cobran20

NEWS: World braces for retirement crisis

14 posts in this topic

Reevaluating... George Warren of the US unexpectedly went on disability six months before turning 62. He saw his modest earnings dry up so quickly that for a time he thought he might become homeless.

 

 

Unexpectedly went on disability??  Take a look at him, he comes with his own postcode. What's unexpected is that he made it to 62 at all!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

News has really sank to low depths. Cut and paste from an article from one of their American publications without even trying to hide the American-isms or alter it to make it relevant to Australia. 

 

He has a second home in Provence. He's just taken a vacation on Oleron Island off the Atlantic coast and is planning a five-week trip to Guadeloupe.

"Travel is our biggest expense," he says.

 

His travel is a luxury, not an expense - he makes it sound like the power or food bill. If he can afford a second home and regular vacations all well to him, but not on the public tit. 

 

At least Australia has made a step in the right direction, raising the state pension age to 67 with talk of increasing again to 70. Problem is a lot of employers don't want anyone in their 60's, let alone their 70's, no matter how capable they are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

his problem is the same as  all fat bitches. they listen to all the promises, to only wake up in the morning, sticky, broke and confused.

Edited by savagegoose
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

his problem is the same as  all fat bitches. they listen to all the promises, to only wake up in the morning, sticky, broke and confused.

WOW!  Outta nowhere!  Who saw that comin' and Happy New Year to Everyone!

 

I really do like this place.   Lotsa action, and not stupid-crazy but sometimes crazy-stupid…which is OK by me.  Gives things some spark!

 

The article raises a point that I believe is not currently well understood…the days of comfortable retirement for nearly all are gone, never to be repeated.  

 

My parents are certainly confused by this.  Over the break we started talking about this kind of stuff and I pointed out that 1) renting is more affordable but I will likely retire as a renter, meaning after 5-10 years I'd better be dead…  2) school fees are killing us…the second income is going to fees not "mortgage" like it did for them… 3) We are already means-tested out of most support THEY STILL GET (though much wealthier then us) who cares about $5 per Dr visit we're paying a tad more than that already…  4) I work with no pension for a company owned by Private Equity and that's how it is…

 

The thing is…this EVERYBODY 45 and under.   Everybody.   What are people going to do in 20 years?  Utterly unsustainable.   Both sides, rich and poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the guys that I read a lot of during the whole Iraq thing has since gone a touch off the rails (in my opinion[1]) and started a new thing: http://www.homefreeamerica.us/

 

He certainly has some ideas in there which I agree with ethically and functionally such as his "Great unbundling" idea which is basically that society can't afford people having great lifestyles and not contributing to society which translates into "you gotta keep working but you should realise that now and start trying to build a lifestyle which is great _and_ includes working that you can continue forever".

 

http://www.homefreeamerica.us/do-you-think-of-work-in-binary-terms/

 

and

 

http://www.homefreeamerica.us/the-income-bootstrap/

 

are pretty good examples of where he is thinking. And he does have some reasonably okayish type suggestions for how to implement the lifestyle.

 

[1] Which is a nuanced opinion of course and not a drunken knee jerk reaction. He does think about the issue and does come up with ideas but they are definitely largely in the formative stage at the moment. So some of them are a bit silly. And when he made the bizarre "we won" post regarding open source warfare I truly wondered where his head was at. I think that he got caught up with a bunch of libertarian crazies during that period because his ideas "live sustainably" dovetailed with theirs "live off the government grid" for a while. I think that since then their underlying crazy came out and he has moved away from them and this new one seems a bit better quality than the couple of years previous output.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the guys that I read a lot of during the whole Iraq thing has since gone a touch off the rails (in my opinion[1]) and started a new thing: http://www.homefreeamerica.us/

 

He certainly has some ideas in there which I agree with ethically and functionally such as his "Great unbundling" idea which is basically that society can't afford people having great lifestyles and not contributing to society which translates into "you gotta keep working but you should realise that now and start trying to build a lifestyle which is great _and_ includes working that you can continue forever".

 

http://www.homefreeamerica.us/do-you-think-of-work-in-binary-terms/

 

and

 

http://www.homefreeamerica.us/the-income-bootstrap/

 

are pretty good examples of where he is thinking. And he does have some reasonably okayish type suggestions for how to implement the lifestyle.

 

[1] Which is a nuanced opinion of course and not a drunken knee jerk reaction. He does think about the issue and does come up with ideas but they are definitely largely in the formative stage at the moment. So some of them are a bit silly. And when he made the bizarre "we won" post regarding open source warfare I truly wondered where his head was at. I think that he got caught up with a bunch of libertarian crazies during that period because his ideas "live sustainably" dovetailed with theirs "live off the government grid" for a while. I think that since then their underlying crazy came out and he has moved away from them and this new one seems a bit better quality than the couple of years previous output.

