I would be careful when attributing intent to voters as a whole. Political analysis is even less precise a “science” than economics.
Even professional analysts should qualify their interpretation with a “may”. Even more so those of us who are not analysts (among which I stand).
I still prefer the Swiss system. If the young people don’t want to fix their retirement system, too bad. But that’s their choice.
The young are a minority.
Did anyone catch the short report just before the discussion among party presidents at 17:00 on SRF1?
It was a 15 min. report by SRF about a 30-year-old who wanted to learn what she could do to save for retirement. First she went to someone who told her to invest in a 3a insurance. After that she visited a day trader who basically said “90% lose money with this, but I know what I’m doing so it’s safe”. The report ended with her saying gambling with stocks is too risky for her so she’ll stick with a 3a insurance.
The message this conveyed, and the missed opportunity of telling young people about buying-and-holding broadly diversified index funds actually made me really angry. What moron is in charge who allows shit like that to air?
I just. Can‘t.
Isn’t this why we are all here? To avoid being ragdolled by the state and the whims of the fleshy masses?
My own investments is where I am putting my faith and effort in.
Other than that all the “robbing the young” bullshit is irrelevant, if young people can’t be bothered to vote because they are a braindead generation then they will accept what those who do decided for them.
But there aren‘t enough young people to make a difference. Hence tyranny of the old.
One thing I appreciate in democracy is that our own vote doesn’t go far. If we’re really willing for a law to pass/something to change or not change, we have to convince others to vote as we think is best.
Most youngs have access to 1-4 older people (their parents/grandparents). The challenge is to be motivated enough ourselves to get enoug of them to be motivated enough to convince a sufficient portion of the older people to vote in the interest of the young out of a principle of fairness.
Not an easy thing to do but, as for myself, I can’t say I’ve given it a fair enough try as of now.
If we really want to do something about it, we first need to get enough people motivated enough at the same time to lobby to get other people to vote. Not easy but not impossible.
Oh well, so that’s their lot in life, in CH, in 2024. If they don’t like it they can look to find better countries to emigrate to, good luck with that 
Personally I consider this a minor problem, the pension systems of most other countries are a hot sticky mess. In fact most other countries are a hot sticky mess.
@Wolverine most people view democracy like this: “if what I want is voted for democracy is great, if not it’s because [insert amoeba-level reason]”. Agree with what you wrote.
Edit 2: policy changes need to be slow and incremental, this one looks like that to me, but I could be wrong. When you see overnight drastic policy changes - like I saw in Greece - you know the country is in deep trouble.
The one behind pension fund aka insurance, bank, lobbies 
Many members tend to forget that the population is not at all educated in terms of finance. These people need to be educated in budgeting before they can be educated in finance and long-term investment. I have a colleague who’s pretty well educated in that respect. But he prefers to keep his money in cash and sometimes buy leveraged products to take a hint. He also prefers to wait for the MMA line or whatever to reach a certain level before putting money into his 3a pillar (he’s always looking for the lowest point). In the end, when we compare our methods, he’s only a few bps away from my average buy on a stock. The difference is that I get dividends, he doesn’t. So there you have it. So getting the majority of the population to understand that investing a portion of their monthly income in a stock market index for 30 years… We can dream.
I think that’s what you are referring to:
Ab wann sollte man Geld für die Altersvorsorge sparen? | Erwachsen werden | SRF (youtube.com)
Cedric Wermuth (SP) talks about greedy pension fund managers and the banks ripping of retirees.
I’ve talked with a few people that were against it, and it came up often.
The vote leaflet talks about 7B/y in management fees, that sounds high, but it’s hard to say without knowing how they came up with this number (I could not find a source), and without context.
Is there anything to it, does anyone know?
It sounds to me any successful reforms in the future will need to explicitly address this point. It’s a cheap but very powerful argument with a significant portion of the voting population, just like “you will get less”.
I think the average management fee is around 0.4-0.5%/year. But keep in mind that pension funds need way more than just an investment team. So I think it‘s pretty efficient and low cost. They just need to drop the max. 45% stock limit.
Good thing we have almost 1’400 pension funds, each with their own investment team.
This would only favour pension funds with a high ratio of contributors.
There are PF with a ratio of 60/40 (contributors/recipients)
Finpension 1E plans cost 0.30-0.35% all in fees. So I think pension funds can do a bit better in terms of fees.
This 0.45-0.5% includes all fees or just management fees? And then there is something else ?
The fees are way to high. Obviously, it depends on the allocation (stocks, RE, PE).
But a pension fund with 5B invested in passive stocks shouldn’t have more than 0.05% of fees
If you check, this pension fund BPK, on page 61, https://bpk.ch/fileadmin/redaktion/3_Kundenservice/3.2_Publikationen/3.2.4_Jahresberichte/Jahresbericht_2023_D_F.pdf, you can see that the total cost is only 0.05%
There are multiples sources for the fees of the pension funds:
A study from Comparis in 2022 (data from 2021 - links below) tries to analyse the administrative and assets management cost of pension funds. It looks to me that it’s hard to add up their costs as they don’t use the same unit (per insured person for administrative costs and per unit of assets under management for management).
Crossing the data with the Swisscanto report for the same year (using a shortcut because they probably haven’t gathered data from the same pension funds, so don’t take these numbers as scientifically accurate), there would be:
It’s the ratio that interests us so the sampling issue isn’t completely invalidating (though it probably remains significant).
So:
So roughly 0.53% total, in average.
However
There is a huge! variation between pension funds. Administrative costs vary from 62.- to 712.- per insured person (x11.5). Assets management costs vary from 0.05% to 1.26% (x25!).
That is not acceptable in my opinion. A solution would be to increase competition by removing the choice from the employers (who are easier to lobby) and giving the choice of pension fund to the insured worker, ala basic health insurance.
This problem should really be handled and it would be easier to communicate on this specific issue toward the general population than on the issue of redistribution between generations.
Comparis results: Beste Pensionskasse Schweiz: Pensionkassen-Vergleich | Comparis
Comparis full report (only in German): https://fr.comparis.ch/-/media/files/mediencorner/medienmitteilungen/2022/banken/pensionskassenvergleich/comparis_report_pk_vermoegensverwaltung_2022_de.pdf?la=de-ch
Swisscanto report: https://pensionstudy.swisscanto.com/22/app/uploads/Swiss-Pension-Fund-Study-2022.pdf
Exactly, i think it’s even worse with some provider.
Swisslife manages a pension fund and most of the asset are invested with Swisslife Asset Management (a Swisslife branch). The fees are 0.54%. With this structure, Swisslife Asset Management has a captive “client” and can apply high fees.
Only because of redistribution theft. If everyone would save only for themselves then over the average working life of 40 years you would swim in money when invested 100% in stocks.
I’ve already heard something like this in a documentary about retirement in Switzerland. It could be really interesting. However, hard to set up for the entire population. I would say that only a fraction of the population would be aware about which pension fund could be the best for them. The other will go on scam pension fund like the 3a-insurance and their like.