Yes, healthcare costs a lot, and social security pays very little. To previous generations, such knowledge would have been motivation to spend less and save more...
Unless one is a ff rich elder (or at least well above moderately wealthy) the suction of any wealth is aggressive and unrelenting, especially if any services are required. Not until someone is totally insolvent do the "real" safety nets (what's left of them) begin to kick in. If you can't afford your ever escalating healthcare costs then you will likely not get the care you need until your assets total $0.00 and you're living ss check to ss check.
There has been and continues to be a sickly draw on any wealth and an unrelenting hacking away of the security of society as a whole. We are surrounded by vultures that eat the living in what seems like an "I've got mine and now I want yours." agenda that does nothing for society, rich or poor and continues practically unabated.
Bankruptcy seems like a perfectly good, viable and reliable option when considering the stacked deck.
In other words, Capitalism working as intended.
For that latter part I've witnessed two mind-numbingly ugly siphoning of all assets to the tune of thousands and thousands of dollars a month until assets are gone and then they're forced out and into pretty sub-optimal situations and neither of these two examples started off anywhere near the edges of being poor but they certainly did die that way.
I'm not singling out individuals, obviously not every boomer benefited, but it seems, like NFL players, we are not good at budgeting for retirement and perhaps there is value in maintaining that social safety net before it's too late.
I question our society when given those type of responses.
I fantasize about buying a house and find it outrageous that most of the houses I would want to buy are nearly 100 years old. Anything since has been very cheaply constructed and designed for a strange lifestyle that seems to prioritize individual greed. To me, my home is second to my neighborhood and this should result in smaller homes which make for a walkable and neighborly surrounding. What was going on in these greedy baby-boomers minds? They are like aliens to me.
Obviously it's not an either-or decision, and everyone's health declines eventually, but an efficient economy is all about spending the money where it will have the highest utility. I see new mothers forgoing checkups on their kids because their coverage sucks, and I wonder how much more we'll end up spending when the odd mole, rash, or ache turns into something more serious.
Not a difficult choice at all.
For my country the following applies:
* Must have residency permit, permanent or temporary with intent to be permanent
* Must pass residency exam (tests language, law, etc.)
* Must be living in country for 8 years minimum
* Must have independent source of income that isn't social welfare or unemployment benefits
* Sufficient knowledge of local language
* Must not have been convicted of a crime
* Must pledge to the democratic order laid out by the constitution
* Annulling or otherwise revoking your previous citizenship
Given the choice between a system that looks unsustainable in the future versus one that is currently unsustainable, I'll bet on the future one.
Can anyone recommend countries that are easy to move to? With urban environments and culture, without being too expensive for cost of living? I have tech skills but am not one of the trendy rich engineers. I commit my free time to art, as it brings me life. Unfortunately, it is increasingly unable to bring me survival.
It's only gotten easier and will continue to get easier to make a living off of art.
My second thought was "Hm...maybe this means I'll be able to afford a house after all."
Whether that's enough to make up for influx of new people from elsewhere in the country and the world, who knows. And of course, many houses will just be inherited and turned into rental properties...
I'm not an economist but here are my basic thoughts:
1. Inflation has caught up to them
2. The lack of stable planning for those retiring
This is going to devastate the middle class/lower class in expensive markets (I.e. CA and NYC where the parents support their kids starting out and in jobs where they can't sustain their lifestyle without extra support)
At least at present, their homes are worth a considerable amount. Selling them off and moving to a comparable or smaller home in a low-cost area can make up for a significant amount of their failure to save adequately otherwise.
Obviously, that may not always be what they want to do, but at least they have an asset to work with. Those who are facing the same predicament and already live in the low-cost area, don't have that option.