Tired Of Bending Over (Social Security)

Komo1000news ^ | 2/28/04 | Ken Schram

[qam1]

SEATTLE - Get ready to bend over, baby-boomers.

In essence, that was Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's message to everyone born between 1946 and 1964.

At 78 years of age, Greenspan's too old to bend over himself, so he figures it should be my generation that grabs its ankles.

Seems Alan G. is wringing his wrinkled hands over the 77 million baby boomers that'll begin retirement in four short years.

'Yikes!' said the man who surely collects his Social Security check every month, 'We've gotta do something 'cause there's not enough Social Security money to give us any security.'

And Alan G's proposal?

Well rather than raise taxes, why not just CUT the benefits all us boomers would be getting when we retire?

The other Greenspan brain burp?

Keep pushing the age of retirement HIGHER.

That means while we could still retire at age 65, we wouldn't get those DECREASED Social Security benefits until we're, oh let's say 104!

Hey, here's an idea Alan.

Why not suggest the president spend less and get the deficit lower.

Maybe advising him to quit giving tax cuts to his rich friends.

'Cause I'll tell ya Alan, my generation is tired of bending over for yours.

Want to share your thoughts with Ken Schram? You can e-mail him at kenschram@komo4news.com

[reluctantwarrior]

Does the author of the article have freep mail?

[Intolerant in NJ]

'Yikes!' said the man who surely collects his Social Security check every month, 'We've gotta do something 'cause there's not enough Social Security money to give us any security.'...this simply can't be - I remember the Social Security Commission in the mid '80's, headed by D.P. Moynihan - recommended big increases in witholding taxes, etc. but guaranteed that the changes then would keep SS solvent forever and no cut-backs or hiked taxes would ever again be needed - the more money you give government, the more it spends.......

[writer33]

Yeah. I can't blame you. My entire focus is the wife's retirement first. With so many scholarships available now, it's best to plan for the retirement. I would count that as a smart move. Don't count on SS.

[GOPJ]

Democrats have been putting ex-welfare folks on Social Security Disability. Some can collect 50 to 60 years without a social worker encouraging work.

Visit your local social security office and count the people under 40. They'll outnumber the old folks. Democrats want generational warfare.

Conservatives should separate social security from liberal social security add-ons.

'Cause I'll tell ya Alan, my generation is tired of bending over for yours.

[jolie560]

I know that for a fact. Social Security Disability and SSI are the new welfare for the under 40 bums. No further questions asked. No further re-hab and re-training required.

Just collect and collect.

[qam1]

Boomers are whining because they might have to (gasp!) wait a couple of years before they get their piddly checks? And they think that's bending over?

Of course, Notice the author doesn't even once mention keeping SS solvent for future generations or how he doesn't show any concern for how the current generation is suppose to pay for (Hey Lets raise taxes on our kids and grandkids), He doesn't care what happens afterwards as long as he gets his. The me,me,me,me generation at it's finest

[Siamese Princess]

I'm afraid it's the post boomers that will be getting the shaft, taking it in the backside, when this ill-conceived, fraudulent, multitrillion dollar house of cards comes crashing down. It should never have been implemented.

Some old bag who retired 20 years ago and is still alive has done well off the system -- she has gotten back far more than she and her late husband paid into it. Not that she appreciates this fact. Social Security originally was not a pension, but merely a little something to prevent complete destitution. It paid little but took little out a worker's paycheck, leaving him with more money to save and invest for himself. As with every government program, it expanded steadily (e.g., Disability was added in 1950) and only become a pension program in the 1970s.

People retiring now aren't profiting as much off of Social Security (they paid higher rates in SS taxes) and as for the baby boomers, such as myself, we're getting hosed. Back in the late 90s, someone (Alan Greenspan, I think) said that a person born in 1960 could expect a 1.8% return on her Social Security. She would do better sticking the money into a CD account, even with today's low interest rates.

[Edison]

"The sad fact is that the Social Security Ponzi Scheme gives back far less than you put into it"

I don't think it works that way...ex: lets say a person works 30 years with an average salary of 40K @ today's 6+% SS tax, that only comes out to approx $72,000. It only takes about 6-7.5 years to collect that money thru SS. Life expectancy is 8 years past 65 for the average man, so you are getting more than you put in UNLESS you averaged over 40k your entire working career. I seriously doubt that most baby boomers averaged 40k over a 30 career span.

Edison

[JPJones]

I was born in 63, but refuse and resent being called a 'baby boomer'. I have absolutely nothing in common, with the values, ideas, experiences, or politics that define that self-centered, lazy, pompous, well-fed generation. Please do not include those born in 1963 as a baby boomers. It just ain't right!

