I’m being diagnosed for Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, which apparently has an average lifespan till 48 years old. I’d rather keep the extra income and enjoy the life while I’m alive, so I was wondering which countries don’t have mandatory pension contributions. I tried to look it up, but I couldn’t find any articles which just lists all countries on that basis. If anyone knows how to find it, I’d appreciate, but I’d also appreciate just a singular country example.
You must log in or register to comment.
Disclaimer that I do not know where you live. However, if you have say public funded health care, then I think paying for pension you might not get to be a non-issue. Further, many contribute to health care they do not receive themselves. This is the way it should be since burdens should be shared and one should receive based on needs.
If you are in a capitalist hellhole without crumbles of social policies, I just feel sorry for you. The issue is still really not about paying for pensions, but lack of social security besides that. Good luck with your health and do not forget that medical advances are frequent these days.
I guess you’re talking about vasculat EDS because the normal kind doesn’t have a low life expectancy.
New Zealand does not have mandatory pension contributions.
However, that’s of no use to you because it also has universal heathcare, so it won’t allow people with serious health conditions to migrate to it.
it also has universal heathcare, so it won’t allow people with serious health conditions to migrate to it
Wait, they legit don’t allow people to migrate based on inborn conditions? How lovely…
No obese people allowed either.
-
New Zealanders collectively pay for everyone’s healthcare and everyone’s pension.
-
New Zealand has finite resources.
-
It includes autism, which really enraged me when I found out. That’s one less country in this already progressively anti-immigration world… Well two, because Australia does the same wrt autistic people (and likely other health conditions).
Not sure why you’d be more enraged about autism than about blind people, motor neuron disease, etc etc but FWIW it only includes autism in cases “where significant support is required”.
The whole thing is based on an estimate of how expensive a prospective migrant’s healthcare needs are.
I found out about the autism because I am autistic and I was considering New Zealand as a potential country to migrate to until I found out about that. I also found out about the plethora of other conditions that bar you from immigration but it started with my personal search.
I also wonder whether they measure the “burden on the healthcare system” in a fair or ableist/biased manner. Your link seems to suggest the former, but it also excludes ability to pay for private healthcare/insurance, which would preclude one from putting said burden on the public healthcare system and leaves the decision up to a medical professional, who may hold said biases, so…
Makes sense that you would encounter it if you were considering migrating.
Re: insurance, New Zealand has universal healthcare and no-fault accident insurance, so creating a class of second class citizens who are not allowed access to it, would be cruel, especially if they ran out of money.
On a practical level, as well as being hard to enforce, it wouldn’t work well. Universal free hospitals means the private health sector lacks capacity for some things, and has to refer people back to the public sector.
It’s actually quite controversial policy. Not in terms of people like OP because NZ health system is underfunded, so there’s no reason to want random strangers to come and freeload off the long-term taxpayers.
But NZ occasionally get cases where non-citizen children of migrants get serious diseases and are denied permanent residency etc, and there’s usually an outcry and petitions etc.
That does make sense. It is a country with a fairly small population, so I begrudgingly have to accept that it has to have some control over this kind of thing, not to overload its public systems.
On the whole I think the concept of countries in general is bullshit but that’s a debate best had in another thread.
The thing with the children of migrants being denied residency is truly heartbreaking. Do they become stateless as a result?
No, I’m pretty sure making people stateless is a crime under international law. Stateless people get to stay.
Basically what happens is Immigration orders the deportation of the child back to their own country of origin, and their parents are free to go back with them. Sometimes it’s the other way round and an ill parent gets deported instead.
Here is a typical example which got a lot of media coverage. A guy from South Africa moved to NZ on a temporary visa, after he brought his family over to join him, Immigration didn’t want a blind child to stay. But his argument was the care is better in NZ so she should be allowed to stay.
Wow. I’m autistic myself and even I with my limited theory of mind can guess why this makes them mad: it affects them personally.
It’s perfectly legit to find more salience in the issues that affect one’s own self directly.
@intensely_human sure, but I had no idea the person was autistic until I asked that question.
You know your username and instance is visible, right?
You do know Lemmy.ml’s sacred founder, Dessalines? There’s a political origin story for why he and many other mods created this social network
If you didn’t know beforehand that this was a ‘tankie’ website, I advise you go to lemmy.world, lemm.ee, raddle, beehaw, or even Mastodon if you seem perturbed by this presence… after all, you seem to be a reddit migrant…
Here is a sample of his political ideology
Lol. A bunch of cringe copy/paste doesn’t change that your question was a weak troll.
“Sacred” founder. Lololol.
Whatever… at least we know for certain what type of character you are, mocking us like that…
What’s your point?
That’s a big gamble to take. EDS isn’t normally life limiting, but even if it was, you might be the outlier, and being elderly and disabled with no money is grim.
