Europe

8484 readers

3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

poVoq@slrpnk.net

UK state pension age will soon need to rise to 71, say experts (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 9 months ago by CAVOK@lemmy.world to c/europe@feddit.de

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The way I see it there are three realistic choices a country can make.

Raise the pension age. Not very popular with the public as illustrated by protests everywhere this has been mentioned.
Increased migration. Not very popular with the public as seen by the rise of far right parties in both Europe and outside.
Lowered living standards. Not very popular because who wants to pay the same taxes but get less out of it?

This isn't a UK problem. It's the entire western world. And no, the populist idea of "just have more kids" doesn't solve it.

Any ideas?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Dendrologist@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Upper middle class is a made-up term to make those in the working class who earn the most think they're not in the same boat as "the poors". If everything comes crumbling down, they'll be waiting in the food lines like the rest of us. Millionaires and billionaires will not have the same problems.

We've seen from things like the Panama Papers that the rich are far richer than they'd have you believe. I'm sure they'll be just fine being taxed a bit more.

Also, £120 billion of pension money is likely to wind up straight back in the pockets of the same billionaires anyway as they own the major companies that pensioners are going to be buying everything from anyway.

Spreading doom and gloom that we'll just all have to suck it up and suffer the consequences of past decisions is a shite position. Don't repeat past mistakes of letting the rich off with it, eat the rich, enjoy retirement at a reasonable age, spread socialism.

[–] Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago

Ok, then what do you call a professional wage-labourer ("working class", in the marxist definition) who is nonetheless a millionaire? A high-paid professional on 100k can quite easily become a millionaire in their lifetime. If they are mere workers, same as the rest of us, that just strengthens my argument because a socialist regime would have to tax them less.

On the Panama Papres: double it, triple it. Doesn't stop eating the rich from not being a panacea, that's all I'm saying. At the risk of "englightend centrism" there's a middle-ground between rothbardian economics and utopian thinking.

That is... not how money works. In order to tax the Billionaire wealth (which primarily is the companies they own) you are either forcing them to sell (by taxing them x% of wealth, leaving them without liquid assets to pay the tax) or seizing assets and re-selling. You can't tax the rich and expect them to stay rich forever by virtue of taxing them.