[hunter112]

Believe me, no more than five years of boomers will get anything, unless they're absolutely dirt poor, and completely incapable of working. And even those will get cut off after another five. Maybe when the fraud is exposed, you won't have to pay it anymore, we've had it sucked out of us our whole working lives. Most of us have been under the amount where they stop taking the tax out, so we've always paid it on whatever we earned.

Frankly, I'd be surprised if your generation, or the one following you doesn't put a bullet through our heads to avoid paying us.

[Siamese Princess]

Democrats have been putting ex-welfare folks on Social Security Disability. Some can collect 50 to 60 years without a social worker encouraging work.

Visit your local social security office and count the people under 40. They'll outnumber the old folks. Democrats want generational warfare.

Yes, I have been wondering how many welfare recipients were shifted onto Disability. I don't think that the Democrats want generational warfare -- they want as many people as possible dependent on a government check -- either as recipients of or working for the government. They tend to vote for the Democrats.

[Gunslingr3]

Gut the program and give us our damned money back.

It should be ended immediately, but it's not possible to 'give your money back', because it was collected and pooled as general revenue according to the Supreme Court, and spent without any strings attached. You enjoyed those social security benefits already in the form of services our government provides from tax revenue annually.

Greenspan is trying to head off the creation of mandatory structural deficits (social security taxes becoming less than expenses in a few years, requiring borrowing at a minimum, or the allocation of other or proposed taxes). He knows what happens when you increase the SSI taxes, because that's what was done previously when he chaired Reagan's commission on the subject. He knows Congress will blow the money and it will just end up increasing the share of GDP seized and allocated by government. He brought this up last March, he's brought it up plenty in the past. It can't be ignored much longer before it starts increasing deficit and impacts Greenspan's ability to manipulate the printing of dollars.

At the end of the day, the government can just print checks to cover those rising SSI costs, but Greenspan is trying to head off the dangerous inflationary pressure he sees from it. I think he wants the reins of money creation in the Fed's hands more tha in the hand's of Congress, but I don't know if they'll act.

We're too big to Weimar, right?

[cherry]

I can't do my job up into the 60's and in fact, I won't.....

if the govt insists that people with stressful jobs are on the same level with people with comfortable, non-challenging jobs, then the only alternative is to seek early retirment thru disability....

because its comparing apples to oranges when it comes to difficult work....

[Chewbacca]

If the Government would allow me to opt out of social security I would do it in a heart beat and they could keep all the money I have currently paid into it.

It was stolen from me without my consent, has already been spent by the Government, and I know that I will never see a cent of it anyway when I get old.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

Well, those touted abotions have killed off all the would be wage earners, so now the Mexicans must be imported, just so the feds can collect FICA taxes which is near 16% of their wage earnings,(1/2 worker/ 1/2 employer) even if they never pay one cent fed or state income taxes.

Damn it is a brave new world what?

[Ferndina]

I believe your employer has a matching portion to pay into SS that goes along with your payment unless you are self employed then you pick up the full 12+ %.

[Siamese Princess]

Believe me, no more than five years of boomers will get anything, unless they're absolutely dirt poor, and completely incapable of working. And even those will get cut off after another five. Maybe when the fraud is exposed, you won't have to pay it anymore, we've had it sucked out of us our whole working lives. Most of us have been under the amount where they stop taking the tax out, so we've always paid it on whatever we earned.

It's been predicted that eventually, if Social Security exists at all, it will be only for the genuinely needy and recipients will be forced to live in old age homes. Back to the future -- this was the way it was a century ago.

Frankly, I'd be surprised if your generation, or the one following you doesn't put a bullet through our heads to avoid paying us.

I think that's likely. There will be too many people on the receiving end, for SS, Medicare, nursing home care, etc., and too few people paying the bills. It will be difficult to cut back on "the third rail," so cut back on people. It will be easy to do -- for example, even now, there are many people in nursing homes with no one to care if they live or die. The solution suggests itself.

[hunter112]

Yep, the baby boomer generation has already taught the younger generations that you shouldn't even be alive if nobody wants you, they know they're missing a lot of their peer group because of free and easy abortion.

Glad I got into something I can do till I drop over dead, and enjoy every day of it.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Gut the program and give us our damned money back.

---

Our money has already been spent. It's gone.

The notion that Boomers are getting screwed by setting back the retirement age a few years is absurd. Those who oppose such plans simply want earners who are funding their retirements to pay in, without a shred of hope of enjoying the same benefit.