Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have two single, female friends that are basically supporting an adult child and grandchildren. One has a divorced thirty year old son with three kids. He will get a job and then get laid off or fired. Sits around for six months or more until he finds another job at little more than minimum wage since he has no education beyond high school. His car doesn't work anymore. The grandchildren stay over every other weekend and once during the week. He pays no rent. My friend is retired and funds all of this as her son has nowhere else to go and she wants to see her grandchildren.
The other friend who is nearing retirement has a 23 year old daughter who moved in with her boyfriend, got pregnant, broke up with her boyfriend and now lives at home. Is going to college but no job. Does not want to ask the boyfriend for child support. My friend pays their way including daycare expenses so her daughter can go to school.
And there are a couple of people at work supporting their adult children and the kids have no higher education or jobs. I think this is a very common problem.
You paid in a fraction of what you are taking out. And guess what. The money you paid in went to those who were drawing benefits at the time. But there were a whole lot more workers per retiree then than there are now, because your generation decided to have fewer kids. So now each worker has to support a lot more of you. I wish we could get by with just giving you your money back and then you're on your own, but instead you're going to keep drawing and keep drawing way more than you ever contributed, leaving the ones you left behind to shoulder the debt your politicians took on so they could buy your votes.
Pension and benefit envy is really ugly. Your generation is full of it. Just do what your supreme leader does. Blame Bush. This tune got old years ago. Suck it up and make your own way in life and if/when Medicare and Social Security are there for you when you're along in years I hope you feel really stupid!
Now run along little boy. I'm sure there's a Millennial board somewhere or a village missing their...
In some cases that may be the case, but in a macro sense it's just the opposite: retirees are bleeding the rest of us dry.
Social security and Medicare payments are bankrupting this country, and retirees are receiving payments from pension plans that are frozen to active workers, or will need the support of taxpayers to continue the payments they make now. Very few retirees ever saved enough to actually live on after retirement, so the rest of us have to carry their weight.
And to top it off, few will admit this is the case, and even fewer feel at all bad about saddling their grandchildren with debt that can never be repaid.
What a crock. Come talk to me after you've worked 40 years. Tho I have a pretty good idea that you'll be doing good if you even work 20. How many retirees do you think can live on only Social Security? How much are you saving?
I have two single, female friends that are basically supporting an adult child and grandchildren. One has a divorced thirty year old son with three kids. He will get a job and then get laid off or fired. Sits around for six months or more until he finds another job at little more than minimum wage since he has no education beyond high school. His car doesn't work anymore. The grandchildren stay over every other weekend and once during the week. He pays no rent. My friend is retired and funds all of this as her son has nowhere else to go and she wants to see her grandchildren.
The other friend who is nearing retirement has a 23 year old daughter who moved in with her boyfriend, got pregnant, broke up with her boyfriend and now lives at home. Is going to college but no job. Does not want to ask the boyfriend for child support. My friend pays their way including daycare expenses so her daughter can go to school.
And there are a couple of people at work supporting their adult children and the kids have no highereducation or jobs. I think this is a very common problem.
Good post, ABQ. In general, of course, I agree with your implication that higher education will help with the job problem, but I have my own little story about that. I have posted some version of this story in other threads, perhaps in the Economics Forum, so readers who recognize it can just skip on if they wish, but it is relevant to the present discussion.
I know a married couple four or five years younger than I am (I am 69) whose younger daughter, a spoiled princess, was an undergraduate majoring in art history. I have a cousin with a Ph.D. in art history who teaches at a small private college, and my cousin explained to me back in 2006 (BEFORE the economic meltdown) that the number of art history graduates far, far exceeded the number of available jobs. She spoke about 100 or 200 people applying for jobs, and again, this was before the economic meltdown of 2008 made things even worse.
Well, wanting to be helpful, I passed along this warning to the parents in an email, not knowing the daughter well enough to feel comfortable communicating to her directly. I was told, although in much more polite language, to buzz off and mind my own business and I was informed that they had encouraged their daughters to follow their passions. All would be well, I was assured.
O.K., fast-forward a few years and Princess had earned her master's degree in Art History, and she moved home to search for a job. Well, guess what? No job. She lived at home for over a year, not working any job at all, looking for a job in art history. She couldn't understand it. ("After all, I have my degree.") After a little over a year, she accepted a part-time job in art history in her home town and continued to live at home while working that job for about a year.
Finally she threw in the towel regarding art history and went off to New York City to study International Relations. I have no idea what the job prospects are in that field, but Princess is now 28 years old and has never, ever held a full-time job.
Please congratulate me; I have bitten my tongue and not once told those parents that I told them so. (Can anyone familiar with my posts even imagine me biting my tongue?)
My sister-in-law has this problem with my niece. Basically my niece is one of those that is too poor to pay her bills, but rich enough to go out every weekend
Yes, my wife has several coworkers and a hairdresser that are big into subsidizing their children in a big way. A few have single mothers and grandchildren living in their house at their expense, of course. We have an adult son living with us, but he works and pays room and board, pays for his own entertainment, his own clothes. However, he'll never be totally self sufficient as he has autism. But I point him out to make a point. Why would these parents let their kids live with them for free. My guess is that in most cities, a person can at least get some kind of job at a fast food restaurant or some kind of temporary work. My guess is that they spoiled these kids when they were growing up and they just keep doing it.
