Senior income inequality and how should society respond? (state, retiree, welfare)
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 don't believe in income equality as some of us simply become better educated, more experienced and work harder than others. Those should b e "rewarded" by higher wages and better benefits.
That being said and in brief, I do believe that there should be safety nets for those who either by making bad choices/decisions or through no fault of their own are destitute and endangered. The feds already provide some of that through Welfare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, subsidized housing, etc. At the same time I also believe that communities should share, beyond tax dollars, the burden as many do through food lockers, backpack programs, emergency shelters, free counseling, free clinics and the like. These could stand to be expanded and made more universally available. Incentives and better tax breaks would help.
NIMBYism shouldn't stand in the way of helping others. By the same token, I am not a believer in forcing housing developers to build low income and subsidized housing in the midst of more affluent communities. We should be able to choose whom and next to whom we live.
Thorny issues to be sure.
Then developers should not be forced to build to government-restricted supply and density levels.
Sorry folks. Your all putting you own spin on the current issue as discussed in the article posted (Ted Talks) and the OP's initial question and definition of what income inequality is. NO ONE is saying everyone deserves the same income, whether in retirement or any other time.
The term income inequality is used only as a historical political term (and not meant literally for any one particular group) as to what happens when the pay gap widens to the degree it has in the past 10-20 years. It is a transfer of wealth to the very top.
Did no one read about that. It effects EVERYONE, not just the poor. It effects everyone below that 1-10%. It is extremely dangerous for society. Who in the world ever said everyone should have equal resources in their retirement, or any other time for that matter.? I don't think that was the OP's question nor was it ever suggested.
As for the inevitable end to such a problem (extreme pay gap=over expressed power and wealth at the top=political corruption=wage inequality=abuse =political and social unrest) , looking at history from the beginning of time, it only ends in one or the three ways mentioned.
Taxes (most likely scenario)
Revolution (storm the capital and pentagon and drag them all out and lynch them)
War (hardly, with today's weapon system)
When our government continues to only support big business and the wealthy, cut from entitlement programs and transfer resources to the wealthy, wages continue to stagnate or decrease, and the spiral continues. As an example, see resent bill passed by the House.
It cuts, pell grants for education, food stamps, lunch programs for low income families, health insurance funding and a host of other social programs, and increases defense spending by 40 billion over recommended allocation and adds 96 billion in a form of indirect tax cuts to benefit the wealthy.
I am very aware of the importance and need to decrease our national debt, but the trend in the way things are being cut is very worrisome, as it continues to widen that pay gap.
The term income inequality is used only as a historical political term (and not meant literally for any one particular group) as to what happens when the pay gap widens to the degree it has in the past 10-20 years. It is a transfer of wealth to the very top.
and the attached CBO chart explain the article's conclusion:
"One of the greatest tragedies a decent society can experience is the abandonment of its elderly. We have set the stage for that tragedy to play out in America through policies that have denied millions the opportunity to properly save for their retirement.
and the attached CBO chart explain the article's conclusion:
"One of the greatest tragedies a decent society can experience is the abandonment of its elderly. We have set the stage for that tragedy to play out in America through policies that have denied millions the opportunity to properly save for their retirement.
The question is, what will we do now?"
Good article. Yes the expanding wealth gap has consequences for everyone not at the top, and will come back to bite seniors in future years more than ever who are both part of middle income as well as lower income today. But the pinch is also being felt along the way as when disposable income declines, debt also rises. It will effect most everyone not considered in the very top bracket.
And the point I was also trying to make as more power is shifted to the wealthy (money = power), the more the middle class and low income people will be squeezed and hurt, as people in power usually operate only in their own best interest.
Good article. Yes the expanding wealth gap has consequences for everyone not at the top, and will come back to bite seniors in future years more than ever who are both part of middle income as well as lower income today. But the pinch is also being felt along the way as when disposable income declines, debt also rises. It will effect most everyone not considered in the very top bracket.
And the point I was also trying to make as more power is shifted to the wealthy (money = power), the more the middle class and low income people will be squeezed and hurt, as people in power usually operate only in their own best interest.
As I noted earlier, The Silent Generation, who are the majority of current retirees, are the wealthiest elder generation in the history of the US (and perhaps the World). The Boomers are OK but what we will see there is, the later the cohort, the greater the distress. By the time the youngest Boomers retire, the crisis will be apparent. Then, as if things could not get any worse ... they will.
Enter Gen X, which will be a return to what happened with the Lost Generation when they retired. Some of you may remember them. There was serious elder poverty during the mid 20th century. Actually, X may have an even rougher time than Lost did. We'll see. I've had a recurring nightmare. In the nightmare, I find myself in something resembling a refugee camp. I am old and surrounded by other old people. There are things like huge mess halls, and mass bathing. I'd rather die.
The situation for the Millies is still unknown. While there is still a lot of time, especially for their younger cohort, the fact they have had such a bad start in careers is going to be a serious issue. Bad career start = minimal to no retirement savings until quite late in life.
People on assistance programs like SNAP, TANF, WIC, those who receive section 8 vouchers, SSI, etc. These programs either provide direct cash assistance or subsidies for items at market prices. This provides a minimum standard of living that anyone eligible to receive simply needs to sign up for.
As I noted earlier, The Silent Generation, who are the majority of current retirees, are the wealthiest elder generation in the history of the US (and perhaps the World). The Boomers are OK but what we will see there is, the later the cohort, the greater the distress. By the time the youngest Boomers retire, the crisis will be apparent. Then, as if things could not get any worse ... they will.
Enter Gen X, which will be a return to what happened with the Lost Generation when they retired. Some of you may remember them. There was serious elder poverty during the mid 20th century. Actually, X may have an even rougher time than Lost did. We'll see. I've had a recurring nightmare. In the nightmare, I find myself in something resembling a refugee camp. I am old and surrounded by other old people. There are things like huge mess halls, and mass bathing. I'd rather die.
The situation for the Millies is still unknown. While there is still a lot of time, especially for their younger cohort, the fact they have had such a bad start in careers is going to be a serious issue. Bad career start = minimal to no retirement savings until quite late in life.
I agree with some of this, like the early boomers being fine, but mess halls and mass institutions? I don't see that happening.
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.
