Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Meet the Greedy Grandparents
Slate ^ | Dec. 10, 2003 | Steve Chapman

Posted on 12/11/2003 10:48:56 AM PST by luckydevi

When Social Security was founded, offering a federal pension at age 65, most of the people born 65 years earlier couldn't take advantage of it. They were dead. For the lucky ones who lived long enough to collect, the new pension system, founded in 1935, was meant as a modest support in the brief span before they passed on to glory. No more. Since then, life expectancy at birth in America has increased to more than 77 years. For the majority of people, that means lots of time being supported by the government. A working life is now just a tedious interregnum between two long periods of comfortable dependence.

America's elderly have never had it so good. They enjoy better health than any previous generation of old people, high incomes and ample assets, access to a host of medical treatments that not only keep them alive but let them enjoy their extra years, and a riotous multitude of ways to spoil their grandchildren. Still they are not content. From gratefully accepting a basic level of assistance back in the early decades of Social Security, America's elderly have come to expect everything their durable little hearts desire.

They often get their way, as they did recently when years of complaints finally induced Congress and the president to agree to bear much of the cost of their prescription drugs. From the tenor of the debate, you would think these medications were a terrible burden inflicted by an uncaring fate. In fact, past generations of old people didn't have to make room in their budgets for pharmaceuticals because there weren't many to buy. If you suffered from high cholesterol, chronic heartburn, or depression, you were left to primitive remedies, or none. Today, there are pills and potions for just about any complaint—except the chronic complaint that many of them are pricey. It's not enough to be blessed with medical miracles. Modern seniors also want them cheap, if not free.

That's on top of everything else they get. Retirement benefits used to be just one of the federal government's many maternal functions. But in recent years, the federal government has begun to look like an appendage of Social Security. In 2000, 35 percent of all federal spending dollars went to Social Security and Medicare. By 2040, barring an increase in total federal outlays, they'll account for more than 60 percent of the budget. And that's before you add in the prescription drug benefit. Most of the projected growth is due to rising health-care costs, not to the aging of the population, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Retirees eyeing this bounty feel no pangs of guilt, thanks to their unshakable conviction that they earned every dime by sweat and toil. In fact, economists Laurence Kotlikoff and Jagadeesh Gokhale say that a typical man reaching age 65 today will get a net windfall of more than $70,000 over his remaining years. A luckless 25-year-old, by contrast, can count on paying $322,000 more in payroll taxes than he will ever get back in benefits.

Why do we keep indulging the grizzled ones? The most obvious reason is that they are so tireless and well-organized in demanding alms. No politician ever lost an election because he was too generous to little old ladies. A lot of people are suckered by the image of financially strapped seniors, even though the poverty rate among those 65 and over has been lower than that for the population as a whole since 1974. But it's not just the interests of old coots that are being served here. Young and middle-aged adults tend to look kindly upon lavish federal generosity to Grandma because it means she won't be hitting them up for help. Paying taxes may be onerous, but it's nothing compared to the cost, financial and otherwise, of adding a mother-in-law suite to the house. Working-age folks also assume that whatever they bestow upon today's seniors will be likewise bestowed on them, and in the not too distant future. It's not really fair to blame the greatest generation for this extravagance. They are guilty, but they have an accomplice.

It's surely no coincidence that the new drug benefit is being enacted just as the first baby boomers are nearing retirement age. Nor can it be forgotten that the organization formerly known as the American Association of Retired People—it's now just AARP—has lately broadened its membership to include all the boomers it can get its wrinkled hands on. AARP, to the surprise of many, endorsed the plan. And what a surprise it is that the prescription drug program, which will cost some $400 billion over the next 10 years, could balloon to $2 trillion in the 10 years following that—when guess-who will be collecting. You would expect taxpayers in their peak earning years to recoil in horror from a program that will vastly increase Washington's fiscal obligations for decades to come. In fact, they—make that we—can see that the time to lock in a prosperous old age is now, before twentysomethings know what's hit them.

