The agreement ensures that the retirement age increases in line with life expectancy, but now the Social Democrats believe that the agreement must be renegotiated.
Mette Frederiksen does not argue for an actual stop to the increase in the retirement age – although some have read and understood it that way.
But she believes that the increase must take place in a more “relaxed and fair” way.
What that means specifically is still unclear, but it’s clear that S is moving more in the direction they called “irresponsible” just a few months ago when SF suggested it.
And Mette Frederiksen has not exactly received a standing ovation for her proposal.
Up until now, both DA, DI and Dansk Erhverv have come out with almost scathing criticism.
“Worrying”, “really bad idea” and “deeply irresponsible”, read some of the reactions.
And although the unions initially clapped their hands in turn, there are now different tones from parts of the movement.
“Like many others, I was very happy for a moment”, writes the chairman of 3F in Aalborg in North Jutland, when he thought that the Prime Minister had understood that “we must not work until we die”.
“But then I became wiser”, he writes.
Regardless of the reception, the proposal will probably be a greater gain for Mette Frederiksen’s chance of being re-elected than for the future of our welfare society.
When the national pension was introduced in 1957, the retirement age was 67, and a pensioner could expect approximately 11 years of pension on average.
If the politicians do not run away from the welfare agreement from 2006, a pensioner in 2040 will receive an average of 16.5 years on public pension.
Those people have paid taxes all their lives so they can get it. That sounds reasonable. But as we live longer and longer and many to over 100, the bill will end up being too big.
It is unsustainable for the welfare society. Because with fewer to pay and more to receive, it will mean massive deterioration in the service we all cry out for.
Instead, new and alternative thinking must be done. Those who are worn out must be given the opportunity to leave or change tracks. On the other hand, seniors must not be treated as a homogenous group that has less value on the labor market.
We must seriously rethink our perception of how much seniors can and should do in the labor market. And how long they can continue to contribute.
And if grandparents or great-grandparents don’t want to or can’t stand working in the same capacity as before, it’s not terrible to ask them to contribute to welfare. In the nursery, in the nursing home or in the hospital.
It is already happening to some extent around the country. And it can easily be expanded.
Otherwise, they may end up being the last generation to experience a welfare society.
People should not “work until they die”. But maybe a little longer and in a less physically demanding job. As was the plan with the welfare agreement in 2006.
And if you want 30 years of retirement, even if you are not worn out, then you have to pay yourself.
Also read
The queen is criticized for inviting a friend from North Jutland – it’s too petty
2024-08-17 19:20:41
#years #retirement #pay