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 already feel screwed by Social Security. When I started working 40 years ago, my retirement age for early benefits was 59-1/2. It's now up to 62. I wish there was some lawyer with cojones who would file a class action suit for those of us who feel SS is in breach of the contract that was in effect at the time we started working.
I have worked full time since I was 16, started right after I graduated from high school (yes, I graduated at 16), and I have been employed all my life. Didn't take time off to reproduce and the longest I have been between jobs was a month. I have paid my share in. I am tired and ready to retire. Every day is a drag. I don't want to die still working. I want some time to enjoy life.
I supported my parents' and your parents' Social Security. I expect your kids to support mine and theirs will support them.
Those of you who want private accounts, go for it. I know people who would have absolutely nothing at retirement age if they weren't forced to contribute through their paychecks. You know them, too. They're the ones that live paycheck to paycheck and every disposable dollar goes toward beer and cigarettes or nose candy. If the government quit taking out SS and you expect them to voluntarily pay a percentage of their check towards their retirement, I have a bridge I can sell you.
Someone asked me to comment on the legal issue raised here - whether changes in social security laws represent some kind of breach of a legal contract. This is what the Supreme Court said in United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166, 174, 101 S.Ct. 453, 459 (1980):
The initial issue presented by this case is the appropriate standard of judicial review to be applied when social and economic legislation enacted by Congress is challenged as being violative of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. There is no claim here that Congress has taken property in violation of the Fifth Amendment, since railroad benefits, like social security benefits, are not contractual and may be altered or even eliminated at any time...
Some of you may think that various changes are wrong - immoral - a violation of a "social contract" - etc. - etc. - or not. And I'm not going to get into the middle of that debate here. But the government *can* change the rules pretty much any way it wants from a legal POV in the middle of the game (at least in terms of what you're talking about here - were it - for example - to deny social security benefits to people simply because they live in Kansas - that case would present totally different legal issues). Robyn
I think it's regrettable that someone who hosts a show on aging like the author of this opinion piece would single out the 65+ crowd as being selfish uncaring old coots. There are members of the "Me Generation" of every age - people who could not care less for their fellow man, but rather want what they want, when they want it, and not a minute later. That kind of attitude is absolutely not restricted to any particular age group.
As for Social Security, it's "death by a thousand cuts" is getting a real boost via the insane so-called compromise tax bill that includes - incredibly, as if NO ONE in Congress learned anything from the Bush tax cuts - a "temporary" 2% reduction in payroll taxes, the taxes that fund Social Security.
After visiting a Senior care center over the last two days...
All I know is this, after seeing what I saw, and interacting with these people..these older souls who looked so so abandoned, and alone...
If I had a billion dollars, I would open up a free, yes free care facility for all of them...so that they could live out the remainder of their days in peace...
When you see these people up close and in person, it changes everything, at least for me it did...you don't see stats or finacial figures or talking points and all that other garbadge. Instead what you see are human beings in need, in need of love, attention and physical care...hanging on best they can...
And if I could help them all for free, I would...
I said hello to each and every one of those Seniors in there today...and they all responded...shocked that someone would or could see value in them...well I did...
And I will never forget that experience...
I realize now you can't put a price on dignity...at least I can't...
I mean to be 68, plagued with medical problems, and not know where you will be in 30 days, to not have family there for you...it was to much for me...
Dmn capitolism, when it gets to the point of putting profit above dignity of life....
Dmn capitolism, when it gets to the point of putting profit above dignity of life....
Your compassion for people who are suffering is admirable. But I think your understanding of political and economic reality is seriously flawed. If you think elderly people are treated better under socialism and that human values predominate under socialism (as opposed to capitalism, which has two "a"'s but no "o"), then perhaps you should talk to some people old enough to remember what things were like in the Soviet Union, which collapsed to the great joy of its people in late 1991. Or perhaps you should investigate conditions in China. Or heck, just pick any socialist country you want and let us know what you discover.
Are you aware that the definition of socialism is that the means of production are owned by the government? Where does this great faith in the essential humanity of government come from?
I agree that we should all try to foster the "dignity of life", not only for the elderly but under all conditions. But I'm afraid you are very naive to demonize "capitalism" for what you saw in the nursing home.
After visiting a Senior care center over the last two days...
All I know is this, after seeing what I saw, and interacting with these people..these older souls who looked so so abandoned, and alone...
If I had a billion dollars, I would open up a free, yes free care facility for all of them...so that they could live out the remainder of their days in peace...
When you see these people up close and in person, it changes everything, at least for me it did...you don't see stats or finacial figures or talking points and all that other garbadge. Instead what you see are human beings in need, in need of love, attention and physical care...hanging on best they can...
And if I could help them all for free, I would...
I said hello to each and every one of those Seniors in there today...and they all responded...shocked that someone would or could see value in them...well I did...
And I will never forget that experience...
I realize now you can't put a price on dignity...at least I can't...
I mean to be 68, plagued with medical problems, and not know where you will be in 30 days, to not have family there for you...it was to much for me...
Dmn capitolism, when it gets to the point of putting profit above dignity of life....
Are you on the Warped Tour? The average age of a senior in a skilled nursing home - ALF - or similar facility in Florida is about 86 - not 68. My husband is 65 - I am 63 - and we do not know a single person anywhere near our age in such a facility.
Please tell us the name of the facility you're talking about and where it is. We have experience with parents who were in places like skilled nursing facilities in Florida for years - not a couple of days - e.g. River Garden up here in JAX. But - like I said - average age about 86. FWIW - no skilled nursing facility or ALF up here in JAX will admit a man under the age of 65 - one reason I very much question your assertions.