Boomers have gotten our way every since we arrived in this world, and the onset of gray hair, bifocals, and arthritis is not going to moderate our unswerving self-indulgence. We are the same people, after all, who forced the lowering of the drinking age when we were young, so we could drink, and forced it back up when we got older, so our kids couldn't. On top of that, we're used to the best of everything, and plenty of it. We weren't dubbed the Me Generation because we neglect our own needs, Junior. If politicians think the current geezers are greedy, they ain't seen nothin' yet.

But responsible middle-aged sorts may yet be brought to their senses when they realize that their usual impulse to get all they can will sooner or later collide with another boomer obsession: the insatiable desire to furnish our kids with every advantage known to humanity. Load Social Security with more obligations than it can bear, and our precious offspring will be squashed under the weight. To fund all the obligations of the Social Security system, payroll taxes will have to more than double by 2040—on top of whatever it costs to buy all those prescription drugs. At that point, our children will realize the trick we've pulled and start to hate our guts. That would be a cruel blow to a generation that thinks of itself as the most wonderful parents in history.

To avoid that fate, boomers need to recognize the need to stop writing checks that today's youngsters will have to cash. With the eager help of our own parents, we've created an entitlement that is fast becoming unaffordable. To bring Social Security into conformity with reality, we'll have to resign ourselves to a higher retirement age reflecting our prospective vigor and life expectancy. We'll have to accept more stringent controls on Medicare spending and take more responsibility for our own medical needs. We'll have to abandon our assumption that the point of the health-care system is to keep each of us alive forever. At some point—don't worry, not anytime soon—we will have to embrace a duty to stop functioning as a fiscal burden on our children and start serving as a nutritional resource for worms.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: medicare; prescriptionswindle; socialsecurity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-219 next last

1 posted on 12/11/2003 10:48:57 AM PST by luckydevi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
The Ponzi scheme coming home to roost. I have a clue for this idiot. Most "greedy grandparents" paid through the nose for social security for forty years and more, and got back far less than if they had put the money in a private retirement account.

It's not their fault. It's the fault of FDR and all the greedy politicians ever since who wanted to give the voters a chicken in every pot but didn't want to pay for it.

What we do now, I don't know, because most of the mischief was done by politicians who are now dead.
2 posted on 12/11/2003 10:56:03 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
--and another thing , everytime I see one of the greedy geezers yapping about the high cost of drugs and the awful drug companies, I'd like to take them by the throat and point out to them that they are living on borrowed time, thanks to the miracles of modern chemistry--
3 posted on 12/11/2003 10:57:31 AM PST by rellimpank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
"The Ponzi scheme coming home to roost."

Yes. Sooner or later, the bill comes due. That time is rapidly approaching.

However, if you feel so sympathetic to those who paid into SS for so long and will get back less, imagine how my generation feels, who will have paid into it for over FIFTY years, and won't see a single dime.

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

4 posted on 12/11/2003 11:02:52 AM PST by Joe Brower ("If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever." - G. Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
Another wrinkle in the story is the meager fertility rates. Social security was originally based on assumptions that families would continue to have more children. More children means more workers and more GDP.
5 posted on 12/11/2003 11:06:53 AM PST by reed_inthe_wind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
What nerve these geezers have living when they should be dead. Wonder what the expected age to die is today? Should the retirement age be 85 or 90 for today's workers so they don't drain their children [or in many of the cases someone else's children because they only have one child]. Besides I could pay for my own health insurance if only I did not have to pay school taxes.
6 posted on 12/11/2003 11:12:56 AM PST by ex-snook (Americans need Balanced Trade - we buy from you, you buy from us. No free rides.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
There is no question that Social Insecurity is going to go belly-up; its just a matter of time. The level of spending cannot be sustained. Congress has already been quietly "reforming" SS over the last two decades by raising the age for getting benefits at the same time increasing the amount of income subject to SS theft. I'm sure you have felt the crunch just as we all have. SS was put in place before I was born; I have been in favor of a major overhaul of the SS pie from the day I got my first paycheck.

So now, over my working lifetime, the RATs and the Vermin in government have stolen well over six figures from me. I'm sorry, but I want every damn penny back. And I won't settle for less. If I don't get it, there is going to be some major unpleasantness involving aspects of the 2nd Amendment, as is my birthright (and yours). I will settle for a check covering the full amount (with no income payable from it) right now. I will sign away away any future benefits IF the bastards stop taking any more SS withholding from now on. Think it will happen?

