Comments by "HomerOJSimpson" (@Homer-OJ-Simpson) on "Does France's Pension System Actually Need Reform?" video.

@antoineaublin3812 "productivity has been rising while the worker/pensioner ratio decreased, so were still producing enough wealth even with less workers in proportion". But then this assumes that people are not materially improving their lives over those decades. HEAVILY flawed argument. A lot of that productivity gain went into people buying more stuff. By your logic, the payout of the pension should be the same as it was 40 years ago.
1
@antoineaublin3812 I Just highlighted a major issue with your argument. I didn’t say you said the whole video was wrong.
1
@JustPeterSteel I’m confused. Are you saying that the more you make, the less you get in pension? That makes no sense. The US does cap how much anyone can get from social security so it doesn’t matter if you make $150k or $1,500k a year, you’ve hit the cap.
1
@JustPeterSteel one million euro/dollars is not that much these days. It's nice but you aren't living rich without a constant flow of high income. But either ways, 120k euro or dollars is not that much if you have a family and the spouse makes a lot less or doesn't work. It's a good amount if each makes 120k though. and many people only start making 120k late in their careers so it's not guaranteed they will have a lot of saved money.
1
@johnsamuel1999 ' If you contribute more to the pension system, you deserve more pension amount to maintain your prior lifestyle. Its about fairness, the more you provide, the more you receive. " You must agree though that there is a cap on payout of a government pension, right? And many laws and policies are not about 'fairness' as you define it. it's about what is best for the people.
1
@asusdvh7265 There are many problems with the OP (Antoine Aublin) using productivity gain. Productivity is measured by the number of hours worked by a population. If there are fewer workers and more retired people or if workers are working fewer hours, a productive increase might still result in lower GDP and lower tax revenues. And guess what, in 2000 France dropped the full time work hours from 39 hours to 35 hours. That means that an 11% increase in productivity and no other changes (same exact number of workers / retired) would be required to just get back to 2000 levels.
1
@JustPeterSteel what country are doing your math for? Are you factoring in that 120k after taxes is a fraction of that? I'm not sure exactly what it would it be in France but let's say it was 80k. That's only 5k per month. The house and all the bills cold be 3k. That leaves only 2k food, clothing, other bills, entertainment, etc. and that individual would have 2-3 kids.
1
@johnsamuel1999 " yes I am aware that the government has both a minimum pension (which benefits lower income groups) and a maximum pension as well. But the person above want everyone to receive the SAME pension amount or lower income people to get more.'" I was looking at clarification from both of you and I think I got it. I certainly disagree with him on that specific argument there. " laws are not based on whats "best for the people", its based on what we want them to be " Same differences. Maybe I should reword it so that you can understand the point. Laws are based on what the people think is best for the people. At least in a democracy. So why are you talking about fairness or equal treatment of finances? The logic you used would suggest all welfare (or financial support to the poor) is wrong.
1