Let's not dilute the word slave by equating it with not being able to retire by 50.
The entire world outside of Africa is grappling with sub-replacement fertility rates and an inverted demographic pyramid.
What this practically means for everyone in the next 30 years is that unlike all of history, where you had 3 children supporting two elderly parents, we now have 1 child supporting two elderly parents. That is a 3x drop in labor force or 3x more labor needed for our elderly.
If you don't have kids, God help you in 30 years when everyone else's kid is too busy laboring to help their own parents...
Then you're ok with me saying "good they're raising retirement age, retiring at 50 just means you're making a slave out of everyone else that has to support you with their labor for another 30 years?"
It's unclear if the planet will be habitable for the remainder of my lifetime, let alone any potential child's. As everything slowly gets worse, bringing a child into this world, for the sole purpose of ensuring there's someone to take care of me when I get older, is one of the most selfish acts I could imagine. Sounds like a lot of the world has made the same calculation.
GDP per capita in China in 1970 was $113 per year. That is not a typo. Talking about slaves in this context in a society that has seen the greatest wealth increase ever in a few generations is completely absurd.
12 comments
[ 5.2 ms ] story [ 35.6 ms ] threadThe entire world outside of Africa is grappling with sub-replacement fertility rates and an inverted demographic pyramid.
What this practically means for everyone in the next 30 years is that unlike all of history, where you had 3 children supporting two elderly parents, we now have 1 child supporting two elderly parents. That is a 3x drop in labor force or 3x more labor needed for our elderly.
If you don't have kids, God help you in 30 years when everyone else's kid is too busy laboring to help their own parents...
Wow, can you share some studies that led you to that conclusion?