Raped a fan’s baby

The problem with your analogy is it presumes that losing 10% of whatever resource it is you are discussing does not have life altering consequences. Losing those two productive adults would be horrific if everyone was just getting by with all adults working at full capacity.

It’s further complicated by the fact that someone will not always die at the same time as someone stops working. It is possible that fewer workers will need to support more people which again is hard if everyone is just getting by in the initial setup.

Finally it’s made more difficult if the numbers are different such as 12 elderly 6 adults and two kids. The moment someone drops out of the workforce the productivity takes a huge hit.

In every instance a greater number of workers fixes the issue. It is a problem of numbers not distribution.

Then you are confused as to how pyramid schemes work.

No this exists regardless of your economic philosophy. You need more stuff being contributed than taken no matter what philosophy you follow.

It has nothing to do with banking or bankers at all. In a communist system you still need a greater amount of resources being paid into the support systems than being taken from them. If every worker only created enough to cover the needs of themselves and family there would not be enough fir those that could not work and have no family. This is a real world problem that exists regardless of your system for distributing resources

You are confused this has nothing to do with fractional reserve lending.

You need a greater number of people paying into a pension system than taking out. As Japan has the oldest average population and a smaller number of people attempting to support that elder population they either need to increase the number of workers, decrease the payments to the point of making it almost impossible to retire or destroy the entire nation’s economy by doing nothing.

Their problem isn’t that a bank can create fiat money by lending $10 twice, rather it is because of population decline

What if the place where you can be relocated to has no job opportunities?

The issue is most of the available housing is in places that do not have jobs

No it’s people not wanting to work until they die that is the problem. Maintaining that support requires more people paying into it than taking from it. Once you have more taking than paying the system goes bankrupt.

Yeah if they work for NASA we should be able to presume they are intelligent enough to know not to do this.

I think you are assigning a moral value to “bad” that I am not. Things can have negative outcomes that are considered not ideal aka bad but do not carry a moralistic element to them. For example “the weather outside is pretty bad” does not contain a moral judgement which is how Im reading OP’s question

That’s because you are ignoring how these retirees financial needs are met. Things like social security systems require people paying in. Robots aren’t going to make up the shortfall in tax revenue.

If I offered you a home but it was in rural Minnesota with no services or people around for miles would you want to live there?

We can house everyone but not everyone is going to want to live where we have space for them.

Things like social security/national pension plans require a steady stream of workers paying taxes into the system so retirees can take money out of it. When you get to the point where more people are retired than the workers can support you have serious issues. Thus the issue is maintaining this population not necessarily growing it.

There’s a massive group of renters whose parent’s wallets drive the market there.

The cow statues are a thing the city started putting around t stops and public areas in the early 2000s.

Vanilla is an incredibly complex flavor. It is really odd it is thought of as basic.

There is rarely a “right” side in generational ethnic conflicts.

Do you regularly give IQ tests or do you simply think most physicists are geniuses?

And right there is my problem with youtube. The editor/director who should be the check on the star’s claims works directly for the star so when the star is wrong about something so is the work.