What's new

Who should have better pensions at retirement?

Joshua Farrell

Stargate SG1 Fan
Valued Contributor
VIP Member
5000+ Posts Club
Jul 20, 2016
6,375
1,132
USD
$0.9775USD
Biznotes
67
Marketplace Access - 1 Month
VIP Premium - 4 Years: Platinum
List Your Withdraw Option Here!
List Your Withdraw Option Here!
Some people spend a lot of money bringing up children who then go on to become taxpayers who go on to contribute to social security which helps to pay their parents' pensions. Other people have no children and spend all their money on themselves. Should people who have contributed children (future taxpayers) to society have better pensions than those who have had no children? Why/why not?
 
I don't think that's has anything to do with who gets the highest benefits as the two categories you mentioned have both contributed to the society as workers in one way or the other though the later doesn't have children but had also paid tax too.
 
The amount of money gotten for pension depends on your position at the job that you retired . If you are a senior staff in that company you would collect the larger pain than the junior ones.
 
Tax paying is not dependent on people that have children or not full stop so far they are faithful and consistent in paying their tax they should be given the same pension as those who have children because those who don't have children have family members and loved ones that can benefit from their pension.
 
You actually work for what you got , so there is no problem there. Everybody should be able to earn based on the amount of time they have invested in their jobs and work. This should not be put into consideration.
 
First of all, people who do not have children are going to consume less social amenities like electricity and there is no likelihood of using social amenities in the future. In fact the reverse is the case in people who have children and I believe that they should even pay more because they are going to use more.
 
In my country I think that depends on your nature of work, that matter how much you will be getting as of pensions or except every one suppose to pay his or her pension well and equal to his work.
 
I guess it depends upon the work as well as the country because the payment of a specific job and its benefits may vary from country to country. I have seen a few videos on youtube and after that, I came to know that in a few countries the salary of nurses even goes up to 6 figures, but in my country, I don't think so.
 
It only seems logical or makes sense those who contributed to the betterment of the society should be given preference. They put in resources to ensure they created an enabling environment which they should enjoy at retirement.
 
The retirees who have invested in the future , should be the one to enjoy their pension fund . There are so many retirees who have been undergoing pension scheme since when they are active at work and at the end of the service, they will receive a bigger pay.
 
The future taxpayers in which you are talking about are going to be people who are going to be using future utilities as well of which money is used to develop. Actually the people with small children should be paying more taxes.
 
I got where you are heading to but that does not really matter in so many countries including my own country. As long as you are working you are qualified to pay your taxes whether you have children or not. You are also entitled to receive your pension after you completely working age.
 
I don't think that should be the case,because if you want to look at it critically you will find out that everybody is actually paying tax,either directly or indirectly,and so that prefrence should not apply.
 
Personally I think both those with children and with not are almost the same thing. Those without children, I believe they might have contributed in there own capacity in such a way that has helped the society too.
 
This demand critical thinking. Well, in my opinion, it'll be unfair if people with children are pay higher pension that those without children. It's discrimination. And the reason government ask us to pay tax is because of social amenities they provide for us. If you have a security issue now and you called police in less than 30 minutes they'll come to your aid. Do you think it's entirely free? No, it's not free, except you're not paying tax. So, a person without have no children who is enjoying government amenities and such deserve to equal or more pension than those with children.
 
Those people that are suppose to earn a better pension after retirement are those whose work before retirement was risky and has a long time before achieving there goal should be the ones to be earning a better pension.
 
Depending on your position at the company where you retired, you will receive a certain amount as a pension.
Senior employees in the organization would receive greater compensation than their less experienced counterparts.
 
If we use such logic to do things in our society, we would soon have an imbalance. What should we then say about the handicapped and the unemployed? Does that make them less deserving of other social amenities?
 
The amount of money gotten for pension depends on your position at the job that you retired . If you are a senior staff in that company you would collect the larger pain than the junior ones.
That is the more reason why most employee would want to move up the rank in their respective career,and what you are given at the end of your retireement is dependent on your position at retirement.
 

Newest Directory Listings

ExplorerEvan
Forums
5.00 star(s) 1 ratings
Clicks
4
Views
85
Comments
2
Reviews
1
ForumExplorers.com is a free discussion board with topics and conversations for everyone. Camp, chill, and cook s'mores with forum friends. We would love to see you!
arbehi
Blogs
Clicks
19
Views
57
Arbehi is a website specialized in everything related to working online.
Shortie
Forums
Clicks
13
Views
54
An entertainment forum focusing on video games, video game content creation and live streaming.
Back
Top