155
tfw China raises their ret. age and it's still lower than yours
Funny how no one mentions that . Just the usual reactionary bulshit,
It's not reactionary to be against authoritarians though. Whether they are bougie capitalist or bougie leninists/maoists. There are countries that better take care of their retirees. And are not socially repressive authoritarian regimes. It's genuinely great that China offers that to the people they don't imprison for asking for their rights and speaking out against the state. But I'm not sure living in a comfortable open air prison would be everyone's idea of an ideal retirement.
I'm going to save my praise for the countries that do both.
They don't know what reactionary means, they think it means having a reaction to the news or something.
It's genuinely great that China offers that to the people they don't imprison for asking for their rights and speaking out against the state.
I mean that's the vast majority of the people, looks like they have a little under 10,000 political prisoners in a country of 1.4 billion, so 0.0007% of people. That's not good and should be 0 but it's not some orwellian police state with stazi on every corner checking if you said xi looks like Winnie the Pooh.
I'm no fan of Chinese authoritarianism and there human rights record but pretending there authoritarianism is the same as the totalitarianism of the 20th century is naive. It's Definitely not an "open air prison" and does a disservice to people who live in actual open air prisons like Gaza or North Korea.
How marxist-lenninist of them...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_billionaires
China - 406
Right??????
Fucking hell.
The french are throwing a hissy fit over that issue. The younger working class has to sacrifice their retirement because "the economy". Meanwhile you got rich assholes parading on their huge yachts in St-Tropez and the French Riviera thanks to the money they make from dodging taxes.
sink the yachts
Speaking of which. I recently visited Monaco and the French Riviera and the account of wealth and opulence has radicalized me. As if the cost of living wasn't enough to do so already.
I could write a book about how mad I am at our governments who enable these rich fucks while asking the rest of us to make sacrifices. .
Unlike in Capitalist countries, China's billionaires don't have much political power and actually face consequences for things like corruption, etc.
Unlike capitalists countries, corruption is proudly displayed and encouraged. The fact that a few bougie billionaires were crushed and kidnapped for crossing the party. Not corruption. Billionaires themselves are a corruption inherently. That you believe bourgeo-xi unquestioningly and the party unquestioningly is extremely sad.
Where have they said they support xi unquestioningly? "Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good!" We hold our own to that standard, and won't allow it to other people, in their own nation?
Heaven is high and the emperor is far away.
But not anymore, now the emperor watches you, always, through his silicon servants. There is no freedom from his gaze, anywhere.
It's OK though, because China is communist and the workers own the means of produ... hhee.. pro... sorry, I can't say it with a straight face.
Presumably you could have typed it without losing control of your fingers, though.
Why is the retirement age for women lower when they have a longer life expectancy than me ?
because women are delicate little flowers, of course
Because they can give birth which fucks with their body in their old age is my guess.
Probably also because they still manage the bulk* of domestic chores.
Factory workers get to retire early, I assume because it's more physically demanding/punishing. Why don't we get to retire at these early ages? Why don't we have universal health? Why aren't we locking up corporate criminals?
That's unfortunate. I thought they wouldn't fall for this.
What do you mean, "fall for this"? What are they going to do — protest? Vote for someone else?
I mean I thought the CCP wouldn't go that route, pretending the workforce can't be productive enough to support their aging population without increasing the retirement age. I guess they either bought the (I think flawed) economic theory that this is needed, or they just want to extract more labor from the population and use that as pretense. Although given Xi's "welfare bad" tendencies I guess it's not surprising.
they either bought the (I think flawed) economic theory that this is needed
You're putting me in the difficult situation of backing up the CCP on this one, but how could it not be needed? They kneecapped birthrates for a whole generation, and never recovered. Unless they fix birthrates or start allowing immigration, they have no other recourse than forcing people to work longer. Either that or they actually start acting communist and redistribute wealth so that the soon-to-be retiree generations can weather the storm.
Edit: also, look at that male surplus. Ouch.
... or they actually start acting communist and redistribute wealth so that the soon-to-be retiree generations can weather the storm.
This is the direction I hoped they'd go. And let me clarify something. I think that there are vast gaps between the financial side of economics and the real economy. In other words, prices and financial capital do not accurately represent what's happening in the real economy and the error is significant. When I think of the real economic cost of taking care of the basic needs of seniors I don't see the problem some economists assert when looking at the financial side of things, typically dressed as "every X working people will have to support Y retirees" where X/Y is really low. For example farming is so absurdly cheap in terms of labor that very few people can feed everyone and have a third of it get thrown in the trash. The one component that is more labor intensive is healthcare but I don't think it'll need an apocalyptic increase in labor to handle.
Of course even then the economy might still shrink due to the decreased total labor as population shrinks. That part could be unavoidable without significant productivity jumps driven by technology, automation, etc., but on that I also do not subscribe to the traditional doom economist view. There are counterexamples where population has been decreasing and the real economy has maintained stability.
Largely, I might agree with all you've said, but farming is extremely labor intensive, and takes a significant physical toll. So farmers should get early retirement and extra benefits, because who survives without them sacrificing themselves for us?
Sorry, yes it's extremely labor intensive in that the labor is difficult. However the number of people it takes to grow the amount of food needed has decreased dramatically over the last century. This results in the labor of a tiny fraction of the population being able to feed the rest. I don't have problems with farmers retiring early. I don't have problems either with reforming farming to overstaff the labor intensive parts of it, so that people don't get broken. It'll still require a very small proportion of the total labor available.
Thank you, and those are easily actionable solutions. Thank you for a thoughtful reply.
Well, this social network is ours so, it makes sense to be excellent to each other. 🫶
Agreed. 🫶
I broadly agree with you and like you also tend to criticize the CCP from the left. If you want to be communist, be communist and do it right (for the first time!).
However, it's far too late for China to do those things before GenX enters retirement, even if there were any political will to attempt it. China is (after the USA) the most grindingly capitalist place I've ever been to, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Within the parameters of their current politics, they are absolutely heading at full speed for an economic cliff, even if Xi succeeds in killing off most of that male surplus on Taiwanese beaches. Taking Taiwan, however doomed and reckless the attempt may be, is perhaps the only hope of stemming that flow, since TW has much higher per capita GDP. I'm guessing that's why he's so intent on it.
NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for NBC News:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-population-declines-second-consecutive-year-rcna134054
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-raise-retirement-age-economy-demographic-crisis-rcna170979
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
155 points (97.5% liked)
World News
38563 readers
2572 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS