• gian @lemmy.grys.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Productivity gains.

    And on what your pay would be based ? The hours you work or the productivity ?
    As I said, I agree that some of the productivity gains tranfer to the worker pay.
    I simply do not belive that even if this trasfer happens then you can retire earlier having a longer live expectancy.
    We can maybe work less every day for the same pay, like we work 7 hours a day and the hours we pool are used to hire some more workers, but that would not change the problem with retiring earlier and living longer (which are not problems per se)

    Why not, though?

    Because that could be applied also to you, I bet you are richer than someone else.
    In the end, once someone pay their fair share of taxes the question is over. How much money is left to the someone is irrelevant.
    We can discuss how to make the rich pay their fair share of taxes eventually.

    • kossa@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      retire earlier having a longer live expectancy

      You asked about maintaining wealth and not expanding wealth. Productivity is output per work. If the output per work grows, we need less work to maintain the current output --> workers can chill more. Whether they retire earlier or have a 4-day-week.

      Right now that surplus of productivity is just grabbed by the owning class.

      once someone pay their fair share of taxes the question is over.

      Yeah, right. And if our society wants to take that fair share to expand retirement for everybody, that’s cool. And to what a ‘fair share’ is…that depends. In Germany in the 50ies they basically took 50% of everybodys assets and had an maximum income tax bracket of 95% (which would start at 850k € yearly income today, if they had kept it), literally a max income, if you want. And apparently people thought that to be fair, so there’s that.

      • gian @lemmy.grys.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        48 minutes ago

        You asked about maintaining wealth and not expanding wealth. Productivity is output per work. If the output per work grows, we need less work to maintain the current output --> workers can chill more. Whether they retire earlier or have a 4-day-week.

        A 4 day week could be done, but I still think that we cannot retire earlier since we live longer. There would be a imbalance between the time we work (that gets shorter) and the time we spend retired (which get longer). But to pay for the longer retire time you need somehow have put aside more money. If we talk about a couple of years then ok, maybe we can retire earlier if we get paid more (given the higher productivity), but if we talk about longer period then I don’t think we could be find a stable solution.

        The only real solution, in my opinion, is that you can retire after how many years you want but your pension is proportional to what you set aside during your working life (with the state that only pay the gap between what you get and a minimum level of sussistence). This way you can work as long as you want and if you want to retire earlier this decision is not paid by others. The additional bonus is that I think that in the end people would try to be paid more to put aside more (if they want to retire early)

        Right now that surplus of productivity is just grabbed by the owning class.

        Not totally I think. I am sure I have a better life than my parent (at the same age) or my grandparents.

        Yeah, right. And if our society wants to take that fair share to expand retirement for everybody, that’s cool. And to what a ‘fair share’ is…that depends. In Germany in the 50ies they basically took 50% of everybodys assets and had an maximum income tax bracket of 95% (which would start at 850k € yearly income today, if they had kept it), literally a max income, if you want. And apparently people thought that to be fair, so there’s that.

        If people thought that to be fair then the 95% tax bracket would be still be there.
        Obviously, no one thinks it’s “fair” to work for about 1 million euros and end up with the same salary as someone who works to earn 10% of that amount.