>This is not about responsibility or morale, but just about the pure economics of life.
Well, the "pure economics of life" for humans include that for human life to be sustainable, we should tend to the young (for a culturally adjusted 18 years or so), and that we should tend to the older (65+) too.
Being framed as a "ponzi scheme" targeting the young at the point they enter the workplace, hides that fact that a lots of money and parental energy (and even more time unaccounted for as money) were given to said young before that point...
It's not exactly a "ponzi scheme" if Ponzi and his money, time, and effort is the only reason you're alive and working now...
Of course somebody has to work for them as well. But does not really change anything, this is why I left it out.
> It's not like the young come from nowhere and suddenly have some responsibility to work for the old when nobody never did anything for them...
This is not about responsibility or morale, but just about the pure economics of life.