• Asetru@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    This still refers to this shitty comment:

    Retirement is not an age, it’s a financial status.

    I’m not saying you should overthrow the system tomorrow, but those seemingly witty comments that just normalise how messed up the system is just don’t help.

    Retirement is not a financial status. Stupid teenagers that listen to right wing podcasts may think such a remark seems smart, but it is stupid and wrong. Retirement is a necessity that stems directly from the fact that people just can’t work as well at 90 as they can at 35. It’s not a hard concept to grasp and the fact that society makes it hard to stop working after people worked a lifetime but can’t go on anymore isn’t some wisdom to understand, it’s just a neocon’s wet dream and should be described and treated as such.

    • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It would be nice if everyone could be afforded some kind of retirement when they got older. You are correct, in general a 90 year old will be nowhere near productive as a 35 year old. But it would also be nice if people working full time didn’t need food stamps, and if the tax rates were higher, and a whole bunch of other stuff. But that’s not the world we’re living in.

      I have to agree with OP here, right now it IS a financial status. It’s a luxury only afforded to those who have the wealth. The whole idea of “retirement” is fairly new. Even 100 years ago a 90 year old might move in with their kids, provide childcare for the grandkids, help out around the house, etc.

      Just to reiterate I am on your side, retirement SHOULD be something afforded to everyone. That’s just not the world we’re living in.