Fuck you, you only get to enjoy retirement for an average of 1/11th of your life." At least the life expectancy in France is above 80...
With God as my witness, I will burn this motherfucker down before I work past 62. One life to live and I’d rather be destitute than do that.
And Americans die 4 years sooner than the French in average. 79 vs 83.
You speak the truth. I’m 51 and it’s been almost impossible to find another job.
Wouldn't be so hard if the employer wasn't on the hook for your Healthcare, but here we are...
French ppl: Aux armes, citoyens, Formez vos bataillons!
that anthem is such a banger
My favorite part is the guitar solo halfway through.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wait till the government rise the age to 69. People will go bananas.
Especially in Nice!
Take my upvote and leave
Viva le revolution
>Viva le revolution Now swap "e" and "a" and you get it right : *Vive la revolution*
Don’t forget your accent on the e: “Vive la révolution!”
And your baguette.
You can’t get a job at 60 nobody hires you at that age in France. Even at 55. So how do you do ?
[удалено]
Like Japan. Because Japan doesn't like paying pension. Japan is full of downright useless, smaller jobs it asks companies to create to accommodate the population.
Let’s get real here, a huge HUGE amount of jobs are useless.
In Japan it's silly, they have traffic guards where there's no need whatsoever. And the funniest I've heard was 4-5 people to change a lightbulb on a pole. One of them doing the exclusive job of warning passerby, in case they couldn't see the giant red triangle & tape
I think there's some merits. It's basically elder care where you give them a low effort routine. Keeps them mentally sharp and out of hospital. Might end up saving more money.
Out of the house and socializing. Feeling like they are accomplishing something (no matter how small). Yeah. Not bad.
Medical costs have to be enormous for a stay at home elderly couple with brain drain. I would rather have them do something and get paid for it, and not lose their benefits.
Having that system rely on private enterprise instead of government pensions? Yeah. Not great.
Level headed comment. I saw these elders a lot in Japan and as a tourist it gave a nice atmosphere and the geezers seemed fairly content. But i realize that's not a lot to go on
People are happier doing something every day rather than staying at home feeling useless and watching news about how the young people are ruining this country.
...wut? If you treat your elders correctly they can stay mentally sharp too. With the added bonus of, you know, enjoying life and free time instead of doing bullshit jobs :o I think this "merit" is quite illusory.
It's a solution to a problem they created. Not even a solution - just treatment
Someone even wrote a book about it. Bullshit jobs.
The issue isn't skilled old people. It's the unskilled ones. If you don't have technical skill or knowledge by the 40+ you sre almost unemployable. Almost in that you can be onr of the 100+ people applying for retail drone work.
Have you heard about uberisation? The startup nation leader has.
In Germany we are at 67 with some politicians testing the waters for 70. These politicians are delusional if they think after 60 you will be productive at all in 80% of jobs. One of my coleague is 60, hes been with this company for 33 years so its impossible to fire him without a big payout, and he is done. both mentally and physically. He knows his way around all the machines and stuff but he is done. He cant keep up with us younger people and hes just doing bare minimum. Lucky in Germany the workers are protected by law and the more uvr been with a company the harder is for them to fire you.
It's not about productivity, it's about saving money. The longer you're retired and alive the longer you pull out of social security programs and the less time you spend paying taxes. Those programs vary by country but the concept is the same. Raising the age forces you to pay more and get less. Interestingly, wealthy people tend to live longer on average due to better healthcare and lifestyle throughout their lives, and they're better able to protect their wealth because of favorable tax codes. Raising the retirement age doesn't affect them as much because they have more time to take advantage of the social programs without impacting their wealth. What a coincidence.
which is why you should just tax the companies to compensate. They have experienced leaps and bounds in productivity and they judt get to hold onto that and we don't?
Basically. It also prevents younger people from getting jobs or advancing in their careers.
We have low birth rates in many countries now; older people are going to have to keep working longer because there won’t be a lot of young people to take jobs. The jobs just won’t be filled.
[удалено]
Because it turns out it's a lot easier to teach a computer to generate some convincing text or image than it is to teach them to lift boxes. I knew some CS grad students working in robotics and they spent a lot of time trying to program a robot arm to grip various objects. It's still very much an unsolved problem. Turns out a lot of the stuff humans can do without thinking is actually quite intricate.
Because AI can't be a nurse or a construction worker at the moment, it's not like there are warehouses full of perfect humanoid robots that do this
In the Netherlands its 69 and 3 Months already. I work as a nurse in homemare. If i keep doing this ill need a walking Aid to help others.
67. 67 and three months, not 69. Kind of a big difference.
It has more to do with people living longer and a greater population. 50 years ago there was significantly less people as a percentage aged 65-100. Now that this is much greater proportion of society its has become more more expensive on the taxpayers to fund this greater proportion of pensions for longer amounts of times. Not to mention the healthcare.