7 posted on 12/11/2003 11:14:23 AM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
As a 30-something, I don't think the "geezers" are necessarily greedy. But I do think they are a bit selfish. But so am I. My selfishness manifests itself in my desire to obliterate social security quickly enough so I may have better prospects in my retirement.

I guess I would call the "geezers" selfish and foolish; anyone with elementary math skills knows that social security is highway robbery.

A solution? Anyone 50 and over is in. Collect your check at 67 (or whatever the current age is) and shut the hell up. I'm out. I'll keep paying the tax for a short while, but after that, I'm on my own. Make "social security" a welfare program for the needy, with a stigma that would make a whore blush.

8 posted on 12/11/2003 11:17:21 AM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Most "greedy grandparents" paid through the nose for social security for forty years and more, and got back far less than if they had put the money in a private retirement account

Do you have any hard data to support that assertion? I seem to remember reading that the return is pretty darned good for those who live past their early 70s (at which point it's a break-even of sorts).

Whether or not you have hard supporting data, your statement doesn't justify the just-passed vampiric bloodsuck drug entitlement.

9 posted on 12/11/2003 11:17:35 AM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
Should the retirement age be 85 or 90 for today's workers...

That is exactly the way the vermin in Congress are going to "reform" SS. That coupled with increases in the SS "quota" every year. Soon, only those reaching the age of 85 will be eligible for "benefits"; that way, all the SS money stolen can simply be rolled-over into the general tax revenue pot and spent on other socialist projects. I wonder when the next revolution will start?

10 posted on 12/11/2003 11:18:57 AM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
We weren't dubbed the Me Generation because we neglect our own needs, Junior. If politicians think the current geezers are greedy, they ain't seen nothin' yet.

I agree. I have enough faith in this country's pragmatic, nihilistic outlook and moral relativism to realize that Junior is never going to be burdened by the Me Generation -- if they start to cost him too much, he'll simply have them euthanized.

11 posted on 12/11/2003 11:20:09 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Ponzi Scheme is right and my generation is on the ground floor of the pyramid that is going to get screwed.
12 posted on 12/11/2003 11:20:16 AM PST by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pogo101
In order not to take more out than I had stolen, I will settle for a check for the full amount taken from me over my working lifetime, as long as A) it is not subject to income tax and B) the bastards stop taking any more SS money from me. Other than that, I want every effing dime, or there's going to be trouble.
13 posted on 12/11/2003 11:22:15 AM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
To fund all the obligations of the Social Security system, payroll taxes will have to more than double by 2040—on top of whatever it costs to buy all those prescription drugs

Now, I'm certainly not going to defend extending the ugly things, but someone somewhere recently did a more dynamic analysis of the financial burdens we are going to face, and revealed a relatively large elephant in the room: when the boomers start cashing their ss checks, they'll also be withdrawing trillions of taxable dollars from their 401(k)'s. Maybe that's how we fund the last generation of ss recipients....

14 posted on 12/11/2003 11:22:38 AM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
I have a better solution:

Start a business, pay yourself a meager, subsistence-level salary, and take out most of your earnings in dividends. Dividends are not subject to FICA and Medicare payroll taxes, and under our current tax law they are taxed not as ordinary income, but at the reduced capital gains tax rate.

15 posted on 12/11/2003 11:22:44 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi


16 posted on 12/11/2003 11:24:17 AM PST by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
To fund all the obligations of the Social Security system, payroll taxes will have to more than double by 2040—on top of whatever it costs to buy all those prescription drugs. At that point, our children will realize the trick we've pulled and start to hate our guts.

Memo to the baby boomers from Gen X: We have known how you are bankrupting us for a long time already. We already hate your guts, you greedy sons of b-tches.

17 posted on 12/11/2003 11:26:03 AM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
"Why do we keep indulging the grizzled ones?"

I would love to drop Social Security all together so I can invest my own money.

But we can't just drop it for those who are currently or near eligibility who don't have jobs that provide them with opportunities for pension plans or enough salary to save for their own retirement. We need to keep the 'promise' to them.

