600
I wouldn't worry about it ,Jack
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
600 points (97.5% liked)
Political Memes
5413 readers
2969 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Retired people are generally working class too. Unless the person owns/owned a large corporation, that is.
Doesn’t that make them not retired?
I cannot functionally tell the difference from doing 2 hours of work at a Hampton vacation home and being retired. So I would say "not necessarily".
It’s a dollar amount in America though.
You’re allowed to work as many hours as you want and continue to collect Social Security once you reach full retirement age. You’ll be taxed on your earned income as well as Social Security benefits.
https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/planner/whileworking.html
That's my point. A billionaire owner can be functionally retired while still being "employed". A worker who's 65 years old cannot.
Sure but they get their money the same way the rich do, via capital gains.
Not necessarily. Social Security is taxable income. About 40% of people who collect it make enough to have to pay taxes on it. They’d be in the same tax brackets as the lower end of the working class. The remaining 60% make too little to pay taxes on their annual income.
https://www-origin.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/planner/taxes.html#:~:text=About%2040%25%20of%20people%20who,in%20addition%20to%20your%20benefits.
That would be in lieu of income taxes, yes. Also doesn't apply for ss or pensions.
Capitalism forces even the unwilling to participate. It's a matter of fact that the only way to afford a retirement in the last 50 years as a worker is to invest in private capital. I already want to see the total annihilation of coerced labor, I don't want to work for my entire life.
What government or economic system doesn't do that? Even if the system is fully autonomous and opt in, it implicitly obligates interaction if it is enforced by any means (or the use of another system is prohibited)
If you're asking about that bit of snark at the end about coerced labor, I can try to explain it.
I consider there to be 3 loose types of labor: forced, coerced, and controlled. Forced labor is what it sounds like: incarcerated labor, slavery, etc controlled through violence and defined by the bosses total control over their labor and often their life. Coerced labor shares a bit of overlap with forced labor, but it's primarily defined through modern capitalist work in which workers must perform waged labor due to economic pressure.
Controlled labor would be the free association to work where the worker wished and contribute at their own pace. I consider the picturesque version of controlled labor to be a unionized worker cooperative in which all management is elected within a socialist economy. Work is still directed by management, but it's free of coercion due to the lack of economic pressure that would require a person to be forced to work.
There will still be coercion through other means within such a socialist society, and it will still be just as evil as economic coercion. But we should strive to eliminate it wherever possible. That's why I believe even the co-op would need a union, to establish protections against such coercion.