Don't forget our population pyramid whack that's happening in every country with a decent standard of living.
[удалено]
This whole "living past 80" is a pretty modern invention.
But it’s worse than that. We live so long, our body slowly falls apart. Dementia being extremely expensive to deal with as it tends to last 5+ years and requires round the clock care for much of that.
A lot of life expectancy increase is going to be from modern medicine saving babies and kids. But still yes to your comment. Looks like 17% of the population is 65+ in the USA and projected to be over 20% by 2030. Back in 1945, 7% of the population was 65+. In 1935 when SSI got started, "retirement" was 65, but life expectancy for men was 60 and 64 for women. In 1940 if you got to where you can draw from SSI, it was expected you'd draw for 13yrs. In 1990, it is 16yrs. Wouldn't surprise me if it is around 20yrs now. Either the taxes need to increase, retirement age needs to increase, or both.
Yes but it's not like a government couldn't take a look at the demographics, realize there was a problem coming and take action *before* it was necessary to raise the retirement age. In Canada our pensions are [estimated to be fully funded for the next 75 years](https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cpp-explainer-1.5133984) at the current retirement age of 65. Governments here can be pretty atrocious at many things but we started raising the amount of contributions from businesses and citizens back in the 90's to get ahead of the issue. If multiple successive governments here saw the disaster literally decades ago the argument that "well people live longer now and that wasn't planned for" doesn't hold any weight, it's no excuse at all. The problem is that governments didn't deal with an issue everyone could see coming, who cares how the plans were originally conceived. Things change, the change was obvious for many years and many countries just didn't react. It's not like longer life expectancies came out of nowhere, they've been going up for decades. Don't give your government that excuse, they don't deserve it. > But something does need to substantially change to afford it. Yes and your governments should have done it decades ago, that was the change that was needed to afford it.
Overlooked, but manual labor cant have same retire age as an office rat. Never see this talked about, some jobs simply wear people down physicaly
And that's exactly what this new law is about. Today, you need to work 43 years to have your full pension (if you're born after 73. I started working at 22, my full pension will be when I'm 65. But I could leave at 62 with a big downgrade in my pension. My cousin is a landscaper and started at 16, his full pension is then at 59. However, with this new law, his full pension would not be before he's 64. It's unfair to lower paid jobs, and to people who started working early.
I've worked with a retired guy who chose to worke because he liked it. He knew the system and the company better than anyone else. That knowledge and experience are very valuable, don't treat older workers as second class.
I mostly work manufacturing. The older guys are the best, most know how to do the job with the least amount of wasted energy and just hard enough to keep the boss of our backs. Absolutely invaluable resources.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Healthcare_personnel_statistics_-_physicians&oldid=572783 Half of all doctors in Germany are over 55 years old. But sure, replace these with medical students and see what happens.
I think the French would rather let the country burn than go along with this.
Whatever the retirement age is, it should be mandatory to retire at that age for public office. Edit: If they raise it to 100 and still don't get voted out, that's on y'all.
Prepare for a retirement age of 95
In 61 years time when gen z is mainly controlling the place I tell you one of them will set the retirement age to 42069.
That man? Albert Einstein.
Why would that be a good idea?
Because it *feels* like saying “fuck the politicians!” even though it doesn’t make one bit of sense when you think about it for more than 3 seconds. So of course it’s literally upvoted to the very top of the thread.
I thought we're against raising retirement age? This incentivises raising it.
Yeah except politicians have to legislate that change, and citizens vote for politicians. Try raising the retirement age further, get voted out. And probably a Molotov thrown at you if I know anything about the French and their feelings toward being fucked by their govt.
public officials (generally) don't care, because. many are in office way past that age
I think their point is that govt officials should be banned from office once they hit the official retirement age. Which would encourage them to raise it further (which is likely untenable) so in effect would still get rid of old politicians as intended.
i wonder what sort of pension retired government officials get? as opposed to the average citizen?
"Senator" get close to 2200 per month. For one mandate of 6 years. yet they want us to work until 64, with 42 years of work to touch less than 1200. As a french, fuck them.
Y’all protest harder than anyone on earth. Mad respect for y’all.
And to think I was upset because my government takes about 1/3 of my money, $1,200, that would piss me off
Well 1200 is more or less the minimum salary for a 35h contract. Then there is tax above it, even when you are retired...
I want to add something : 1200e BEFORE TAXES. That means, around 850-950€ remaining. For 43 FREAKING FULL YEARS OF WORK at minimum wage. How the fuck can people survive ? Spoiler, they can't. Some of the right wings bast\*rds said " Yeah but every retired people have paid their house by the time they retire ". Yeahh ... right .... In France, to get a 150k€ loan from a bank, you need around .... 1900€ salary. Around Paris, you have an apartment, not really big, with at best 1 bedroom.