 

Perhaps it's a case of starting with Timothy Leary's, "turn on, tune in, drop out", but without turning into vagabond hippies with little or no appreciation for the dynamics and complexity of social structures. I think there is some usefulness in Leary's saying, it just comes down to how one interprets it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the guys that I read a lot of during the whole Iraq thing has since gone a touch off the rails (in my opinion[1]) and started a new thing: http://www.homefreeamerica.us/

 

He certainly has some ideas in there which I agree with ethically and functionally such as his "Great unbundling" idea which is basically that society can't afford people having great lifestyles and not contributing to society which translates into "you gotta keep working but you should realise that now and start trying to build a lifestyle which is great _and_ includes working that you can continue forever".

 

I disagree. It's the fact that we keep trying to hold onto the money paradigm that is causing the trouble. Let's run it all down to a cost of zero and then go money-free. The fastest way to get there is to pay people to stop working so that only workaholics run the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I think you are insane I actually roughly agree with the idea. I figure when people like me make jobs redundant the government has a problem (unemployment numbers go up) and the people have a problem (no income).

 

But this is the f*cking dream! If you go to work and achieve zero for the world then what the f*ck are you going to work for? This is not humane. More importantly it is useless to society.

 

I would rather that the people I unemployed went and did something. I don't even care if it is something I care about. Go save some dogs, go clean lichen off a boulder, I don't care.

 

But I do care that those people do something. And sitting around working in a half arsed fashion for the bare minimum of output to cover a 40 hr week is not good for their psyche or my society.

 

I want to see companies paying their redundant people. It is a tax writeoff if it is for charity. So if I write a program that automates a bunch of peoples jobs (and I don't even do that much anymore, there is too much competition in that space) then I want to see those people getting paid their normal salary to go and do dumb sh*t that I don't care about. If they want to sit at home on the couch and watch the cricket they still get paid (but they will be dead within years) if they want to save the endangered lichen leech and fight pitched battles in the streams with the Clean Boulders Front I don't care.

 

What I do care about is the way that people not good at working get forced to work and so I have to deal with them. Given automation and such we don't need everyone to work, we just need the workaholics to work, and we will anyway (this is the bit where I agree with you).

 

I suspect that most of the worker people don't really give too much of a sh*t about where their taxes go. We do our jobs because we f*cking love that task. We might bitch about taxes at times but realistically we would do the f*cking thing for free if our lifestyles were covered.

 

So no need to abolish money, that would be tricky and require a massive amount of change which could easily go wrong. Instead just tell everyone "hey you can work here of we will pay you to go do whatever the hell you want so long as we can replace you with a computer".

 

And if you think you can't be replaced with a computer it is just because you have dealt with sh*t quality programmers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I think you are insane I actually roughly agree with the idea. 

 

What I do care about is the way that people not good at working get forced to work and so I have to deal with them. Given automation and such we don't need everyone to work, we just need the workaholics to work, and we will anyway (this is the bit where I agree with you).

 

I suspect that most of the worker people don't really give too much of a sh*t about where their taxes go. We do our jobs because we f*cking love that task. We might bitch about taxes at times but realistically we would do the f*cking thing for free if our lifestyles were covered.

 

And if you think you can't be replaced with a computer it is just because you have dealt with sh*t quality programmers.

 

What is so insane about me?

 

I was going to mention the workaholic thing. I am in total agreement that is where we will end up.

 

WALL-E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ahahaha really? Do you think your behaviour counts as sane even amongst the other crazies? Compare that to what most people expect from a situation and, yeah, you look pretty crazy. Too welded to a belief system, too radical ideas for fixing the world to be of any real use. Obviously the same charge can be levelled at me, but _I_ acknowledge that I am not sane by most definitions.

 

The only issue I see with the "go do whatever and we'll pay you anyway" is the people that get pissy about what other people have. That will limit the initial rollout. Middle managers won't want to give a "free life" to their staff and won't want to acknowledge that their own position is pointless. After all if you are a mid mgt type and all of your people can be replaced with computers then what exactly is it you are doing? Most mid mgt I have met have a sense about themselves of "I am doing a good job". Being told they suck at their job and should just go home and do the gardening will be too bruising to their ego for them to accept. Letting their own staff go home and do the gardening would effectively make them redundant so they will fight it tooth and nail.

 

Which is the issue really. Keeping the incompetent and the unwilling at work is pointless and wasteful but telling them they are wasteful is tricky.

 

On top of which of course every single "welfare mothers are scamming the system" believer will attack the crap out of the idea. "If I have to go to work then why don't they have to?".

 

Even though it is obviously better for the businesses bottom line. An automated role makes fewer mistakes, has less hangovers, less maternity leave, less sick days and can be fixed by specialists in ways that are measurable (as opposed to "team builders" who have no believable measurements). Plus the people you have to pay to do the gardening will eventually die.

 

If a role can be automated to even 50% of the employee on a good day then it is worth doing I think. When I was in a mgt type role (and a complete newbie at it) I did a cost / profit analysis of my guys (because my database tracked all the relevant info). It came out to about 40% of the day actually working was a pretty damn good number for most people. The other 60% of the time they weren't making me money and should have just gone home.

 

Being smart I started sending them to the pub at around midday and they could tag team it so that one person was in the office to answer phone calls, but I wrote a website that allowed people to check the status via the web and so there were soon no phone calls except from arsehole customers and I trained reception to deal with that "oh they are all busy working on stuff and will only tell you what I am saying anyway because it is all automated" and soon enough all the guys were just working half days provided they were efficient 100% profitable hours. Then I brought in one day a week total day off as well.

 

All of that resulted in us (an industry which is physical) working 4 days a week for 4 or 5 hours. And actually making money. And getting top of VendorX's "best workshop list every year. I had in the course of 6 years there _one_ guy leave. I largely put it down to the awesome life they had.

 

Seemed pretty obvious to me at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ahahaha really? Do you think your behaviour counts as sane even amongst the other crazies? Compare that to what most people expect from a situation and, yeah, you look pretty crazy. Too welded to a belief system, too radical ideas for fixing the world to be of any real use. Obviously the same charge can be levelled at me, but _I_ acknowledge that I am not sane by most definitions.

 

The only issue I see with the "go do whatever and we'll pay you anyway" is the people that get pissy about what other people have. That will limit the initial rollout. Middle managers won't want to give a "free life" to their staff and won't want to acknowledge that their own position is pointless. After all if you are a mid mgt type and all of your people can be replaced with computers then what exactly is it you are doing? Most mid mgt I have met have a sense about themselves of "I am doing a good job". Being told they suck at their job and should just go home and do the gardening will be too bruising to their ego for them to accept. Letting their own staff go home and do the gardening would effectively make them redundant so they will fight it tooth and nail.

 

Which is the issue really. Keeping the incompetent and the unwilling at work is pointless and wasteful but telling them they are wasteful is tricky.

 

On top of which of course every single "welfare mothers are scamming the system" believer will attack the crap out of the idea. "If I have to go to work then why don't they have to?".

 

Even though it is obviously better for the businesses bottom line. An automated role makes fewer mistakes, has less hangovers, less maternity leave, less sick days and can be fixed by specialists in ways that are measurable (as opposed to "team builders" who have no believable measurements). Plus the people you have to pay to do the gardening will eventually die.

 

If a role can be automated to even 50% of the employee on a good day then it is worth doing I think. When I was in a mgt type role (and a complete newbie at it) I did a cost / profit analysis of my guys (because my database tracked all the relevant info). It came out to about 40% of the day actually working was a pretty damn good number for most people. The other 60% of the time they weren't making me money and should have just gone home.

 

Being smart I started sending them to the pub at around midday and they could tag team it so that one person was in the office to answer phone calls, but I wrote a website that allowed people to check the status via the web and so there were soon no phone calls except from arsehole customers and I trained reception to deal with that "oh they are all busy working on stuff and will only tell you what I am saying anyway because it is all automated" and soon enough all the guys were just working half days provided they were efficient 100% profitable hours. Then I brought in one day a week total day off as well.

 

All of that resulted in us (an industry which is physical) working 4 days a week for 4 or 5 hours. And actually making money. And getting top of VendorX's "best workshop list every year. I had in the course of 6 years there _one_ guy leave. I largely put it down to the awesome life they had.

 

Seemed pretty obvious to me at the time.

 

You have barely scratched the surface of the jealously, bitterness and schadenfreude that exists in _most_ workplaces. I am about to embark on a process of applying not only for my own job but that of my colleagues. The intent is to "reorganise" the workforce.

 

I'm currently considering how I might be able to game the process. Choices include:

  • Applying for the job of the weaker candidates.
  • Applying for my own position.
  • Applying for only those positions for which I have no skills whatsoever in an attempt to fail and be offered a redundancy.  :o 
  • Reject the entire process and boycott outright.

 

Every single person I speak to has a personal hit list of people whom they expect will cop it in the neck (and deservedly so! :laugh: )

 

I need it all to be settled by May when I plan to take my long service leave. If they discover they can do without me for 3 months they may not want me back!  :huh:

 

In actuality, I'm writing up my job on a share point wiki so they can easily do without me. No fear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have barely scratched the surface of the jealously, bitterness and schadenfreude that exists in _most_ workplaces.

 

Not sure about that.

 

I'd say it is mostly true for the public sector though (and most large corporations).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now