How, then, do we change policy? If public funded retirement doesn't work, and private funded doesn't work, and individual funded doesn't work... what are we left with?
Should we go back to the 19th century sort of, "family funded" model?
Should we simply let all of the little old ladies sink or swim?
I don't know... I'm left with more questions than answers here.
If public funded retirement doesn't work, and private funded doesn't work, and individual funded doesn't work... what are we left with?
Cure aging. Seriously. The fundamental problem is that we have a rapidly increasing number of people who can't be economically productive due to physical and often mental decline, and who are very expensive to keep alive. Arguing about who should pay for all of this is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.
We're about to enter the robot-age, during which most manual workers are going to lose their jobs. That's a lot of people who won't have much else to do other than look after old people like your children and mine.
> There is something useful in the pragmatist view.
More specifically, there's just some things one should pragmatically avoid. Running out of toilet paper: don't let it happen. Doing the same during a part: even more so. Angry mobs of the destitute: If one can see this one coming for decades, one simply has no excuse. It just shouldn't happen.
How, then, do we change policy? If public funded retirement doesn't work, and private funded doesn't work, and individual funded doesn't work... what are we left with?
Should we go back to the 19th century sort of, "family funded" model?
Should we simply let all of the little old ladies sink or swim?
I don't know... I'm left with more questions than answers here.