18 posted on 12/11/2003 11:27:48 AM PST by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
I vaguely recall another poster writing that such a policy wouldn't work. Not sure what the gist was to be honest. Regardless, I'll be sure to vote for ANY candidate who favors abolishing SS.
19 posted on 12/11/2003 11:29:40 AM PST by KantianBurke (Don't Tread on Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
"Memo to the baby boomers from Gen X: We have known how you are bankrupting us for a long time already. We already hate your guts, you greedy sons of b-tches."

Gee! I'll bet your folks are reeeeally proud of how you turned out!
20 posted on 12/11/2003 11:32:01 AM PST by Maria S ("…the end is near…this time, Americans are serious; Bush is not like Clinton." Uday Hussein 4/9/03)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
"Memo to the baby boomers from Gen X: We have known how you are bankrupting us for a long time already. We already hate your guts, you greedy sons of b-tches."

Sweetie, the baby-boomers aren't even on social security yet. They've been paying into it a lot longer than you Gen Xers.

Now, go to the restroom and untwist your knickers.

21 posted on 12/11/2003 11:32:20 AM PST by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
imagine how my generation feels, who will have paid into it for over FIFTY years, and won't see a single dime.

The government is playing you all for suckers. Your inter-generational finger pointing keeps the heat off them. They are the ones who took every dime they could from the fund and used it to finanance the "new world" we live in. They left an IOU. Had they invested the money, this arguing would be hypothetical.

22 posted on 12/11/2003 11:36:00 AM PST by Glenn (What were you thinking, Al?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reed_inthe_wind
Another wrinkle in the story is the meager fertility rates.

This why the politicians have no interest in ejecting the illegal aliens. They are paying into false SS accounts keeping SS solvent.

23 posted on 12/11/2003 11:37:25 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Other than that, I want every effing dime, or there's going to be trouble.

ROTFLMAO! I like your attitude.

24 posted on 12/11/2003 11:37:59 AM PST by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
I wonder if all of the little whinie-hinies who are cursing "old geezers" can even remember how hard their folks worked to get them those cars they thought they HAD TO HAVE the day they turned 16; or the $100 pair of shoes or jeans they couldn't live without; or the $500+ spent on graduation night for a limo, corsage, dress or suit; or all of the video tapes and CD's and computers and TV's...all of which you had to have in your VERY OWN room; or all of the stuff (amounting to thousands of dollars) that you demanded you 'needed' BECAUSE EVERYBODY ELSE HAS IT!

Grow up, little kids. You've been raised in the richest country that ever existed, and you're not showing much appreciation...imho.
25 posted on 12/11/2003 11:39:06 AM PST by Maria S ("…the end is near…this time, Americans are serious; Bush is not like Clinton." Uday Hussein 4/9/03)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Most "greedy grandparents" paid through the nose for social security for forty years and more, and got back far less than if they had put the money in a private retirement account.


No kidding. However, those who are supporting them will get a far worse deal. Just because the current retirees merely got only somewhat more than their money back does not mean that they aren't living off the next generation who will never even break even, let alone come close to private investment growth.
26 posted on 12/11/2003 11:46:03 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Police officials view armed citizens like teachers union bosses view homeschoolers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Social Security isn't the only program with which the elder generations have been using to rape the younger one. Also, were a boomer to suggest to me that they've been paying into it longer and therefore they somehow have more of a claim to be a judge of the system ignores the fact that the boomers are the last generation that can expect to receive a dime from it. Big deal, they paid in more. They will get something back for what they paid. Those of us who come afterwards will get absolutely nothing.

The boomers support the subsidies to seniors only because they expect to cash in on it themselves. So the boomers have in fact been stealing the money of the generations after them already, in order to pay for their own parents' retirement, when historically this is their responsibility and not their childrens'. For some strange reason the boomers are the only generation that assumes no responsibility to support their parents in their old age.
27 posted on 12/11/2003 11:51:59 AM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
What nerve these geezers have living when they should be dead. Wonder what the expected age to die is today? Should the retirement age be 85 or 90 for today's workers so they don't drain their children


Your exaggeration aside, if the system is to be sustained, and generationally equitable, then the retirement age should be adusted annually to ensure that it is self-funding on an annual basis. No "trust fund" for Congress to spend. If you are in a boom generation, you retire a few years later. If in a bust generation, you retire a few years sooner. And since you know from birth whether you are in a boom or bust, you have ample time to save, if you prefer not to have a delayed retirement.

