You do realise this system is unsustainable, though ? We just cannot grow infinitely just because .end of life care costs money.
We are way too many, and the #1 source of global warming is human activity. At one point we'll have to stop growing, so the system of how we pay for elderly care has to change.
We don't have to grow infinitely. Population collapse comes with a huge host of problems though.
The problem of elder care isn't purely financial. It's not the model of paying that's the problem. At the end of the day, (kinda oversimplified) money represents a fractional value of the work output of a population. The output of the population depends on the number of people working in productive roles. The value of the currency is related to the consistent output of services and confidence in the existence of your country.
Shifting over an increasing fraction of your population to elder-care is non productive. It has a tension with both stability of currency and value of currency.
The true cost of end of life care
1. Is already socialized in many western countries
2. Impacts human capital allocation in countries
3. Requires other people’s children to take care of you. If there are no kids, society stops functioning.
4. Will continue to rise in price as there are fewer young people
When you consider that most old people do not fully fund their retirement even with existing subsidies, you can see that this is an odd proposition.
Some people’s work will be valuable enough to offset their end of life care. It will be an increasingly smaller number over time given trends.