And - if you're really talking about people our age - where are their kids (who should be in their 30's and 40's)? We did know people in River Garden who were maybe 95 or older - and their kids were dead. But most people in their 60's haven't predeceased the rest of their families.
Either way, they've jacked up my full retirement age from 65 to 66. Breach of contract.
I'm at 67 (born 1961), but I know they'll keep moving the age to be at least a year older than I am. Nice to know I paid those nice EXTRA-HIGH 1983 tax rates on every paycheck I earned, since that's the year I graduated.
I find it amazing that every promise made by politicians to OTHER people is treated like the word of God, while benefits I PAY THROUGH THE NOSE FOR are treated like I'm asking for a free ride.
My generation got the raw end of every deal--jobs, housing, stock market, low interest rates on savings, devaluation of the dollar, high taxes.
Demographics is a huge determinant of your level of success in America. You can't do worse than be born at the very tail end of the Baby Boom--every good deal is gone, high costs are left to be paid, and the next (spoiled) generation won't start working until every one of us has been worked to death.
My generation got the raw end of every deal--jobs, housing, stock market, low interest rates on savings, devaluation of the dollar, high taxes.
Demographics is a huge determinant of your level of success in America. You can't do worse than be born at the very tail end of the Baby Boom--every good deal is gone, high costs are left to be paid, and the next (spoiled) generation won't start working until every one of us has been worked to death.
I was born in late 1959. That's pretty similar to 1961. Unlike you, I have always felt I got a swinging deal. College tuition was low where I grew up. I loved going to school. I earned two BS degrees and one JD. I was fairly bright, but no genius by any stretch. When I had trouble finding work, I solved that problem by going to work for myself. You and those like you are a puzzle to me.
Unfortunately, the current generation going to college doesn't have it so easy. I pay my son's college tuition and it costs him 10X what it cost me 33 years ago. Inflation has gone up during this period, but not tenfold!
I do not understand why there are so many whiners and complainers out there. Every generation has its challenges. We meet those challenges by obtaining education and training and learning to network with others. Whining gets you nowhere.
If someone anywhere in the baby boom generation cannot "make it" in America it speaks volumes about them unless they are disabled. Its far more difficult to get anywhere in most other countries.
The issue with medical care costs is with the insurance companies, hospitals and doctors who rake in huge profits not with seniors getting a meager social security payment.
When I was growing up those high paying Silicon Valley jobs didn't exist. It is shocking for me to see people with no loyality to the United States making huge salaries after going to school on the American tax dollar and then complaining that senior don't deserve anything. Maybe their cell phones do cause brain damage.
I worked, put my husband through school, with no help, and paid into the system which has been mismanged so don't cheat seniors just because the younger ones don't want to pay fair share or stand up to correct a broken system. What will they be saying when it is their turn to retire?
I was born in late 1959. That's pretty similar to 1961. Unlike you, I have always felt I got a swinging deal. College tuition was low where I grew up. I loved going to school. I earned two BS degrees and one JD. I was fairly bright, but no genius by any stretch. When I had trouble finding work, I solved that problem by going to work for myself. You and those like you are a puzzle to me.
Unfortunately, the current generation going to college doesn't have it so easy. I pay my son's college tuition and it costs him 10X what it cost me 33 years ago. Inflation has gone up during this period, but not tenfold!
I do not understand why there are so many whiners and complainers out there. Every generation has its challenges. We meet those challenges by obtaining education and training and learning to network with others. Whining gets you nowhere.
If someone anywhere in the baby boom generation cannot "make it" in America it speaks volumes about them unless they are disabled. Its far more difficult to get anywhere in most other countries.
Good luck. Sounds like you really need it.
So you are saying it is more about the individual and not when they were born.\
And - if you're really talking about people our age - where are their kids (who should be in their 30's and 40's)?
I work with a program in Texas that helps high school students get into college and we sometimes do community service. One of the projects we do every summer is visit a nursing facility. The age of the residents are anywhere from 55 to 95 with a wide range of illnesses. The facility's admission criteria is dependent on the needs of the resident and space available. Some have adult children who live in other states, are serving in the military or some the residents do not have children, a few had children who died.
OK folks..... I honestly do have the answer to this dilemma. It will never happen but I DO have the answer.
Here's what you do.....
Ramrod a bill thru Congress that forces all of our elected officials to receive ONLY the income of the average worker in their state. They also receive ONLY the average health care and retirement for a worker in their state. If they are already rich when elected, they have to put all their money in a blind trust and have no access. There are no loopholes because they are not allowed to do anything to abrogate the intent of this law. They are also not allowed to receive any type of support or gain from any other means. This includes receiving money or anything of value from other people or businesses.
It would work. It would get rid of the career politicians and get some people in there who want to serve the people they represent. If our representatives want or need more money, they have to make life better for the people they represent. There's a dandy incentive. If they want healthcare or retirement, they have to get it for us first. Ending their sweetheart deals will make our lives better.
None of them would vote in favor of anything that would be outrageously expensive or cost jobs in their states. We would stop bleeding foreign aid and supporting wars. We would spend in the people's best interest and for their benefit. I bet we would ALL have good healthcare and retirement in less than a decade. It would force government to put the people and their wellbeing first.
I know it's a bizarre concept. But go back and read the Constitution. Sounds like the Founding Father's intent wasn't all that different from what I am describing. Politicians and elected officials were meant to serve the people they represent.
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.
Capitalism and Socialism
