It has nothing to do with life expectancy. They want men to continue generating tax revenue. The glass ceiling is a thing there, too. Men out earned women. If they have to work even longer, more money for the government.
Although it’s odd that it’s not the same age for both.
That's not it. Most jobs (specially areas that women occupy) don't require any abnormal strength. The reason usually given is that women have a double work journey. They leave work and are still responsible for most domestic jobs, jobs that aren't remunerated at all. I.e. the numbers difference between single mothers vs single fathers.
That's the reason given in Brazil, I'd wager it's the same in Argentina
30 seconds of googling gave me plenty of discussions of the glass ceiling for women in Argentina… but hey, a redditor said it doesn’t exist, so what do researchers know?
If women want to share the burden of men's 98% fatality and injury rates in the workplace, sounds fair. As well as 75% of the homeless being men breaking that glass ceiling would be great too.
That makes no sense. They already get time off when they have the kid. Why do they then need to work fewer years at the end of the career? Lengthen maternity leave if you want, but I see no correlation between child birth and your ability to work past 60.
9 months of ruoning your body for a child, earlier it was usually 2+ children + heping take care if grandchildren. In addition, to lost career opportunities because of maternity leave (even in the perfect world, losing multiple years of experience negatively affects career).
So they worked fewer years, so they didn't have as much career progression, and your solution is to shorten their career further so they'll have even less opportunity to progress? The fact that they took maternity leave, which is paid by the government, means they have spent more time taking than contributing to the social welfare system already. I agree with a long maternity leave, but to act like contributing less directly to the system means you should be entitled to MORE government funding makes 0 sense.
What work? Coal mining for 40 years? Sure. Office job? Not even by a fraction. Moreover, I’m talking about short-term, not long term effect. Pregnancy is not fun by any means, in order to uplift ferrility rates that are in the gutter, additional bonuses to motivate woman are beneficial to the society. And I do agree, childless woman should have the same retirement age as men.
There's way better ways to encourage people to have kids than some benefit far off in the future. Give them a child welfare benefit. Make school supplies free and give a 1 year maternity leave. All of these would be cheaper and have better results. Other more general society wide changes like making housing and food more by building enough housing will also make someone more likely to have children.
A. I'm not from the USA B. What I said are all better ways to incentivise births. C. The argument wasn't over whether men would accept it or not it was whether or not they brought it in to incentivise births, which they didn't. The reason that many countries have lower retirement ages is simply because women were not always full participants in the workforce, so it was never expected of them to work until they physically couldn't. You just made the idea it was to incentivise births up.
Maybe Argentina recognizes that women tend to bear most of the mental and emotional labor of those men and therefore of society, and compensate them accordingly… men and women are different and serve different roles in every culture, shocking I know.
3.5k
u/waisonline99 4d ago
Suddenly 0 men over the age of 60 in Argentina.
Girl Power!