Traditionally, retiring entails leaving the workforce permanently. However, experts found that the very definition of retirement is also changing between generations.

About 41% of Gen Z and 44% of millennials — those who are currently between 27 and 42 years old — are significantly more likely to want to do some form of paid work during retirement.

This increasing preference for a lifelong income, could perhaps make the act of “retiring” obsolete.

Although younger workers don’t intend to stop working, there is still an effort to beef up their retirement savings.

It’s ok! Don’t ever retire! Just work until you die, preferably not at work, where we’d have to deal with the removal of your corpse.

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    255
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So much propaganda in this article.

    Knowing you won’t be able to retire, and making plans accordingly, is acceptance of the situation.

    It’s not a fucking preference.

    • Rolder@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      1 year ago

      I could see some people wanting low level jobs in their retirement because they don’t know what to do with their time otherwise.

      But it should absolutely not be a requirement.

      • treefrog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        For sure.

        A some people do just like to work.

        But I think most people would prefer to do their own things, work on their own projects and hobbies, instead of someone else’s.

        Acting like it’s a preference to work past retirement, instead of a the financial reality for most of us, is such a load of horseshit I was tempted to write a complaint to the editor that this wasn’t published as an opinion.

      • xxkickassjackxx@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Definitely. When I was a teenager this retired guy Al worked at chick fil a with me, not because he needed to but he wanted to. He had a cushy position too. He would just go talk to customers and make sure they had refills and stuff. Great guy, taught me a lot about life.

    • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      1 year ago

      “soft life” is a lifestyle that embraces comfort and low stress, prioritizing personal growth and mental wellness.

      What a fucking garbage take.

      This isn’t a lifestyle. This is how life used to be for most people.

    • ZzyzxRoad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      So sick if seeing these articles framing “millennials/gen z killed xyz” as a preference or a want.

      Remember when we killed the diamond wedding ring industry? We can’t pay our rent ffs.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        They used to advertise a diamond engagement ring as costing ‘three months’ salary’ since that was painful, but affordable.

        Who can afford to sacrifice one month’s salary anymore?

    • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is it, right here. I’m a little older than the age range listed in the article and I literally became a nurse with the explicit expectation that I will have to work until I can’t stand up anymore. At least this pays well and gives me lots of options for working environments that might be a little more compatible with old age.

      But the idea that I’ll ever be able to not work AND also afford healthcare? Impossible. Not going to happen. Might as well accept it.

  • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    1 year ago

    are currently between 27 and 42 years old — are significantly more likely to want to do some form of paid work during retirement.

    Want is not the right word there, and it completely changes the message. This is a fucking hit job, trying to convince people that company executives stealing pension plans, and a failed society that abandons its elderly, is something young people desire.

      • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would have retired 20 years ago if I could. I will never understand people that say they don’t know what they’d do with themselves in retirement. What unimaginative and boring people they must be. I have a thousand interests I can’t fully pursue because of work obligations.

        • Shotgun_Alice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This was my stepdad, always said that. I just would tell him “whatever you want.” And it wasn’t for a lack of hobbies, he has plenty. I just don’t understand the mindset of people that want to “work.” Like, I love making things and “working” on my own things, but never have I gone to work and happy to be there. To work for a manager that micromanages me, another manager who want me to falsify records, (that btw it won’t come back to him but to me,) a GM who would put undo pressure on you to stay longer then you were scheduled. Fuck that place. Nothing made me happier when my situation changed and didn’t need to pick up extra hours. Six hour mark rolled around and I was out. I’d take that time go to the gym, go on a bike ride, go rock climbing, go paddle boarding because I sure as hell enjoyed working on myself more then I ever did at any job. And to work so hard for so little, damn if America isn’t just on large pyramid scheme.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m one of those people. If not pointed in a specific direction by someone else I’ll just aimlessly do nothing but kill time for months on end. I have a couple interests, but nothing that could keep me occupied for an extra 40 hours a week.

          This isn’t to say I love working, but I don’t hate it either. I’d rather have work than no work, even for the same amount of money.

          • Dkiscoo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just do shit until you say “hey that was nifty” or run out of money. Whatever comes first.

    • Flambo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Want is not the right word there, and it completely changes the message.

      Or perhaps it’s the right word, because it completely changes the message in precisely the way they intend.

      • qarbone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s certainly the intended word. But it’s not “right” by any reasonable metric of correctness.

    • Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In older vocabulary, “want” was actually the stronger form of “need”.

      Perhaps we’re returning to tradition in more ways than one?

  • aes@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    what the fuck is up with all these pansy-ass terms suits keep coming up with? “quiet quitting” and now “soft saving”?

    fuck this marshmallow flavoured cyanide bullshit

    • Rory Butler Music@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a way to turn people off of what they really mean.

      “Quiet quitting” is just doing your job. Trying to make it seem like breaking your back to help someone profit is the minimum to do unless you want to be branded a quitter.

      “Soft saving” is apparently the requirement of working til your dead because no one gets paid enough to…hard save…I guess.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      what the fuck is up with all these pansy-ass terms suits keep coming up with? “quiet quitting” and now “soft saving”?

      It’s their attempt at managing the narrative in their favor.

    • drphungky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Neither of those terms were developed by suits. They both were popularized in the Gen Z social sphere, namely TikTok, and then well after they went viral and had plenty of adherents, started being picked up in the normal media cycle of regurgitating whatever is happening on social media and seeing what sticks.

      They’re both just a rejection of “old” cultural norms, in this case specifically a rejection of “hustle culture” and to a lesser extent the FIRE (i.e. early retirement) movement, both of which had their heyday on the internet many years ago.

      And like…this shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. Gen Z is typically much more concerned about mental health (focus on now) than prior generations, has a very doom and gloom outlook for the future (focus on now), and is the first generation to be raised by people who didn’t tell them “just work hard and you’ll be fine eventually” (focus on now). Is it any surprise that they’re less forward looking? What do they have to look forward to? Call it cyanide if you want, but while I don’t necessarily agree with it, it certainly feels like a natural development to me.

  • Marin_Rider@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    did some idiot confuse “worried we will have to work until death” with “wanting to work until death”?

    get fucked capitalist class. the minute I can afford not to work I will stop. the problem is you guys fucked the system so hard that it seems that point is so far away, or not attainable at all.

    I feel so sorry for the retired boomers on good pensions in their big houses with nothing better to do than wish they were working again

    end rant

    • drphungky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      did some idiot confuse “worried we will have to work until death” with “wanting to work until death”?

      Yes, the OP and everyone else slurping up this rage bait. The article does not say they “want to work until death”. It also doesn’t say shit about “capitalism celebrating” anything. This is presenting survey results and generational trends. Guess what, Gen Z is a little different than millennials, and different still from Boomers (though they appear to have some in common with the consumptive, “me generation” that Gen X was broadly painted as). This shouldn’t be revolutionary. They don’t save as much as millennials because millennials lived through multiple rough markets, and entered the workforce during a historic downturn. They care (even) less about work because they are much more focused on mental health. These are super, SUPER broad strokes, but we’re talking about national level surveys. Why everyone is getting their undies in a bunch over this is absurd. No one is saying anything is good or bad. It just is.

    • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      Like “quiet quitting”, which is, in reality, just doing your job and not going above and beyond because it doesn’t benefit you…

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      This honestly sounds like propaganda trying to convince people this is a thing.

      IMO it’s exactly that. They hardly bring up any other external influences on people’s income in the article, just a paragraph or two very deep in the article.

      It insinuates really hard that people have the money to spend but just don’t want to spend, a subtle “killing the messenger” of people being lazy and greedy.

    • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is some straight up Manufacturing Consent shit that’s designed to make you think being poor and working until you fucking die on the assembly line and have to have your corpse dragged into the dogfood machine by the other wage slaves was your idea.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is some straight up Manufacturing Consent shit

        This message is being projected to the leaders of Capitalism, not the workers. It’s being said to the wrong audience.

        If so, it seems like it’s a wasted effort.

        • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The leaders of capitalism are just “capitalists.” And they don’t read CNBC. This is an article written for middle-class office drones, because it’s one of the few websites that isn’t blocked by the company firewall that has something approximating entertainment on it.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The leaders of capitalism are just “capitalists.”