Retiring early is nifty, but not if it is enabled by stealing from workers who have no hope of retiring anywhere near that early.
28 posted on 12/11/2003 11:52:18 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Police officials view armed citizens like teachers union bosses view homeschoolers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
We need to keep the 'promise' to them.


Why keep a promise that they can retire before 72 when those who are funding their leisure have no hope for retiring any sooner?

And there has been no promise made by current workers. The promise was made by those elected years ago by the geezers. Being soaked for 15% of your income is not "making a promise". (And the few geezers got soaked anywhere near that bad.)
29 posted on 12/11/2003 11:55:09 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Police officials view armed citizens like teachers union bosses view homeschoolers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Sweetie, the baby-boomers aren't even on social security yet. They've been paying into it a lot longer than you Gen Xers.


...at lower rates, with full vesting for lower earnings, and with much earlier anticipated retirement ages.
30 posted on 12/11/2003 11:56:24 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Police officials view armed citizens like teachers union bosses view homeschoolers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
Moron S

Do you understand the difference between your parent or grandparent giving you money and sacrificing and a young person trying to start his/her own family being forced to pay for people who aren't even related to him/her?
31 posted on 12/11/2003 11:58:10 AM PST by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
I wonder if all of the little whinie-hinies who are cursing "old geezers" can even remember how hard their folks worked to get them those cars they thought they HAD TO HAVE the day they turned 16...


You are confusing family dynamics with government tax policy.

Just because some boomers screwed up their own kids by spoiling them does not mean that they also are justified in stealing from others of their kids' generation.
32 posted on 12/11/2003 11:58:37 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Police officials view armed citizens like teachers union bosses view homeschoolers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
Were my parents concerned at any time with actually raising kids rather than simply shuffling them off into government-indoctrination warehouses, more concerned with motherhood than feminism and the indulgent pseudomysticism of 'self-actualization', more concerned with fatherhood than with easy divorce, alimony checks, child support payments, and using their children as weapons against each other in decade-long custody wars, I might actually care what they think about how I grew up.

They'd probably be scandalized, if they cared to know anything (for which there is no evidence whatsoever). After all, many of us turned out to be conservative, proved to be perceptive enough despite the propaganda to understand that abortion is child sacrifice, and to love our country. The Vietnam generation would be frankly aghast to learn that the generations after them are nowhere near as indulgent of bleeding-heart liberalism.

I would care what boomers thought if there was a reason to do so. I see none. 99 out of 100 boomers care for nothing but their own self-gratification, so I really don't see how anyone else can be expected to give a whit about them.
33 posted on 12/11/2003 12:00:08 PM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
I tell my kids that they are just handing it over to Mom n Dad..Of course, God willing, we will leave them what they will need since they sure won't get from the defunct Ponzi scheme....
34 posted on 12/11/2003 12:00:34 PM PST by litehaus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
And another thing:

Appreciation for what, for whom?

If my mom needs me, I'll be there for her.

But why should I subsidize the WEALTHIEST SEGMENT of the American population just because they want cheap drugs.

Wouldn't it make more sense to have strict means testing where only the truly indigent had access to the drugs?

And you do know that with this prescription plan that the companies will actually make a killing now? ANd that private firms will start reducing retirement plans and health plans because they can just pawn it off on government(iow, US.)
35 posted on 12/11/2003 12:01:00 PM PST by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
She's apparently none too bright, as she compares parents providing, even indulging, THEIR OWN KIDS with government extortion and the ruination of the futures of millions of citizens.

That'd be like me being killed for my organs so that someone I don't even know can receive a transplant because once upon a time, I was "given life" and "supported."
36 posted on 12/11/2003 12:02:59 PM PST by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Glenn
You miss the point that the politicians who were running the government were voted in by the generations that preceded mine, and thus were installed long before I was born.

Mine has been the non-pleasure of having to fight them all my life. And as you probably know already, being professional bureaucrats, they are quite hard to dislodge once they are in place. Especially when they just keep upping the offers of largesse.

