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.
That has nothing to do with Social Security or retirement, but thanks for trying to hijack the thread anyway.
The first sentence of the study's abstract is false:
The social safety net for older Americans has been shrinking for the past couple decades.
Social Security has exceeded the rate of Monetary Inflation, but not Demand-pull Inflation. The sole function of Demand-pull Inflation is to force consumers to stop consuming, so that resources, goods and services are not depleted, overused or over-consumed. Increasing wages or Social Security to match Demand-pull Inflation is totally stupid and senseless, since the end result is even higher prices due to the acceleration in the depletion, overuse or over-consumption.
The methodology of their study is seriously flawed:
Of the 910 questionnaires, 895 provided valid age data. Of the questionnaires with valid age data, 120 or 13.4 percent reported at least one head of household as age 65 years or over.
So, they looked at 3,200 bankruptcies filed between 2013 and 2016, and then sent out 910 questionnaires and only 120 had "at least one head of household as age 65 years or over."
That's a nonsensical statement, because there is one and only one head of household, not two or three or four.
The data is clearly skewed, because a household with a person age 65 years or older is not proof the person aged 65 filed bankruptcy, it's only proof that a household with someone age 65 or older living there filed bankruptcy.
And here they doom their own study:
The percent of bankrupt filers age 65-74 has increased almost 500 percent since 1991, growing from 2.1 percent of the bankrupt population to 12.2 percent in 2016. Even adjusting for increased numbers of older Americans, older people are still more likely to seek protection in bankruptcy courts than in prior decades.
They don't actually provide the numbers in the study, probably because it would contradict their skewed "findings" so they disingenuously state that older people are more likely to file bankruptcy.
This is another false statement:
On the heels of the Great Depression, approximately two-thirds of older Americans were in poverty (Fleming, Evans and Chutka 2003), living “the stark terror of penniless, helpless old age” (Eliot 1961).
35 of the 48 States (Alaska and Hawaii weren't States yet) had social security programs. When FDR was governor of New York, he implemented a social security program modeled on several other States.
Later, after he became President, he effectively nationalized the programs of those 35 States.
29 of those 35 State had a retirement age of 65, while 6 had a retirement age of 70. That is one reason -- but not the only reason -- the Social Security Administration chose the age of 65 for retirement.
All States operated State-funded old age and pensioner homes. These homes were for mainly for the elderly who never married, married but had no children, or had children but outlived them. Not only did they have housing, they had three meals a day, and all free. States also operated old age homes specifically for military veterans. If you do genealogy, you might come across relatives living in those homes in the 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930 and 1940 Census Records.
By the 1960s, nearly all States stopped funding such homes, because of Social Security, although some States, like Ohio, still operate old age homes for military veterans. They're operated by the counties, and you'll find them mainly in rural counties.
The elderly also lived with their children or grandchildren, so it's not like they were living on the streets.
This is like watching the response to a mouse that has caught the attention of a lion...only on a mental level.
The "problem" is complex, but much of it has to do with more money going toward war, corporations, the top earners and everything else except for "the people"....
As we speak the Republicans are doing even more of that....LOTS more. These increases in bankruptcies started as a result of the Reagan Era and new "religion" of the country called "supply side" or "trickle down".
A more apt description is that "you don't matter anymore, only wealth and power do".
In some sense it was inevitable. Post WW2 we got to call all the shots and any joker with a pulse and a modicum of work ethic could live a pretty good life just showing up at an assembly line with most of the rest of the world blown up, pre-industrial etc.
Frankly, that's just not sustainable.
However, the US has leveraged it's other great assets to attract some of the best talent in the world along with capital to keep us humming along although in a different manner.
Except that a consumer economy is like a gold mining town when the mine has played out.
One vision I see in the future is massive house projections that house senior citizens that can no longer work a regular job & have very little funds.
It will be run by the government and feel like a big college dorm. You'll have 2-3 1 bed room apartments sharing 1 kitchen and that's how people will live.
Generally known in previous times as a boarding house.
You apparently did not read the article, which linked to the study by four researchers from four universities.
You also apparently did not read the quotes from the researchers themselves, or from professionals who serve older adults, or from various older Americans whose experiences reflect the study's findings.
Talk about nonsense ...
I've worked for 10 organizations over 40 years on the job.
Exactly one has matched any kind of investment into retirement. None have offered pensions.
I've done the prudent thing and paid myself first; however, my chosen profession(s) have not been high-paying ones. I don't take expensive vacations, I live in modest housing in a working class neighborhood, I drive an economy car, I save every dime possible - and still, my 403b and IRA aren't going to amount to enough to live on by the time I retire at 70 (11 years - if anyone will employ me that long, that is ... ).
If you've worked 40 years, plan to retire at 70, and have the modest lifestyle you describe, then Social Security should be adequate. Have you run the numbers on the SSA site? You may be pleasantly surprised.
And who wants to help Americans with medical treatment payments and universal insurance and trying to help students get an affordable college education, certainly not the conservatives. One day you people have to wake up and realize you are fighting against your own best interest that only help the wealthiest who don't have to worry about healthcare or private education and can afford the best treatments and around the clock nursing for their family members.
Pretty nonsensical isn't it? They thump their chest and wear their badges, and then have no clue how to differentiate between liberal and conservative ideologies. There's a bunch of 'em out there too. Strange times.