            By the leaders of capitalism one could mean the CEOs and/or upper management, the c-suite, etc.

            And they don’t read CNBC.

            They sure watch it though, as well as the Sunday morning shows.

            This is an article written for middle-class office drones, because it’s one of the few websites that isn’t blocked by the company firewall that has something approximating entertainment on it.

            They’re usually too busy to watch videos on their web browser at work because they are trying to keep the place from burning down project wise, but sure, it could be for them as well.

    • Scew@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      news is profit driven, so it literally always has someone’s agenda behind it… (e.g. always propaganda) this appears to be corporate flavored

  • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    1 year ago

    One thing worth noting that’s tangentially related: the reason Social Security faces solvency concerns is not that they couldn’t anticipate the Boomers’ retirement, but because under Boomer management, wages (which are the basis for Social Security’s funding) have been suppressed, particularly on the low end of the wage scale.

    They saw the Boomers coming a mile away. What they didn’t see coming was that they’d flatline the minimum wage and kill off unions

  • Solivine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have no idea where they pull these statistics from. It’s increasingly sad that we should get more time off as labour gets automated and cheaper, not less.

    • metaStatic@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I do the manual labour while machines paint and write poetry, this is not the future I expected.

      • KnightontheSun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Had to bail at the first YT ad, so I’ll finish on Piped. My first take is that even though I get paid for eight hours, I work very similarly as the Stone Age worker in bursts. Some days I’m not working very hard and some days I am. I usually try to ensure I get something done over the course of the week, but it doesn’t always work out. Shrug. I don’t lose any sleep over it.

    • bluGill@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most people are using that extra productivity to have more toys. Houses are much larger than 70 years ago. People now commonly have AC in the house. Most people have a phone/computer in their pocket (the video phone of 1950s science fiction not only exists, and it isn’t a room sized machine but something even kids have in their pocket). You don’t have to - get rid of the phone and you save a lot of money per month - but most people have chosen not to. Maybe they just feel forced to, but it is still a choice and there are a few people who by not having them prove it isn’t forced.

      • spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        What world do you live in where you can get by living like a hermit in the woods?

        You may be okay with having a shitty existence but I certainly am not. Shaming people for having AIR CONDITIONING in a time where we are encountering record high temperatures, the likes of which are killing people? Fuck you pal, all the “advice” or “wisdom” you think you’re spewing here is nothing but garbage.

        GUYS GET IN HERE. THE SECRET TO SUCCESS IN AMERICA NOW IS TO STOP PARTICIPATING IN SOCIETY.

        Come on man…

      • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        get rid of the phone and you save a lot of money per month

        ?

        Have you tried living without a phone? This is very hard to pull off in America. You need an email address. Ok, fine, you say, but that doesn’t mean you need a phone. Okay, so you need to pay for home internet and have a PC? Still a cost here.

        No, you say, walk/drive to the library every time you need to check your email. Every time you need to use a website to make an appointment or fill a form out. Every time you need to check google for information (by the way, I have saved thousands of dollars by googling things, I am sure you have, too).

        There’s still a cost here - time. Many people who have smartphones in America don’t have home internet.

        You still need a phone number if you’re employed. I’m sure there are jobs that will put up with not being able to contact you, but good luck with that, I’m sure they pay well. You’re paying for a dumb phone or a land line either way.

        And you’re right, it is a choice. I choose to participate in society, and that pretty much requires the internet. I choose not to live naked in the woods, surviving on what I forage like a bear.

        • bluGill@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          By making that choice you pay the price. I knowany people without a phone, they live in a different society. Most are old.

          • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Most are old

            Bingo!

            Try balancing a job and kids, reaching companies and schools without a smart phone. It will cost you time if you can’t just reach into your pocket. Example, schools in my area put school closures on Facebook and through email. Guess you could listen to the radio if you didn’t have access. Or watch the news on TV (Oh, actually, TV is a luxury, nevermind, much less useful. I don’t have TV, don’t have time to watch or the money to waste on cable).

