3 Comments

Biggest of the jewish cunts. Fink needs beheading.....

Employment

TRENDING

207,068people read this week

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink said America could dodge a ‘retirement crisis’ by encouraging people to work for longer — here’s why 1 labor economist thinks he’s dead wrong

A worried senior factory worker

Dusan Petkovic/Shutterstock

While we adhere to strict editorial guidelines, partners on this page also provide us earnings.

Bethan Moorcraft

Updated May 31, 2024

Play

(4 mins)

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink caused quite a stir when he suggested America could dodge its looming “retirement crisis” by encouraging people to continue working past age 65.

The billionaire, who chairs the world's largest asset manager, kicked off his 2024 annual letter to shareholders by telling his readers it is “time to rethink retirement.”

He raised the point that more Americans are retiring and their retirements are increasing by length. This, he claims, is having a “massive impact on the country’s retirement system” — specifically the nation’s Social Security coffers, which are quickly running out of money.

“What’s the solution here?” Fink pondered in his letter. “No one should have to work longer than they want to. But I do think it’s a bit crazy that our anchor idea for the right retirement age — 65 years old — originates from the time of the Ottoman Empire.”

Fink never claimed to have the answer, but he did suggest that encouraging Americans to work for longer “with carrots rather than sticks” may help alleviate certain retirement-related economic challenges. But not everyone agrees.

Labor economist Teresa Ghilarducci, a renowned thought-leader on U.S. retirement issues, slapped down Fink’s suggestion in a recent interview with Bloomberg's Sonali Basak.

“If you think, Mr. Fink, that people working longer — maybe just one year or two years longer — will mean that people won’t go into their old age without being downwardly mobile into poverty after being a middle class worker, or you think working longer will maintain people’s living standards, you’ll be wrong,” she said. Here’s why Ghilarducci is against raising the retirement age.

Expand full comment

Employment

TRENDING

207,068people read this week

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink said America could dodge a ‘retirement crisis’ by encouraging people to work for longer — here’s why 1 labor economist thinks he’s dead wrong

A worried senior factory worker

Dusan Petkovic/Shutterstock

While we adhere to strict editorial guidelines, partners on this page also provide us earnings.

Bethan Moorcraft

Updated May 31, 2024

Play

(4 mins)

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink caused quite a stir when he suggested America could dodge its looming “retirement crisis” by encouraging people to continue working past age 65.

The billionaire, who chairs the world's largest asset manager, kicked off his 2024 annual letter to shareholders by telling his readers it is “time to rethink retirement.”

He raised the point that more Americans are retiring and their retirements are increasing by length. This, he claims, is having a “massive impact on the country’s retirement system” — specifically the nation’s Social Security coffers, which are quickly running out of money.

“What’s the solution here?” Fink pondered in his letter. “No one should have to work longer than they want to. But I do think it’s a bit crazy that our anchor idea for the right retirement age — 65 years old — originates from the time of the Ottoman Empire.”

Fink never claimed to have the answer, but he did suggest that encouraging Americans to work for longer “with carrots rather than sticks” may help alleviate certain retirement-related economic challenges. But not everyone agrees.

Labor economist Teresa Ghilarducci, a renowned thought-leader on U.S. retirement issues, slapped down Fink’s suggestion in a recent interview with Bloomberg's Sonali Basak.

“If you think, Mr. Fink, that people working longer — maybe just one year or two years longer — will mean that people won’t go into their old age without being downwardly mobile into poverty after being a middle class worker, or you think working longer will maintain people’s living standards, you’ll be wrong,” she said. Here’s why Ghilarducci is against raising the retirement age.

It’s not fair

Ghilarducci thinks people need to dive deeper into the data around American life expectancy and how that relates to working longevity.

“Not everyone is living longer,” she stressed. “There is a slice of the population that have had good healthcare [and] have had the kinds of jobs that enhance their health and their wellbeing and their skills. They’re living longer.

“But there are some parts of our economy, of our America, where actually the longevity is going down. Deaths of despair, the suicides, the opioid addiction [and] even the kinds of jobs that people have are shortening their lives.”

Ghilarducci claims this “inequality” in society makes this common “live longer, work longer” argument impossible for a large portion of Americans.

Specifically, she highlighted the plight of older workers in pink collar jobs (care-oriented careers, historically considered to be women’s work) and “light” blue collar jobs that may require a lot of engagement with a computer.

“The service sector — taking care of older people, taking care of children — that requires a lot of heavy lifting, a lot of stooping and bending, a lot of physical activity and those jobs break bodies down,” Ghilarducci explained.

“The computer has made some aspects of jobs easier, [especially] on the knees, but the requirements for intense concentration, keen eyesight and actually being able to speed up your work because of increased surveillance has actually made those jobs harder too.”

Ghilarducci claims the jobs older Americans often have “can raise cortisol levels, increase inflammation and cause more metabolic disorders and early death.” As a result, she says making them work for longer is not a viable solution to the nation’s retirement challenges.

Expand full comment
Jun 4Liked by Paulo Kirk

Fink =

Betrayer

Rat

Talebearer

Tail-bearer*

Strikebreaker

One who is disapproved of, or held in contempt.

One who belongs in ditches, with stitches that itches , and kvetches and wretches- Is wretched.

One to be “wasted”/garroted/guillotined.

One of the finest, most loving, dedicated family men I’ve ever encountered, had a stroke, from which he never recovered, in his seventies.

At the time he was “working at the car wash”.

His previous employer, of over 40 years, had stolen his employee’s retirement funds, and employed arsonists to burn the factory to the ground.

He would not see the inside of a jail cell.

“The boss” reached an accommodation, by which this great man I referred to earlier would receive $59 a month as his retirement stipend, after forty/fifty/sixty years of backbreaking work.

His partner, Phyllis, would die destitute, some seventeen years later.

They worked, and they worked, and they worked, and they worked at menial labor jobs.

Physically demanding, soul sucking, positions without perks.

I’m still fucking pissed.

Maybe that fucker fink is on to something.

Maybe us old boys, and our blue hairs, need to burn down the bastards in our old age.

I wonder, what does the position of arsonist pay, nowadays???

My inspiration-Ray, would not go that way.

He played by the(ir) rules, and accepted his meager pay.

Guess it’s up to someone else (me?) to seize the day.

Godspeed, godsend-Ray Schlueter.

Expand full comment