[alexander_busek]

For every 1 retiree 2.8 (Let’s call it 3) are required to support. When those 3 retire, 9 will need to support them. When those 9 retire, 27 workers will be needed to support them. When those 27 retire, 81 workers will be needed to support them.

But, when "those 3 retire," that original 1 retiree will be dead.

When those 9 retire" - likewise.

You are apparently forgetting that yes, people do eventually die.

Assuming that people begin paying into the system at 25, and retire at 65 (i.e., after 40 years), even if they live on average to 85 (i.e., another 20 years), only 2 workers (between 25 and 65) will have to support each retiree (between 65 and 85).

This is a simplification, to be sure, but illustrates the basic flaw in reasoning of your scenario.

Regards,

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Nope. I figured in those who will die. In fact, I would not be surprised to find the Government trying to find some way to kill off the oldsters.

They have already found a way in Europe with “euthanasia” in which old people are afraid to go to the doctor as the doctor may decide on his own that the old person has “no quality of life left” and kill him.