Posted on 02/21/2014 4:33:38 AM PST by TurboZamboni
The critics are right, however, that some people will choose to work less because they qualify for a tax-credit based subsidy. If not for this government program, they would have to work harder and employment numbers would be higher. So might total output or gross domestic product. This aspect of the Affordable Care Act distorts economic efficiency. But don't kid yourself that this is anything new.
Social Security has the same effect. About 41 million people currently get Social Security retirement benefits. Many still do work, at least part-time. But most do not. If not for their monthly checks, which had been promised for generations of workers over the past 75 years, many of these retirees would still be in the labor force.
Before benefits were first paid in 1940, it was the lot of most people to work at least some hours as long as they were physically able. Only a fortunate economic elite had the means to stop working because they didn't want to anymore.
If we abolished Social Security, we would increase the labor force. (I am skeptical about there being a net increase in GDP or national income, however.) But some retirees clearly are sitting around playing Hand & Foot or Rummikub because younger people are paying in FICA every month.
Ditto for Medicare. On average, Medicare recipients get two to three times as much in benefits as the actuarial value of that they paid into the system over their working lives. So there is a tremendous transfer from younger people to older ones, the largest welfare program in history.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
I don’t know many people who plan to rely on social security for retirement.
Never mind that these “models”, Social Security and Medicare, are on the brink of bankruptcy.
LOL! Socialist Schemes BUILT on the back of DEAD Americans (we hope you die before you receive any benefit we’ve confiscated from you). YOU DID BUILD THAT Mr. SOCIALIST.
COLLECTIVIST COMEDY ALERT!
I rarely take vacations, and don't anticipate ever really retiring. But as long as I am contributing to a system in which able-bodied people in good mental health can choose not to work, what's there to be upset about..
not a thing to be upset about, now get back to work
Obamacare is a killer, period.
Although SS and medicare have been poorly run and are both broke or on the brink, people paid in to both of them. Had they been run properly and the money not stolen by the federal government they would not be bankrupt.
No, but when they get there they find that it is very helpful. OTOH I try not to spend it, but to pass it down to the children/grandchildren who are paying it. Some now, hopefully a lot in my wife’s will. When SS goes bust they are likely to need it.Certainly, I don’t relate well to the concept of voting for increases in SS.The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it.
“If we abolished Social Security, we would increase the labor force”
It’s not the “labor force” we need to increase Mr Lotterman, it’s the job market and JOBS. If we eliminated Social Security there would be no jobs for people over 62.
If not for their monthly checks . . . many of these retirees would still be in the labor force.. . . and because of those checks they can stand down. This is wonderful, without doubt. The conclusion is obvious; we should reduce the retirement age to zero, and nobody will have to submit to the indignity of doing anything for anybody. And it’ll work just fine - the Chinese have plenty of money to lend us . . .
</sarcasm>
The average person will draw far more in social security then they ever contribute. A main reason the system is going bankrupt.
Meanwhile the amount paid to individuals is insufficient for a retired person to live on without additional money. Money that comes from family, savings, or frequently from other govt programs.
Social security is a poster child for failed social programs.
Imagine if the money contributed to social security was invested back into the economy?
I agree,but when it gets to the point where you can’t do what you were doing,can’t find anything suitable,& made subsistence wages when you were working......what are the options?
Its certainly a mess they’ve made. People have been trained that SS is there for their retirement. So most people haven’t saved much.
The lefts solution is to withdraw medical care so the old people die faster.
> On average, Medicare recipients get two to three times as much in benefits as the actuarial value of that they paid into the system over their working lives. So there is a tremendous transfer from younger people to older ones, the largest welfare program in history.
The writer missed the /sarc tag there. Thanks TurboZamboni.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.