In some cases that may be the case, but in a macro sense it's just the opposite: retirees are bleeding the rest of us dry.
Social security and Medicare payments are bankrupting this country, and retirees are receiving payments from pension plans that are frozen to active workers, or will need the support of taxpayers to continue the payments they make now. Very few retirees ever saved enough to actually live on after retirement, so the rest of us have to carry their weight.
And to top it off, few will admit this is the case, and even fewer feel at all bad about saddling their grandchildren with debt that can never be repaid.
Whether you are right, wrong, or some of each, the fact is this thread is about individual families and the issue of retirees' continuing financial support of their adult children, i.e., yes, it is on a "micro" level. The issue you are raising here is actually a totally different one, and should have its separate thread. The discussion of the thread topic has almost nothing at all to do with the discussion of your topic.
Pension and benefit envy is really ugly. Your generation is full of it. Just do what your supreme leader does. Blame Bush. This tune got old years ago. Suck it up and make your own way in life and if/when Medicare and Social Security are there for you when you're along in years I hope you feel really stupid!
Now run along little boy. I'm sure there's a Millennial board somewhere or a village missing their...
Well said! But, you forgot to mention that it was the politicians who robbed the bank, not seniors. They are the ones who keep fanning the flames of division. Sadly, the uneducated don't understand that.
Read The Millionare Next Door for more stories about the children of parents who can't let them grow up. Other stories from the book are about children who had nothing growing up but became millionares.
As for me, I'm spending my kid's inheritance while I still can. He is old enough to find his own way in the world.
In some cases that may be the case, but in a macro sense it's just the opposite: retirees are bleeding the rest of us dry.
Social security and Medicare payments are bankrupting this country, and retirees are receiving payments from pension plans that are frozen to active workers, or will need the support of taxpayers to continue the payments they make now. Very few retirees ever saved enough to actually live on after retirement, so the rest of us have to carry their weight.
And to top it off, few will admit this is the case, and even fewer feel at all bad about saddling their grandchildren with debt that can never be repaid.
Gee, I can't imagine what cable news station you get your facts from. Social Security has enough money right now for 20 more years. With minor adjustments no more dramatic than those that were deemed acceptable in the past, the time frame doubles. Right now, we only ask people to pay through earnings of approximately $114,000. That's quite unbalanced. It means that the wealthy are not chipping in proportionate to their greater means. We also have greatly increased the number of millionaires we have over the last couple of decades, so it's about time they pay their fair share and we can stop pretending that Social Security is about to disappear.
But you know that ... you're just being disingenuous.
Gee, I can't imagine what cable news station you get your facts from. Social Security has enough money right now for 20 more years. With minor adjustments no more dramatic than those that were deemed acceptable in the past, the time frame doubles. Right now, we only ask people to pay through earnings of approximately $114,000. That's quite unbalanced. It means that the wealthy are not chipping in proportionate to their greater means. We also have greatly increased the number of millionaires we have over the last couple of decades, so it's about time they pay their fair share and we can stop pretending that Social Security is about to disappear.
But you know that ... you're just being disingenuous.
Well, this thread has gone so far off topic, what the hell. While I agree with you that the poster to whom you were responding is wrong about Social Security - he is essentially crying wolf - I feel compelled to comment on your assertion that the rich are not paying their "fair share" into Social Security, an issue which is more nuanced than you seem to realize.
The earnings cap on FICA taxes is such a tempting target, of course. However, you do not mention that benefits are also capped at that level. So if you are advocating eliminating the cap on taxation, you have to say whether you are also advocating eliminating the cap on benefits; if the answer is yes, then a large part of the gain for the system is lost, and if the answer is no, you have to explain how to defend Social Security (which already has welfarish aspects) against the political charge that it is just welfare.
We really have to see the issue of the cap in the context of the entire structure of SS taxes and benefits. Did you know that the rich are already subsidizing the poor in two more than negligible ways?
First, not just the rich but the middle class and up are paying federal income tax on 85% of their Social Security benefits while those living solely or mostly on SS are paying nothing. Further, those income taxes on SS benefits do not go into the general fund but are earmarked to be plowed back into SS.
Second, the formulas which compute SS benefits strongly favor high wage earners over low wage earners as follows (as of 2012 - so the tipping points may have changed slightly but the principle is the same): SS takes our earnings years, indexes them for inflation, then averages the 35 highest earnings years. In monthly terms, the formulas then allot:
90% of the first $749
32% of the next $3,768
15% of the remainder.
Finally, it is an open question if there are enough people making over $114,000 (an amount substantially more than double the national median family income) in WAGES (as opposed to investment income which is not subject to FICA taxes) to put the SS system on fiscal easy street. A lot of people in that category would be making just marginally over $114,000.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Higher education doesn't guarantee jobs either!
But, you forgot to mention that it was the politicians who robbed the bank, not seniors. They are the ones who keep fanning the flames of division. Sadly, the uneducated don't understand that.