            Smart phones are not an expensive luxury anymore, they’re a tool. They’re a tool that the younger, employed and child-raising part of society is assumed to have. I’m not saying you can’t do it, it’s just, well… Hope your kids can adjust to college life if they haven’t been exposed to tools like easy access to the internet. Their peers will probably have smart phones, at least as teenagers/young adults. Doesn’t bode well for them. You can get a cheap smart phone, even used iPhones aren’t always that expensive, though I think androids are far more economical.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Wouldn’t a radio also be a luxury? Should we be spending money on anything other than ramen and a rug to sleep on?

              • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Excellent point. Radios are clearly pushing it, I’m sure some of them cost like $20. People can just learn how to do without!

            • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              The person you’re replying to is a moron, basic maths tells me they’re wrong. My phone costs £400/year, let’s round that up to £500 for ease of calculation (less once the handset is paid off, but I’ll give them the best possible argument). Living in a 3 bed semi, nothing fancy, decent area. Currently my house would cost £200-250k, I’ll take the lower end, again benefits their argument. At £500/year it would take 400 years for me to save for my home. Not a big fancy home, a relatively small starter home. My smart phone is not the reason I can’t afford a bigger house.

              • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yea I know, lmao. I work with people who think that some people don’t deserve smart phones. It’s cathartic to argue about it on the internet.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            By making the choice to not have a job since you don’t have a phone, you’re not going to be able to buy those toys. Or afford rent. Homeless people have phones because they need them to work the minimum wage jobs they’re forced to work just to be able to sleep in their cars.

  • xaetrus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    A soft lifestyle? And to think this whole time I thought it was just called “being poor and underpaid”

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Generally the people being discussed in this article are not poor and underpaid, but rather prefer work-life balance to be heavily slanted toward “life” and “experiences” rather than “work as much as possible to make as much as possible.”

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Generally the people being discussed in this article are not poor and underpaid

        From the article, buried inside of it…

        Additionally, inflation makes it harder for people to cover their expenses or save, Koehler said.

        A report by Blackrock shows that in 2023, only 53% of workers believe they are on track to retire with the lifestyle they want. A lack of retirement income, worries over market volatility and high inflation were some of the reasons cited for a lack of confidence about retirement among workers.

        I know the article insinuates it, but I don’t think we can assume that people can afford more but just don’t want to spend more, to protect their lifestyle.

        I believe it’s more of people want a better lifestyle and they’re not getting paid enough for it, that they’re expecting the same lifestyle that the previous generations had, and are not being selfish and asking for more than others had.

      • randomdeadguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah! They should be raising themselves up by pulling up those bootstraps. That’s the way anyone can reach a higher socio-economic status. America!! /s

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This really has nothing to do with “bootstraps” which is a satirical metaphor (originally satirical) about climbing from poverty.

    • Acters@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t get the privilege of having a life, why shouldn’t we get to work till death?

      • TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who need a life if you’re working all the time? If you were serious about retiring you’d work yourself to death to get there!

  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    From the article…

    According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Americans are saving less in 2023. The personal saving rate — the portion of disposable income one sets aside for savings — was significantly lower at 3.9% in August, compared to the 8.51% average in the past decade, according to data from Trading Economics which goes as far back as 1959.

    Additionally, inflation makes it harder for people to cover their expenses or save, Koehler said.

    A report by Blackrock shows that in 2023, only 53% of workers believe they are on track to retire with the lifestyle they want. A lack of retirement income, worries over market volatility and high inflation were some of the reasons cited for a lack of confidence about retirement among workers.

    It really just is time for companies to pay more money to their employees, to share the wealth better, back like how we used to.

    It’s wild to think that in the past only one person would have to work and a couple would be able to afford a house and raise a family. I can’t see how that can be done in today’s world.

    Someone dig up FDR and ask him the redo the ‘New Deal’.

    • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Additionally, inflation makes it harder for people to cover their expenses or save, Koehler said.

      I feel like this is the most significant piece of information in the entire article and it just skims over it. People aren’t failing to save because of lifestyle choices. They’re failing to save because groceries for 1 person costs like 200 bucks a week in some cities. Shit is more expensive than ever before, and things like home ownership, which is historically THE default hedge against inflation, is outside the grasp of pretty much anyone below 40 who isn’t a doctor or working in a similarly lucrative field.

      • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Man, I remember when I was a kid groceries cost $100~$200 for a family of 4 for a week, and some of that food (like bags of chips) would get spread out over multiple weeks. 11-year-old me couldn’t believe that my parents spent that much on food but wouldn’t get me a $40 lego set.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the formula for minimum wage should be as follows

      Minimum wage adds up to enough per month that the average number of hours worked times the minimum wage are large enough for the national average for rent to make up at most 40% of a minimum wage worker’s budget.

      If a county (or equivalent subdivision) has a higher average rent than that average, the minimum wage there is the same formula but for that higher average rent instead of the national average.

      If there’s a discrepancy between where someone lives and where they work, their minimum wage is the higher between the two.

      The only modification I think it’d need is maybe finding a scientific way to replace monthly rent with “average monthly expenditure” so that folks getting billed for medicine aren’t being screwed over, but frankly a country that can get the above proposition done is probably one that made UHC happen too anyways.

      Also just to keep those landlords from thinking they can get wise, rent can only be raised on lease renewal, and only by as much as the reported inflation rate at the time of lease renewal. Also, constructive eviction to try and get around this is a felony and you lose all rights to own housing property other than your own home ever again.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also, constructive eviction

        Constructive? Elaborate?

        this is a felony and you lose all rights to own housing property other than your own home ever again.

        I think that’s a step too far, and wouldn’t(?) pass muster, legally.

        A felony would come with high penalty fees to pay, and could be enough of a deterrent.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you’re unfamiliar with the concept of constructive dismissal, it’s where an employer skirts termination laws by doing shit like booking the employee on all the worst hours or piling on tasks or moving their office space to somewhere far away or unpleasant to make work so unbearable that they quit. In parts of Canada that’s illegal and you’re required to pay out as if you’d fired them anyways if it’s shown you did that.

          Constructive eviction would be the same idea, not forcing an eviction before date because they want to spike the rent, but instead scheduling a shitton of construction and maintenance and other shit that make the place unlivable until the tenant eventually has to break the lease to be able to find anywhere else to get a consistent night’s sleep.

          Landlords were pulling it all over the dang place during the COVID eviction holds.

          Also, not being able to own or manage housing property other than your personal residence seems like a perfectly apt punishment for someone who’s demonstrated quite blatantly that they’re the worst kind of scumlord to trust with people’s housing rights.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you’re unfamiliar with the concept of constructive dismissal, it’s where an employer skirts termination laws

            Thank you for the education. I had not heard of that tactic described using that term before.

            Also, not being able to own or manage housing property other than your personal residence

            IANAL, but that seems to cross a legal ‘free will’ line that most people wouldn’t want to cross.

            Other forms of punishment without losing ownership would be the more established go to alternative.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Wow what a boomer article.

      No, that’s a capitalist “greed is good” article in disguise.

      Some of us Boomers actually wonder WTF the ‘New Deal’ went, and lament it’s loss for our grand/children.

      Seriously, stop buying into and dividing up one side that would stand together against that kind of thing.

  • yenahmik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why should people push for traditional pensions? I don’t want to be stuck at a crappy job just because leaving would reset my retirement clock. It’s the same reason healthcare shouldn’t be attached to the employer either.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem is the alternative has become 401(k)s, which can be wiped out of the market does badly. This requires government intervention to be fixed, but the will is not there.

  • AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If my calculations are correct, my cheeseburger and pizza diet will kill me around the time I want to stop working. That’s my retirement.

    • bitwaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Na, medical care and medicine are better than they’ve ever been. They’ll save you from your heart attack and you’ll spend the next 3 decades paying for heart medication.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If my calculations are correct, my cheeseburger and pizza diet will kill me around the time I want to stop working. That’s my retirement.

      A better retirement plan would be Costco hot dogs.

    • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s like a version of The Whale where he doesn’t have a daughter and isn’t depressed from his gay lover dying, but just depressed because of general socioeconomic conditions and the overall shitty state of the world.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    This increasing preference for a lifelong income

    These crazy kids with their preferences for avocado toast and Tik Tok and never being able to stop working!