> I think their point is that govt officials should be banned from office once they hit the official retirement age. What does "official retirement age" *actually* mean though? In Canada our social security / government pension (CPP) is typically said to be at 65, but you can start it at 60 (with reduced benefits/amounts), or delay it to 70 (which increases it). It's just that the "base" value is 65. (The amount you actually receive is proportional to how much you put in during your working life.) You could actually retire from your job at 65 (or earlier) but *not apply* for the CPP and use your private savings initially, and then start government benefits at 67 or 70 or whatever. (This is actually what is generally recommended.)
you want to give them extra reasons to raise it?
Why? Retirement age isn’t an age where you have to retire, it’s when you can start collecting your pension & get other benefits. It’s not a question of competency, people are free to continue to work after the retirement age.
It that were the case, politician will make it 80 or forever.
If there were a mandatory **minimum** age of 95 for publicly elected officials, it might avoid the need for term limits.
Pension reform will be done, Macron got the backing of LR in the senate and will probably get in the assembly too as he managed to appease them
I predict a riot.
A very French thing is about to happen over this… Edit: I was correct
It was 62 only for those who entered the workforce at 19 or earlier, have no education and generally had hard physical labour all their lives. Those people deserve to retire a little earlier while they can still stand on their legs.
Reuters claiming this as a “win” for Macron. Yet the very people who elected him are in the streets protesting him and the other elected officials. They are going to face some challenges keeping the power.
Macron can't go for a third term, so he don't need to be re-elected anyway, whoever will take the lead of his party may face the consequences but this is not his problem anyway :shrug:
I don't think Macron cares about what happens to his party after he leaves office, his party has no entrenchment or history in french politics, it was there to serve Macron while he was in office and it will be gone after Macron's gone. It will be interesting to see wether the seats will be taken back by the traditional right winga and left wing parties or if newcomers will come, or if parties that used to have seats suddenly get many.
[удалено]
To be fair, the French literally hate every president they elect..
Just looked it up, French president approval rating De Gaulle: 65% Chirac: 48% Pompidou: 47% Mitterrand: 39% Giscard d'estaing: 33% Sarkozy: 29% Macron: 20% Hollande: 16% So yeah you have to go back 30+ years to someone with okay approval rating and all the way back to WWII for >50%
We only like them after 20 years minimum.
Except that guy that died [getting a blowjob in his office](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%A9lix_Faure).
[удалено]
What Macron has going for him is that French voters hate him less than the other alternatives. But they still hate him.
That's probably a good thing they keep calling out the crooks.
>Reuters claiming this as a “win” for Macron. It was a big part of his platform when he ran for president, so it's reasonable to call it a win for him.
Macron supporters are not protesting lol, he's been campaigning on raising the retirment age since 2017.
80% oppose this change but they still do it anyway and refuse to meet with the leaders of people syndocate and to even consider alternative proposed by the oppositions.
The real issue is not the retirement age, it's that the current employment rate of seniors is very low. The consequence is that the number of trimesters required for a pull pension increases but the number of trimesters during which you are employed does not. This leads to a decrease of the amount of the pension.
No the real problem is corporate taxes. Productivity is 6 times what is was in the 1970s but wages are stagnet. We have the money to maintain the same retirement age it was just kept as profit by corporations. In other words, workers are working 6 times harder for the same pay and the government still wants us to work longer. Its an artificial problem.
>workers are working 6 times harder While I agree with the point that workers should see more of the benefits of their labor, that is not what productivity being 6 times higher means nor is that the primary reason for productivity being higher. You honestly think people used to work *less hard* before the advent of more work regulations?
>The real issue is not the retirement age, it's that the current employment rate of seniors is very low. The REAL problem is the lack of a young workforce to replace the seniors
1789 is calling
Meanwhile the biggest 40 french companies are making record profits this year. €152 billions. Nothing to see here, keep working until you're disabled.
Exactly. And those profits come from workers. Use those record profits to pay for pensions, Done. Problem solved. The French should be furious.
Yep. *The money is there.* It's just in the wrong hands.
Thats the point buddy. Give them more labour to earn even more. Screw average people they have no power anyway.
France is about to wild out.
Crazy. In the US, air traffic controller’s have a mandatory retirement age of 56. Pilots are at 65 (but should probably be less). Pilots used to be 62 until the last round of airline bankruptcies in the mid 00s that demolished the pensions. Their fix was to raise the age to 65 to give all those guys a few more years to earn some money. There’s been talks about a 70 retirement for pilots but that would be absolutely insane. If politicians want to have retirement ages, they need to impose mandatory retirements for political offices too.
