Work Reform

9976 readers

93 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

seeCseas@lemmy.world

tintory@lemm.ee

TinMod@lemmy.world

948

What the hell is this shit? Instead of pushing for the return to traditional pensions, capitalism is celebrating the idea that Millennials and Gen Z may simply never be able to stop working. (www.cnbc.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ASK_ME_ABOUT_LOOM@sh.itjust.works to c/workreform@lemmy.world

224 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Traditionally, retiring entails leaving the workforce permanently. However, experts found that the very definition of retirement is also changing between generations.

About 41% of Gen Z and 44% of millennials — those who are currently between 27 and 42 years old — are significantly more likely to want to do some form of paid work during retirement.

...

This increasing preference for a lifelong income, could perhaps make the act of “retiring” obsolete.

Although younger workers don’t intend to stop working, there is still an effort to beef up their retirement savings.

It's ok! Don't ever retire! Just work until you die, preferably not at work, where we'd have to deal with the removal of your corpse.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] geeuurge@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I agree the article seems very out of touch, and the reason I think is because it reports this in a very neutral way. If it made clear that the author thought this was a bad thing that was happening, would you still think it was out of touch?

[–] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I believe it's out of touch not because they didn't come to the conclusion I wanted them to, but because they cite the opinions and data curated by tax and investment companies at face value instead of actually asking responders why they answered the way they did. Who is Blackrock to say what young people want to do? Hell, Blackrock garners disdain from both sides of the aisle, would millennials and Gen Z really pick them as a representative of their wants and needs?

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I agree the article seems very out of touch, and the reason I think is because it reports this in a very neutral way.

To me it didn't seem neutral, it seemed to imply a sense of laziness and wanting luxury over hard work from the newer generation.