The oldest Pyramid scheme in existence will fall within the next 50 years.

TheInquisitor

The oldest Pyramid scheme in existence is of course the human population and our dependency on our children to look after us. While populations were rising at an ever increasing rate the increasing elderly population was looked after by the ever increasing youth. However the world's population rate of increase is slowing and around 2050 we will reach the peak of our population.

In 50 years we won't be able to afford to pay for old age penions, because our working population might be the same size as our retired population.

MY question is how can we stop this from happening? Make people work longer? Get rid of the old age pension so that if you cant afford to retire with your own money you cant retire?

You think now is bad. In 40-50 years time the world will be on its head and our recent problems will look like a strole in the park.

Jumpy

Soylent green tbh.

I am not entirely sure what a strole looks like either. Especially one in a park.

enry

TheInquisitor wrote: »

The oldest Pyramid scheme in existence is of course the human population and our dependency on our children to look after us. While populations were rising at an ever increasing rate the increasing elderly population was looked after by the ever increasing youth. However the world's population rate of increase is slowing and around 2050 we will reach the peak of our population.

In 50 years we won't be able to afford to pay for old age penions, because our working population might be the same size as our retired population.

MY question is how can we stop this from happening? Make people work longer? Get rid of the old age pension so that if you cant afford to retire with your own money you cant retire?

You think now is bad. In 40-50 years time the world will be on its head and our recent problems will look like a strole in the park.

We can save on pensions by feeding old people to children this will also allow us to save on children’s allowance. by doing this we can pump the money we save into the pension schemes so I’d say in about thirty years time we would no- longer have to continue this practice as we would have saved loads of money for our ageing population.:D

I'm sorry for taking the p1ss but i'm more worried at present about where ill get money to buy food then whats going to happen in 50 years time. I cant tell the future but my stomach can tell me when im hungry

seamus

The flaw in this thinking is in believing that trends can't be fixed. There's very little stopping us from incentivising children - impose a "pension tax" of 20% on everyone with less than 2 children, and make provision for free child "stuff" like education, food and clothing and suddenely you'll find people happy to ride all around them in order to breed as much as possible and save themselves money.

That's an extreme though. I honestly think this trend is starting to reverse somewhat. Since women were largely emancipated and "released" into the workforces in the 70's and 80's, there was a slowly-growing negative sentiment around having children - they would limit your opportunities, destroy your social life and for a time there was quite a negative attitude to non-working mothers and pregnancy in general. Pregnant women and housewives were viewed as being weak and submissive and damaging the women's rights movement.

Now it's starting to become the thing to do again. Being pregnant is asserting your femininity and it's now "cool" again to be pregnant.

You have to remember that the human race isn't a pyramid scheme in the true sense of the word. Pyramid schemes are such because there is a physical limit to the number of new entrants to the scheme. The expansion of the human race isn't physically limited (for the moment anyway), it's only artifically limited by social norms.

Oryx

I dont disagree that the population will peak at some point, continued growth in population is unsustainable, our planets resources are finite. So how we will cope when our lifestyles are affected by population growth? You say there wont be enough young to look after the old. Well, we cant continue to consume as we do, or to expect our standards of living to continue to improve if the population is getting bigger. Something will have to give, whether that turns out to be monetary lack, or health issues, or less physical space, or pollution, I have no idea. Its a bigger issue than simply who pays for whose retirement.

TheInquisitor

seamus wrote: »

You have to remember that the human race isn't a pyramid scheme in the true sense of the word. Pyramid schemes are such because there is a physical limit to the number of new entrants to the scheme. The expansion of the human race isn't physically limited (for the moment anyway), it's only artifically limited by social norms.

A pyramid scheme does not have a physical limit. It doesn't reach a level and say way hay thats done now. It keeps going until the new people investing in the scheme cannot cover the other people already in the scheme withdrawls. Madoff's pyramid scheme lasted for decades!

It is a very coarse view of our population and how the demographics are going to change for the worse but i still think it works.

Sand

Definitly the situation cannot continue on the current trajectory ( generous pensions supported by ever growing youthful workers falls apart when children stop being born) but it can be attacked from more than one side.

It is possible that as medical science advances, the side affects of aging may be mitigated to the point where going past 60 doesnt mean you suddenly become doddery and unable to support yourself. At the very least, early retirement is going to end, statutory retirement is going to be put out further and further and the workforce itself is going to age as people in their 60s are forced to continue working to sustain themselves.

simu

Sand wrote: »

It is possible that as medical science advances, the side affects of aging may be mitigated to the point where going past 60 doesnt mean you suddenly become doddery and unable to support yourself.

Well, this is already the case for most people. 60 isn't really old anymore. I know teachers who have gone on early retirement in their 50s and while this has been a great opportunity for them on a personal level, it's a bit ridiculous that the state is paying them to be idle when they could have many productive years of work ahead of them yet. I expect to be workong a lot longer myself, anyways!

silverharp

the only problem is peoples expectations. The common belief out there is that you can work for 30 years , spend like a drunken sailor all your adult life and retire for the next 30 years on 70% of your closing salary.
Take away those assumptions and it is easier to plan your lifetime finances.

mike65

At some point the global population will level off as the 4/5th who are poor tip over into starvation, the first world will be fighting to keep the draw bridge secure. Meanwhile we will have to learn to forget the concept of retiring unless independently wealthy.

Joey the lips

I hear that I also hear we will have run out of water food and oil by then.... Lifes a bitch!

I honestly dont know the solution but I know this. At the moment I cannot afford to have more kids to look after me. So I am messed up either way.

Earthhorse

Sorry, but what world are we talking about hear? The developing world or the developed? It's the latter where this problem is going to arise and the simple solution to it is that immigration will ensure that jobs that need to be filled will be filled and the exchequer will continue to collect the revenue it needs. Broadly speaking that is what I believe will happen.

There is also a lot of truth in this statement:

silverharp wrote: »

the only problem is peoples expectations. The common belief out there is that you can work for 30 years , spend like a drunken sailor all your adult life and retire for the next 30 years on 70% of your closing salary.
Take away those assumptions and it is easier to plan your lifetime finances.

Kama

Always problems extrapolating from trends (people like Kurzweil who think Moores Law will go forever, rather than plateau as with population), but Europe is the 'Greying Nations', but I don't think the conclusion is necessary.

In 50 years we won't be able to afford to pay for old age penions, because our working population might be the same size as our retired population.

Or: we take in young workers through immigration, who pay our bills and don't require schooling, replacing the natalist imperative by taking some in through the drawbridge of Fortress Europe; immigrants tend to have lots of kids, offsetting the declinging fertility which seems to correlate well with prosperity and labour market integration.

It doesn't solve the problem of paying pensions from current, but it's hardly the death-knell either. Dependency ratios are an issue, but I'd agree with the other posters that we have other problems such as energy production and a declining resource base that need the attention more.

SparkyLarks

when the retirement age of 65 was set the average life expectancy was 63 so the majority of people never retired and worked all there life

we just need to get back to that situation.

The norm in most of the world is people work for there whole life. If your lucky enough to be able to provide for yourself so you can retire, then you will be able to

Boskowski

I actually think the oldest pyramid scheme in the world has an even more disastrous effect.

"And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein."

The principle of everlasting growth and expansion- that is really going to get us one day. Easter Island is all I say...

Gurgle

SparkyLarks wrote: »

when the retirement age of 65 was set the average life expectancy was 63 so the majority of people never retired and worked all there life

Set, incidentally by a forward thinking politician called Otto Von Bismark, when he introduced the state pension to Germany in 1889.
Same guy brought in health insurance, accident insurance for workers and disability benefit.