- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Denmark is set to have the highest retirement age in Europe, after lawmakers voted to raise it to 70.
Parliamentarians passed a bill mandating the rise on Thursday, with 81 votes in favor and 21 against.
The new law will apply to people born after December 31, 1970. The current retirement age is 67 on average, but it can go up to 69 for those born on January 1, 1967, or later.
The rise is needed in order to be able to “afford proper welfare for future generations,” employment minister Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen said in a press release Thursday.
i can’t help but think this “problem” could be solved in ways other than forcing people to work until they’re 70. like for instance TAX THE FUCKING RICH
i know propaganda is a powerful weapon, but you should be extremely skeptical of the people saying “the problem can’t be solved any other way…” and what their motivation might be (spoiler: keep themselves rich at the expense of everyone else. including, apparently, the elderly who have already spent their life working)
Most people can’t work at that age, and no one will hire you like after 55 anyways. So stupid and evil.
Far from perfect, and with rising inequality, but Denmark has generally been relatively decent when it comes to taxing the rich and high-income individuals.
As born in the 90s I’m expected to retire at the earliest by 72. I don’t understand this at all though - I’m expecting a reduced need for labourers as many things become increasingly automatised anyway, so it’s an entirely wrong focus in the first place.
And you’re saying this about that bastion of right-wing economic policy… Denmark? Tax-to-GDP ratio in the mid 40s, second highest amongst OECD countries?
No-one here has said that increasing the pension age is the only solution. Indeed, on its own, it probably doesn’t solve the problem. But it’s one part of a plan. Other parts include addressing the other side of the equation - young people, so encouraging immigration and increasing birth rates (but Danish net immigration is already about 1% of its population per year which isn’t low, high levels of immigration are unpopular, and increasing birth rates is difficult and makes the problem worse for at least 18 years). Tax policy is another aspect of it, but you have to realise that having an older population doesn’t mean that working population is willing or able to bear higher tax rates (even if you try to target them at the rich) That is to say, if you have a high average tax rate already, as you do in Denmark, increasing it further to pay for an aging population is likely to start having adverse effects, and it doesn’t matter why you’re increasing taxation.
i don’t know what to tell you then, other than people might not be more excited to have kids knowing that they’ll be working until they’re 70. unless their plan is to move the entire family out of the country. which also makes the problem worse
I don’t think this will affect people’s desire to have children at all (Denmark’s strong social security system has a much stronger, and positive, effect on that).
I am of child-having age and my decision is based around what my life would be like for the next 18 or so years, not would it would be like at retirement. If I were to think about that, possibly having someone around to help me out and let me retire earlier would probably be a very tiny nudge in favour of having children.
lol “hey can you give grandpa a ride to work? his back’s gone out again and he’s used up all his pto”
How are you gonna stop “the rich” from simply taking all of their digitally stored wealth and leaving the country that taxes them?
Not disagreeing with you necessarily, i’m just curious. With borders being more for show than anything and the ability to purchase a passport from countries with low or no income tax, how do you propose to stop them?
This is where the nationalists win against the globalists in all types of debate. They atleast have a strategy, even if it leads to other humanitarian problems. You have to start giving more of a shit about your own community, either by becoming rich and giving it back to the community or let the rich leave and deal with the aftermath of it.
I hate this argument.
If they’re not paying their fair share of taxes then leaving is beneficial. It’s like saying “yeah but if you ask the thieves to pay for their stolen goods they might leave the store”
Totally agree with you, im 41 and all my live i head this shit excuse innmy country that the billonaires takes all their money and fly, so we need to shit all the people only to save a small group of billonaires for nothing, they never fly away, it more expensive than taxes but, you know, the assholes thinks that defending billonaires could give them money
Its not so much an argument as it is the logical conclusion to open borders. They can leave if they want. Especially if they haven’t broken any laws. They simply leave when a law gets voted through.
What if they’re paying their share/most of their share of taxes now, but a change pushes them into not doing so? These things ar enot all-or-nothing.
In something like Denmark’s case, I could see an argument. In the US? Rich people pay nearly nothing, so I think forcing them to pay taxes is a slam dunk
They never leave, that’s propaganda from the rich class (Massachusetts passed a millionaires tax and I saw in person this to be a bunch of bologna). They obviously live there for reasons other than taxes.
They definitely do.
During the financial crisis in the 90’s, Sweden was close to defaulting due to the rich moving their wealth out of Sweden.
I would want to understand that data, as it was a lot easier to just say things are happening in the 90s than today. The rich tried to say this would happen 3 years ago too. However, in the current police state in America where there is no privacy for anyone, we have a concrete example of raising the taxes on the parasite class and there was no data to back this claim.
it’s not an easy thing to solve, and a large part of it comes down to not having a country where greedy selfish assholes make all the rules and hoodwink the populace into supporting policy that completely the opposite of in their own best interest
i don’t know about other countries, but investing more in the “common good” has basically become a pejorative where i live, where people who benefit the most from publicly funded resources whine the loudest about “socialism”
it may be too late. there may be no solution, other than the late 1700s french sort
Why haven’t they already?
Their wealth is digitally stored, but their business isn’t. A car dealership or a Walmart are physical things that they can’t take with them unless they close up shop entirely and miss out on the revenue, and those are taxed too.