【2022新車賞遊會來啦!】
全新車款、全新感受,2022年式新車不管是零件還是塗裝絕對都是超乎你的想像,來到賞遊會現場你就會知道 #本人絕對比照片還帥 😂
公路車即將進入 #無線電變 的時代, #碟煞、#KOM齒比、#碳纖輪、#功率計 更早已成為台灣車主的新標配,如果你還沒試過,千萬別錯過這次的賞遊會唷❗
*本次活動限網路預約報名,恕不開放現場報名
更多賞遊會相關消息,請見內文說明唷😊
#2022新車賞遊會 #GIANT #TCR #PROPEL #DEFY #TRINITY #SRAM #無線未來 #即刻體驗
defy 2022 在 利世民 Facebook 的最讚貼文
#Socialsecurity or ill-fated #Ponzischeme?
When Franklin Roosevelt introduced social security to the United States in 1935, life expectancy at birth was only 58 years for men and 62 for women, while the retirement age was 65. Approximately 46 percent of men and 39 percent of women who lived into adulthood died before retirement.
The US Social Security Administration denies the chosen age of retirement had anything to do with the benchmark set by the Germans, saying it was an attempt "to conform to contemporary practice during the 1930s."
Despite all the advancements in medical technology and the fact that we now live in a knowledge-based economy, the common legal retirement age is still 65.
Why should it be so ?
The life expectancy in Hong Kong is among the highest in the world, and our city is graying rapidly.
Those aged 65 or above represent less than 14 percent now, but that will grow to nearly 20 percent by 2022.
If there must be a social security system, shall we propose a retirement age of 85 instead of 65, just to reflect the reality? I am sure it is going to be politically incorrect but that is the only economically feasible way to have sustainable universal social security for Hong Kong.
With due respect to the advocates for universal social security, good intentions alone cannot defy the laws of gravity. Let's assume the life expectancy of an average person is 80. Under the ideal lifestyle aspired to by many in our younger generation, the first 25 years and the last 15 years will be the non-productive ones, leaving them only 40 years of productive career to make enough money to pay back the expenditure of the first 25 years and support themselves for the last 15.
One can see how difficult life can be if everyone lives this way. If something is not sustainable at an individual level, it can hardly be feasible at a collective level.
Retirement, and work, are personal choices, rather than a birthright to be enjoyed by all.
We should first ask what we can do for our own retirement before asking the government what it can do for us.
Let's not forget that there are no free lunches. Someone has to pay for social security but it will be too late for us to realize that we are paying into a Ponzi scheme destined to collapse in the foreseeable future.
Wednesday, May 28, 2014