I am constantly haunted by an idea every time I delve deeper into the numbers of social security. It's not just spreadsheets; these are compressed life stories in columns and figures. It is the story of our society, its dreams and fears, and the silent contract that bonds us with one another. Today, I feel this bond is quietly tearing apart, not because of a conspiracy, but under the simple truth that we have changed, the world has changed, yet the rules of the game remain the same.
Everything starts with aging. We inherited a stereotype about the retiree as someone who has finished their journey and quietly waits on the sidelines of life. What a misleading and unjust image. I look around and see a generation of "older adults" rejecting this mold. They are not just numbers in a statistic that states the global average life expectancy has jumped to 73.3 years. No. They are my grandfather who still repairs everything at home, and my neighbor who runs a charity after retiring from teaching. In my country, Jordan, when I realize that 15.1% of those over sixty hold a university degree, I understand the magnitude of expertise we force to idle at home. We are asking powerful engines to stop running at the peak of their contribution.
This leads me to the word "entitlement". A resonant word, but one that now demands reflection. We were raised to believe that a retirement pension is a right. And it is. But how can any right continue if the system that guarantees it faces sustainability challenges? When I read that the dependency ratio in developed countries will reach a level where three working individuals will support two retirees by 2075, the logical question that arises is: Is the current structure capable of withstanding this demographic shift? And is it rational to expect the continuation of the same level of benefits without adjusting other variables such as retirement age or the value of subscriptions? Entitlement has shifted from an absolute concept to a variable dependent on a collective equation.
Then we arrive at "protection". What is real protection? Is it just a check that arrives at the end of the month? Analysis leads us to understand that the fear does not only stem from poverty in old age but also includes loss of value and feeling ineffective. Effective protection might be in enabling people to remain productive, and investing in their health to live their additional years actively. When I learn that more than half of the workforce in my country, about 54%, work in the shadows, outside any protective umbrella, I question the efficiency of our current network. Is it designed for our economic reality, or is it still operating on assumptions that are no longer valid?
And here lies the burden of "taxation". A word that no one likes. We ask the youth, struggling to start their lives in a tough economy, to pay more and more to fund a system not designed for their reality. This is not a solution; it is delaying the problem and creating a generation gap. I feel we need to be more creative. Why not consider funding social solidarity from other sources? From the profits of capital that does not age, or from taxes on excessive consumption that harms us all? The burden of keeping the social contract alive should not almost completely fall on the shoulders of labor and workers.
What I see is not just a financial crisis. It is a crisis of imagination. We are stuck in 20th-century definitions while facing the challenges of the 21st century. Social security is not just numbers; it is a philosophy. It is our societal answer to the question: How do we take care of each other? And if our current answer no longer works, there is no shame in admitting that. The real shame is to close our eyes and pretend that everything is fine while the ship is slowly sinking.