Check your dates as to which generation benefitted from the "post war boom" (I assume you're talking WWII). I guess we did benefit in that we had indoor plumbing.
By the time the largest cohort of Baby Boomers were of age to get those "cushy jobs" the industries were collapsing. If anyone benefitted from those "cushy jobs" it was the WWII generation and, to an extent those in the so-called Silent Generation.
Another flash for you, most (as in 65%) adults are "only" high school educated.
Actually the post war boom lasted from the end of Ww2 until the oil crises and recession of 1973 according to multiple sources. The seemingly endless economic expansion allowed boomers to obtain very good jobs right out of high school. College was not necessary for the American Dream in those days so many did not get one. I did not mean to insult your generation, y’all lived with the world you were dealt, we Gen Xers lived with the world we were dealt. It was tougher for us than you boomers and it’s much tougher for millenials than it was for us. Things are going in the wrong direction for a lot of people in this nation in spite of the stock market and jobs reports. A whole lot of young people work part time McJobs with no hope of getting out of that life. Not everyone can get a college degree and even if everyone had one there still would be the same finite amount of good jobs available. Things today are nothing like they used to be. Too much offshoring, too many corporate cutbacks, there just are not enough real middle class jobs for “regular Joes”. I can’t believe that you would deny that much better jobs were available when boomers came of age than there were for later generations. Look how many millenials live in thier parents basement, I know they are not doing that because they want too. It is much harder to get a livable job today
All those advocating for basic income or an expansion of the EITC should contemplate the fate of these seniors long and hard. A lot of people, probably most, are bad with money.
For many they are not falling behind because they are bad with money. They are because others were bad with money and unjustifiable greed.
They were told for decades to save and live off the interest. Wall Street was bad with money and the interest went away.
Actually the post war boom lasted from the end of Ww2 until the oil crises and recession of 1973 according to multiple sources. The seemingly endless economic expansion allowed boomers to obtain very good jobs right out of high school. College was not necessary for the American Dream in those days so many did not get one. I did not mean to insult your generation, y’all lived with the world you were dealt, we Gen Xers lived with the world we were dealt. It was tougher for us than you boomers and it’s much tougher for millenials than it was for us. Things are going in the wrong direction for a lot of people in this nation in spite of the stock market and jobs reports. A whole lot of young people work part time McJobs with no hope of getting out of that life. Not everyone can get a college degree and even if everyone had one there still would be the same finite amount of good jobs available. Things today are nothing like they used to be. Too much offshoring, too many corporate cutbacks, there just are not enough real middle class jobs for “regular Joes”. I can’t believe that you would deny that much better jobs were available when boomers came of age than there were for later generations. Look how many millenials live in thier parents basement, I know they are not doing that because they want too. It is much harder to get a livable job today
You are correct in the time frame. The oldest Boomer would have been 27 at that point (1973) so would have had, at most, 9 years in that "cushy" job. Having worked in one of those "cushy" jobs myself (a plastic closure factory and then a glass container factory, both for the same company) I'm going out on a limb to say that your and my definition of "cushy" don't match.
Another reality about "cushy" pensions, less than 40% of US workers had them at the time when they were most widespread. And again, when those "cushy" jobs went away so did the pensions (unless the Boomer worker had vested). Of course now many are getting a very small one from one of those jobs (if the pension fund itself didn't collapse, which they did for many of those industries).
I went to college with guys who attended a semester or two and never came back because the money in the steel mill was too good. They got permanently laid off at about the time they would have graduated with their degrees in Accounting, or Management, or Finance.
Actually the post war boom lasted from the end of Ww2 until the oil crises and recession of 1973 according to multiple sources. The seemingly endless economic expansion allowed boomers to obtain very good jobs right out of high school. College was not necessary for the American Dream in those days so many did not get one. I did not mean to insult your generation, y’all lived with the world you were dealt, we Gen Xers lived with the world we were dealt. It was tougher for us than you boomers and it’s much tougher for millenials than it was for us. Things are going in the wrong direction for a lot of people in this nation in spite of the stock market and jobs reports. A whole lot of young people work part time McJobs with no hope of getting out of that life. Not everyone can get a college degree and even if everyone had one there still would be the same finite amount of good jobs available. Things today are nothing like they used to be. Too much offshoring, too many corporate cutbacks, there just are not enough real middle class jobs for “regular Joes”. I can’t believe that you would deny that much better jobs were available when boomers came of age than there were for later generations. Look how many millenials live in thier parents basement, I know they are not doing that because they want too. It is much harder to get a livable job today
I'd say the post war boom ended in the mid 60s, when Europe and Japan finally caught up in production.
It wasn't clearly apparent, because women entering the work market in huge numbers beginning in the late 1960s covered over the fact that their husband's labor was very quickly diminishing in value.
By 1972/73 we see President Nixon performing all kinds of economic stunts to keep things together, like his executive order freezing all wages and prices in the nation (imagine that happening now), removing the dollar from the gold standard and letting the value of the dollar float on the world market, hedging both of those bets by making a deal with Saudi Arabia that the US would defend them if they accepted only US dollars for their oil (which is the reason the US went to war to defend Kuwait against Iraq).
So the boom was already well over by 1973. The smoke and mirror show began in 1972 and continues today.
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.
Well said.
You apparently did not read the article, which linked to the study by four researchers from four universities. 
