anonymous question

The fact that the state will collectively receive more money from working people and return less to those who have reached the threshold age will only increase the number of beneficiaries of this predatory clusterfuck. A pensioner receiving an old-age pension is not a beneficiary of the pension clusterfuck; they are just as much a victim of it as someone who didn’t live to see retirement—they have simply been compensated for part of the damage previously sustained. The beneficiaries, however, are the pension fund employees and those who manage the plundered pension savings. Naturally, there will only be more of them as a result of such a reform.

One can conditionally agree with the logic of “the worse, the better.” The more victims the system has, and the fewer chances they have to receive any compensation within the system, the more reasons there are for the complete abolition of the system; whereas if the robbery were more moderate, far more people would be willing to tolerate it, and the few dissatisfied people would talk about reforms rather than the abolition of the system.

On the other hand, the worse, the worse. “The poor pray that their poverty is guaranteed.” Try to abolish the system of robbing the working class all at once if there is a hole in the pension fund and the elderly are universally destitute without savings—they will tear you apart, no matter how charismatic a reformer you are.

And, as already mentioned, there is no more reliable tool for pension savings today than bitcoins. So you can donate a few of them to my channel 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8, and set aside the majority for your own old age.