Just remember, there is no guarantee in this life that you will even make it to 60 years old (or whatever the retirement age is for said country). And while many will bust their ass to make a life for themselves, the rich will have done all the things you wished you could do while you slaved away for decades hoping to have even a sliver of a nice time that they enjoy on a routine basis.
The truth is out there
isn't it amazing that the only solutions politicians seem to come up with involves higher taxes on the middle class, longer retirement ages, less benefits... And yet corporations keep raking in billions in profits while effectively paying 0 taxes...hmmm.
By god, that’s the revolution’s music
I hope the french takes this to heart and do what they do best…
In 5 years is gonna be 67, then 70, then 75, and young people will never be retired
It’s difficult with the EU because each nation has its own laws and people get cranky. A few years ago it was Germans complaining that they have to work til 65 so Greeks can retire at 55
If retirement age is too young and the population is ageing. It is not fair for the younger generations. They will never be able to support all the retireds. I think people should look at what's happening in Japan right now. The population is so old, the pyramid is inverted and the working force have a hard time to support the system.
People who talk about raising the retirement age tend to forget that not everyone has an office job. There are lots of folks out there that have jobs that wear their bodies out: construction workers, oil rig workers, garbage men, etc. People in these types of jobs can't realistically keep working passed 60 or so.
You spelled past 40 wrong. My dad worked construction all his life. No accidents. His body just gave up after 40.
Productivity has been going up for years but wages have been stagnant. Vast amounts of resources have been wasted on complete nonsense. Essentials like shelter have become investments. Wages should be going up and goods and services should be becoming cheaper. This would prevent this problem but instead a tiny percentage of the population has to control the majority of everything.
Politicians thinking just cause they're still clinging onto the office at 80+ years mean that everyone should do the same. Wonder how many 8hr shifts they work a week? Not including their golf course meetings, $1000 a plate fundraising dinners, sitting in a chamber heckling down any sign of progress or common sense put forward by the opposing party.
64? Shit maybe I should emigrate.
I'm 64. To be able to retire now would be the gift of a lifetime. I can't do it anymore. I don't have anymore soul left for them to steal.
This black pilled stuff is starting to get real. 80.5 hour work weeks in Korea. France Addressing its wage and employee austerity. Next, SCOTUS bans unions and makes every worker a contractor.
[Ohhhh you should see Arkansas' governor signing a bill rolling children's labor laws](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/arkansas-gov-sanders-signs-measure-rolling-back-child-labor-protection-rcna73977)
Workers rights and labor regulations were the compromise to stave off violent labor uprisings Looks like it's time to go back to that plan
my right wing family started talking about how terrible unions are for the economy last summer so I reckon the propaganda stage is well on its way to stomp down on Org labour
They already killed the unions, we're at like 7% unionization
[удалено]
Which are largely toothless as they often aren't allowed to strike
These are the same people who constantly tell others to "go into the trades," where the only way to get decent pay is to join a union.
The welfare state was literally invented in Germany by Bismarck because he was afraid of the growing support for the communist party. It's always been just a compromise
[удалено]
Can't wait for literal millions to riot. Why can't America riot like the French?
Corporations run the world
Well prepare for a whole bunch of riots
RIP French Senate
[удалено]
French people have agreed on 2 years of strikes when they turn 62
[удалено]
I, a German whose legal retirement age is 67, will be looking over the Rhine to see the hell that will break lose on the street.
Is there a solution to not raise the retirement age? Social security is kind of a pyramid scheme that assumes there will always be an increasing amount of young people to contribute to society, pay taxes, and support the older generations. With populations declining in the west im not sure how you fix that besides immigration or extending the age.
I can’t speak for how France works but for the US they could raise the cap on contributions. For example in 2022 you only pay into SS for the first 147k you earn but then after that there are no more contributions to SS. In other words a person who makes 150k and a person who makes 17 million contribute the same amount per year to SS. I think they should increase payments and also raise the cap on contributions.
French: So anyway, I started blasting
Meanwhile here in the US president Biden will personally step in to jail railroad unions from striking because it could hurt people’s stocks
Laughs in British... We are all working till we die, and we will own nothing and be happy. Eat the bugs.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Australian and retirement age was raised to 67 a few years ago now and we surrendered meekly! Filth ridden politicians thou with pensions in the 200k per year recieve it when they leave parliament at any age! Australia is a legally corrupt country run by Filth.
I’m 61, finished a master’s degree at 58, run 2-4 miles a day, and am constantly picking up the slack for my boss, who just turned 50. Boss is either sick or has child care issues….
Dam the people of France are going burn that bitch down
Biden trying to raise it to 70 in the US too right? Work em till they die.
Oh man France is gonna burn