On: To retire comfortably, under-40 workers need to se...

[pavlov]

There's another historical alternative:

5. When an old person becomes useless, drug him senseless and throw him off a cliff.

Allegedly this was customary among the ancient Sardinians in pre-Roman times. The drug they used on the elderly before killing them induced a sinister grimace, giving root to the expression "sardonic grin":

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5344257/Myst...

[lionhearted → pavlov]

Facetiousness aside, that's a neat anecdote, but the point stands. Original commentor said there were three options - destitute and possibly homeless old people, after the fact emergency spending, or some sort of pension system. That ignores family/community ties, which is in my opinion a much better solution. You can disagree, but not even presenting it as an option is either being disingenuous or missing a really obvious potential solution.

[philwelch → lionhearted]

The government can't mandate interdependent families and communities. Those either happen or they don't. They can mandate social security.

Interestingly, the government can also mandate compulsory euthanasia for the elderly.

[s3graham → philwelch]

> Interestingly, the government can also mandate compulsory euthanasia for the elderly.

I can't see it happening with short-term elections to office.

[_delirium → lionhearted]

I guess I tend to group that with the other missing fourth option, "hope everyone saves for retirement". I agree that yes, ideally, people would all find some way to take care of themselves for retirement, whether out of savings, or with family, or some other method. But empirically, in modern societies a lot of elderly end up penniless and alone, so the question is what we do about that.