Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

Merkel and Kohl were not that far apart. And if we consider not only real democracies but also "flawless" ones, then a few more governments can be found.

Fair enough ;)

I actually wanted to point out that demography is not the root of the problem, but that the productivity growth of the last decades(!) has not proportionally ended up in the pension fund. Demography is an aggravating factor, not the cause.

And having more children may ease matters in 20+ years, but before that they have aggravated them for two decades.

It’s easier said than done - in more ways than one.

Above all, the transition phase must be taken into account, which takes about 20 to 30 years, during which old and new cases exist side by side, and these generations definitely have to bear more burden, and that is also the main reason why no one dares to tackle it.

I actually wanted to point out that demography is not the root of the problem, but that the productivity growth of recent decades(!) has not proportionally ended up in the pension fund. Demography is an aggravating factor, not the cause.

You are right about that. However, the problem is not just the short-sightedness of governments. Our entire social system is built on the production factor labor. This now becomes a double problem. On the one hand, demography is unfavorable; on the other hand, the capital factor has performed significantly better in recent decades. The Riester pension originally aimed somewhat in that direction, and people were supposed to build up a pension on the capital market in addition to the statutory pension insurance (GRV). Unfortunately, in Germany we basically consider the stock market to be as much of the devil as personal responsibility and have focused on how to protect people from losses. What resulted was a state-subsidized pension provision through insurance (after all, professionals make the decisions there!) and with a contribution guarantee (who would invest in something that pays out less in the end?). In doing so, it was ignored that, on the one hand, professionals do not make better decisions, that they generate a lot of costs, and that the guarantee leads to 90% of the portfolio being tied up in government bonds due to low interest rates. In the end, a return of almost nothing comes out, and that before costs. A similar problem exists with occupational pensions (BAV). A construct similar to a 401k would be far superior.

Residential property, in my opinion and from my experience in Queensland, is rather poor quality in substance (thin timber framing with single-layer plasterboard).

Change things for a different climate. Australia simply has the exact opposite focus compared to Germany. Namely, you have three seasons where you want to get the heat out of the house as quickly as possible, and in winter you just throw another blanket on. That also has different advantages or disadvantages. For example, if I want to lay another cable, I don’t have to tear open the entire wall. But I also have to admit that there are no strict standards for house construction in Australia. I have friends who get upset about that. The fact that, with climate change, Germany’s weather is moving more towards Australia’s, I find quite striking. I don’t find it so bad; with the low humidity here, it is actually better than in QLD. However, I insist on having air conditioning in our houses because I see how my mother copes with the heat there at an older age. You can also see this with the heatwaves in recent years in France, etc.

You are right. However, the problem does not lie solely in the short-sightedness of governments. Our entire social system is built on the production factor labor. This now creates a double problem. On the one hand, demographics are unfavorable, on the other hand, the capital factor has performed significantly better over the past decades. The Riester pension originally aimed somewhat in that direction, and people were supposed to build up a pension on the capital market in addition to the statutory pension insurance (GRV). Unfortunately, in Germany we actually regard the stock market as devil’s work just as much as personal responsibility, and we focused on how to protect people from losses. The result was then a state-subsidized pension provision via insurance (after all, professionals make the decisions there!) with contribution guarantees (who would invest in something that ultimately pays out less?). In doing so, it was ignored that on the one hand professionals do not make better decisions, that they incur plenty of costs, and that the guarantee in times of low interest rates leads to 90% of the portfolio being stuck in government bonds. In the end, you get a return of almost nothing—and that before costs. Similar problems exist with occupational pensions (BAV). A construct similar to a 401(k) would be vastly superior.

True.

But what does it ultimately come down to? In the end, the productive force of capital assets should pay into pension provisions. Either via the stock market route or via the state insurance route, if one also subjects the profits of a pension contribution to it. In both cases, the returns of companies have to pay for it—and always according to the pay-as-you-go procedure.

The state route argues for planning security, the stock market for personal responsibility. Personally, I believe that pension provision with small pensions is not something that should be subject to volatility, but that can also be seen differently.

Fair enough ;)

I actually wanted to point out that demography is not the root of the problem, but that the productivity growth of recent decades(!) has not proportionally ended up in the pension fund. Demography is an exacerbating factor, not the cause.

And having more children may ease things in 20+ years, but before that they have made things worse for two decades.

It’s easier said than done - in multiple respects.

Since we have a pay-as-you-go system, the "fund" you speak of doesn’t actually exist. Capital accumulation is explicitly not provided for.

Yes, it is demography plus a series of voter gifts to pensioners.