513
submitted 1 day ago by Garibaldee@lemm.ee to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] A_Filthy_Weeaboo@lemmy.world 26 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Also...loosen immigration laws?

I know it's a very closed off nation with deep cultural roots that is very weary of outsiders...

[-] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 10 points 8 hours ago

I don't mind finding work in Japan... ...if it wasn't so hostile to workers

So far, Japan is near the bottom of my list for western countries to work at, and I would much rather find a job in Korea instead

[-] Xatolos@reddthat.com 19 points 7 hours ago

Japan is near the bottom of my list for western countries

Japan is an Eastern country. In fact, it's the farthest East county possible.

I think the words you were looking for were "first world countries".

[-] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

Depends on your meridian.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)
[-] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 10 points 7 hours ago

its so east that it loops back around to being west

[-] apostrofail@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago
[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Noodle07@lemmy.world 20 points 10 hours ago

Racist, the word is racist

[-] A_Filthy_Weeaboo@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago
[-] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Additionally, the word is "wary"

[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 53 points 17 hours ago

Oh fuck, oh fuck, our ponzi scheme is about to enter the find out phase.

[-] Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 11 hours ago

Capitalism is totally different from a ponzi scheme. In a ponzi scheme, the profits go up to the person at the top and you always need new people that come in, otherwise the whole thing will fall apart and the people at the bottom will be the ones that suffer. Under capitalism however, the profits of everyone's work will go up to the top and you always need new workers to come in, otherwise the system will fall apart and the people at the bottom will suffer. Totally different.

[-] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

Maybe this ponzi. Unfunded state pensions use workers contributions to pay current pensioners.

Less workers = less pensions.

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 hours ago

That’s still not a Ponzi scheme even if it isn’t sustainable.

[-] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

I think it actually fits quite well.

A Ponzi scheme is a form of fraud that lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors.

Meanwhile, the current pension system in most countries depend on a growing population to spread out the payments for pensioners over multiple workers.

Ponzi schemes collapse when there aren't enough investors to sustain the dividends to be paid to the existing investors. Most countries' pensions rely on an increasing amount of working age inhabitants to pay retirees and are now having issues paying out pensions due to the shift in demographics, that's why many countries have been increasing the retirement age recently.

There are 2 solutions to this.

  1. Increasing birth rates, this option is not sustainable in the long term but is commonly preferred for reasons mentioned below.
  2. Migration. There are currently plenty of countries with a large working-age population and a weak economy. Letting those migrate would solve the demographic issue, but is political suicide.
[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how these funds work.

The goal is not to pay people with the money from new people paying into the pot. They invest the money and then the pot grows and that money is used to pay out. When the pot is not growing enough - whether because investments aren’t doing well enough, or you designed a you designed an bad system where people can withdraw from it for too long, or any other many possible issues - then yes you functionally end up dipping into the money given by new people, but this is not how it was designed to be used.

You are acting like this is a one-to-one system where you just put money in, then you get money out later, and all of the money given out is 100% the money that people put in in the first place with no intention of growing that money or finding a sustainable way of disseminating it long-term.

Mismanagement/poorly built systems are not the same as Ponzi schemes. Unless you think, I don’t know, US Social Security is also a Ponzi scheme?

[-] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Of course I understand that the money that is put in is invested, but that doesn't mean the problem goes away when the system relies on the "pot" growing at a certain rate.

EDIT:

Mismanagement/poorly built systems are not the same as Ponzi schemes. Unless you think, I don’t know, US Social Security is also a Ponzi scheme?

I'm not implying that it's the same, just that the comparison fits better than you might expect.

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

When did I ever say the problem goes away? I am saying it is not a Ponzi scheme. You were saying it is a Ponzi scheme. Don’t move the goalposts here.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
513 points (99.6% liked)

World News

32509 readers
1157 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS