Should The Childless' Pensions Be Cut?

[Vulpix]

Should the deliberately childless have their pensions cut? Or do you think they should be axed completely?




Germany Considers Pension Cuts for the Childless

15.03.2006

Politicians Discuss Pension Cuts for Childless Germans (http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1934571,00.html):
New statistics confirming the declining birth rate have sent Germany in to a state of panic, amid a growing consensus that pensions should be increased for people with children and reduced for those without.
“People without children should either receive a reduced pension or pay more into pension schemes,” said Norbert Geis from the CSU.
Johann Eekhoff, director of the Cologne institute for Economic Policy said a reform of the pension system was long overdue.
“People without children should never have been admitted into pension schemes because these only work when they are financed by subsequent generations,” he said in an interview with mass-circulation Bild newspaper. “Their pensions should be cut by 50 percent.”
As Mark Steyn likes to say, any country that promotes a central welfare state is going to have to have pro-natalist policies, or the welfare state won’t survive more than a couple generations. The catch is that the welfare state seems strongly correlated with lower birth rates, potentially creating an unsustainable system. What’s a socialist to do?
To quote another Steynism (http://www.newcriterion.com/archives/24/01/its-the-demography/), “The design flaw of the secular social-democratic state is that it requires a religious-society birth rate to sustain it. Post-Christian hyper-rationalism is, in the objective sense, a lot less rational than Catholicism or Mormonism.”

[Oisín]

I definitely think there should be incentives for couples to have large families but I don't think those without children should have their pensions cut. Some people are not physically capable of having children and some people are just unlucky in love and never get the chance to have a family, I don't think they should be punished for that.
Reward those that do have large families but don't punish those who don't/can't.

[Arrow Cross]

No, dammit, create a state where one could responsibly think about having a family, and if you ruin the economy and bring in half-ape savages en masse, don't be surprised if people will be less inclined.

[TheGreatest]

Uhh err... How about we axe the immigrants?



There should never be a problem for pension funds. The Government uses the pension fund to invest in businesses, foreign countries and to purchase and build armaments.
If there is ever a pension crisis, than it's the result of an economic collapse or poor investment decisions by officials in charge of the fund.

[Æmeric]

Think of it this way: Should the childless have to pay taxes that go towards supporting statefunded schools? Is it fair that people with children get extra benefits in the form of tax credits/deductions or outright payments, which means the childless must make up the difference in higher taxes?

Some societies get along without state pension systems, Japan for one & China has decided not to burden itself with one. The welfare state is very expensive & is inept in adminstration. The tax burden of supporting the modern welfare state has as much to do with depressed TFRs as the promise of the state supported pensions in old age. The Western welfare state is nothing more then a ponzi scheme that will come crashing down eventually. The reason the EU needs 50 million immgrants is to support its pension system.

[TheGreatest]

Think of it this way: Should the childless have to pay taxes that go towards supporting statefunded schools? Is it fair that people with children get extra benefits in the form of tax credits/deductions or outright payments, which means the childless must make up the difference in higher taxes?

Some societies get along without state pension systems, Japan for one & China has decided not to burden itself with one. The welfare state is very expensive & is inept in adminstration. The tax burden of supporting the modern welfare state has as much to do with depressed TFRs as the promise of the state supported pensions in old age. The Western welfare state is nothing more then a ponzi scheme that will come crashing down eventually. The reason the EU needs 50 million immgrants is to support its pension system.


Needs?
Wants. We don't use the pension argument in the United States. It's mainly the ''Jobs that Americans Refuse to do". I'm afraid if the pension crisis (regardless if it is real or not) didn't exist, Europe would just come up with another argument to justify a poor immigration; or rather a lack thereof; policy.

[GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS]

Definitively not! This will only hurt white retired people, and make more money to the "quantity over quality"-immigrants. And I bet that's what they're planning in Germany, to only make the turks applicable for state pensions. That's the only thing we can offer the elders who have worked so hard for us, and now they want to take it away from them, in favour of those who's only achievement is having 20 bastard kids.

But, if only people who are parents to atleast two children and are white would receive pensions, I'm all for that.

[Groenewolf]

Needs?
Wants. We don't use the pension argument in the United States. It's mainly the ''Jobs that Americans Refuse to do".

Actualy here in the Netherlands both arguments are used. So yes, they probaly would come with some other retoric to say why we need more.

[Skandi]

How would you decide who had been able too and who hadn't? and you would then get people having children without having a partner just to get a pension. Not only this but you could only really run this for women not men. give benifits for familys with many children, or those that have worked for the state, (and I don't mean petty beurocrats I mean Fire/police/army etc) But there is no way to penalise people without children that would not cause more problems than it solved.

Create a society where you can aford to run a household on one basic income and then responicble people will also breed.

[Absinthe]

Create a society where you can aford to run a household on one basic income and then responicble people will also breed.

:clap2: Amen. :thumbs up

[Heimmacht]

I hope this plan is meant to expand the numbers of the ethnic people, not the immigrants, because they will do anything to get their hands on more money.

[TheGreatest]

Create a society where you can aford to run a household on one basic income and then responicble people will also breed.


We had this society. For a long time in the United States, men were able to purchase their own homes on basic salaries and the Wife could fulfill herself as a domestic servant. Which was not just about cleaning, women were important in the household, especially in the community and relations with the neighbors.
People complain that there is no more ''culture'' in the United States, that's because we have gone from a community nation to an industrious nation, were most of us (even on factory jobs) struggle to cover the apartment's rent.
We have people making six figures in the United States and can barely afford an apartment near their corporate workplace...



This sounds all insane to me. Housing might return to affordable levels, if there weren't so many immigrants pouring in and purchasing these homes through government assistance or money they stole back in their original country. (I wonder how a lot of these Chinese on the PNW can afford to buy so many million dollar homes, when their countrymen barely make a thousand dollars a year.)