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

37 posted on 12/11/2003 12:10:12 PM PST by Joe Brower ("If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever." - G. Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
"Think it will happen?"

No. Unfortunately.

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

38 posted on 12/11/2003 12:12:12 PM PST by Joe Brower ("If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever." - G. Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: litehaus
I agree with your approach 100%. That's what my wife and I are doing for our kids. It's called 'self-sufficiency'. The way things used to be.

Real estate is very profitable right now ...

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

39 posted on 12/11/2003 12:14:05 PM PST by Joe Brower ("If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever." - G. Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Skywalk
I am simply astonished to see people try and defend the generation that brought us 40 million murdered American children.
40 posted on 12/11/2003 12:20:52 PM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
Social Security isn't the only program with which the elder generations have been using to rape the younger one.

I am entirely in sympathy with you. My preferred metaphor (to "rape") is that of vampirism. And eventually we become vampires ourselves ...

41 posted on 12/11/2003 12:21:31 PM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
The WWII generation may have a legitimate claim at SS as they fought against Hitler and the such. But what did the Baby Boomers do? Help bring us what their parents fought against. I don't want to pay for them, and I especially don't want my kids paying for them. BTW I'm on the tail end of the BB generation.
42 posted on 12/11/2003 12:28:54 PM PST by stevio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
Funny article to be coming from Slate. They supported this stuff.
43 posted on 12/11/2003 12:31:11 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
You need a time out son, or maybe a little therapy to help you get through this oedipal thing you got going.
44 posted on 12/11/2003 12:36:09 PM PST by wtc911 (I would like at least to know his name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: stevio
You certainly are on the tail end of something.
45 posted on 12/11/2003 12:39:46 PM PST by wtc911 (I would like at least to know his name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Revenge is the best therapy. Hope the boomers are prepared, because when they are weak and no longer able to defend themselves, those of us who have to live with their legacy will treat them as they treated the weak and powerless themselves. (Check out your local abortuary if you need a sample.)

I'm solidly pro-life, but when it comes to euthanasia for baby boomers I will be conspicuously absent from the opposition.
46 posted on 12/11/2003 12:41:27 PM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: stevio
The baby boomers paved the way for, among other atrocities, Bill Clinton, and that minor little matter of killing 40 million children for their personal convenience.
47 posted on 12/11/2003 12:43:04 PM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: pogo101
I understand that we will soon be sending retirement checks down to our wonderful neighbors across the border, thank you GWB, this admn is full of lunatics.
48 posted on 12/11/2003 12:43:28 PM PST by douglas1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
Someone must have really touched you the wrong way. Far too much emotional pathology on display here.
49 posted on 12/11/2003 12:47:58 PM PST by wtc911 (I would like at least to know his name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: luckydevi
Young and middle-aged adults tend to look kindly upon lavish federal generosity to Grandma because it means she won't be hitting them up for help. Paying taxes may be onerous, but it's nothing compared to the cost, financial and otherwise, of adding a mother-in-law suite to the house. Working-age folks also assume that whatever they bestow upon today's seniors will be likewise bestowed on them, and in the not too distant future. It's not really fair to blame the greatest generation for this extravagance. They are guilty, but they have an accomplice
__________

This part I disagree with. Plenty of folks would be happy to build an addition for the mother or mil as long as she would be willing to add something to the family and not treat it as a free ride. My mother has lived with us for two years and she broke the agreement that she live here rent free but was to help with the cleaning and the children so now she pays us rent. We opened our home to our mother and all she does is take. She's a baby boomer. I'm sorry, I only have anectdotal experience, but I do think this generation of people are some of the most greedy around. Some of the stuff they did to me, I can't bear to see happen to them--no home, back turned on them. Yet when you extend them help they behave as if they should not do anything in return or show any gratiousness.
Sorry, this is a sore spot for me. Perhaps I have incredibly greedy parents, but I don't think I'm alone in this. I resent that my parents generation want to suck us dry and take from their grandchildren a secure future. I resent that they do this while enjoying travel and all kinds of material amenities. It will be my children who won't have squat when they are old because they were robbed of their ability to save. They will be the ones trying to actually survive on SS alone.
50 posted on 12/11/2003 12:49:01 PM PST by cupcakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-219 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson