me_irl

7703 readers

2951 users here now

All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

herrwoland@lemmy.world

804

Me_irl (lemmy.radio)

submitted 23 hours ago by sanitation@lemmy.radio to c/me_irl@lemmy.world

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

And, if you assume retirees fund their retirements through investments (which is not generally true btw, private pensions are not the only model), this holds on some level for retirees as well. If their income depends on the profits of some company, then it is not to their benefit if that company needs to pay workers more.

When you have a public pension, the difference is just that you do not take it via profit, but via some sort of tax. So for pensioners in general, they do not want to increase the real pay of workers. It is also hard to argue that a government pension is not a form of wealth, when something similar on the private market is considered that.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

So for pensioners in general, they do not want to increase the real pay of workers

I don't understand this. Why?

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Why give more to the workers, when you can take it yourself?

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Yeah, so that argument makes sense when your pension is privately funded. I can't really connect the dots for the public ones.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 59 minutes ago

In a public pension, there is some sort of tax, which is taken from workers to pay the pensions. If you want to increase pensions, you need to increase those taxes, hence everything else being equal you lower the real wage of workers.