Posted on 01/08/2008 5:58:42 PM PST by Vigilanteman
Another option to safe Social Security is to legalize mandatory euthanasia for baby boomer liberals.
In the abstract, it’s not a bad idea. However, it’s clearly not feasible.
The three solutions are:
Gradually continue to increase the retirement age
Double the earnings limit
Modestly increase FICA taxes
None of these are permanent fixes, but they will keep things solvent until a permanent fix can be installed.
Analysis by a post-Boomer, judging from the spelling...
As I’m 64 with no plans to retire or collect yet, I think I can say this.
My generation and the boomers younger don’t deserve SS. We squandered the Social Security Surplus. Starting in the 60s under LBJ until now in 2008 we have consistently paid enough into SS to keep it solvent. But we demanded immediate gratification and using SS money to ease our guilt feelings about the poor, Blacks, seniors older than us and worst of all, drug and alcohol abusers and malingerers on SSI. SS is bankrupt because of us. We do not deserve it to be baled out. We have no ethical or moral basis to demand that our grandchildren (or immigrants or anyone else) to pay for our own mistakes. We should reap what we sowed.
Being one that did the sex, drugs and rock n' roll ... but grew up before killing myself ... I think I like your idea.
I will study this.
I plan on working til I am 70 or 72. I plan on living with one of the children and have told them that the house and property goes to the one who cares for me. They are interested.
Somebody better start breeding fast, because I plan on getting my checks starting at the end of the year. I’ve put over $100 grand into this Ponzi scheme and want some of it back.
“I’ve put over $100 grand into this Ponzi scheme and want some of it back.”
You will likely get SOME of it back.
Two of your suggestions involve large tax increases. They will be permanent tax increases. The conservative approach is to privatize the system. Allow people out of the system if they forfeit benefits. Provide incentives for people to work by eliminating payroll taxes and reducing benefits.
You insult Mr. Ponzi!
That would be an understatement.
This does not have a chance of ever even getting scheduled for a vote.
The US Government is the largest employer in the nation. They have an almost unstoppable lobby in Congress.
Ever notice when the government runs out of money and the government workers get laid off when they come back they get paid for the time they were off. That’s power at the polls in motion baby.
Morally, you are correct, at least insofar as you are addressing the boomers who engaged in this squander.
Politically, however, you know they won't reap what they sowed; they'll push it off on the next generation.
This is why the outlined plan is more humane and more politically possible.
Morally, you are correct, at least insofar as you are addressing the boomers who engaged in this squander.
Politically, however, you know they won't reap what they sowed; they'll push it off on the next generation.
This is why the outlined plan is more humane and more politically possible.
The vast majority of America does not work for the government. Just bringing this up would highlight a division we need to highlight sooner rather than later-- one America which pays the taxes and one America which consumes them.
The America which consumes the taxes should not be living better than the America which pays the taxes. What will happen to the former when the later decides they've had enough?
Fundamentally, the system must renege on promises it made to people when it took their money, take money from other people with no reasonable likelihood of repayment, or do some of both. Privatizing the system might reduce the amount of money that gets looted in future, but won't solve the fundamental problem that the government borrowed money from some people and gave it away to others.
The third proposal said “modest increase in FICA taxes,” not a large one. And privatising the system doesn’t have enough support, though it has more than 20 years ago.
Speak for yourself, Bob. I didn’t approve of ANY of those give away programs you list. We should be demanding the same funding of “pension” liabilities on the part of government at all levels which is required of private companies, and legislators who approve benefit levels without proper funding should be in prison (with their own generous pensions cut off).
Easy, make the Senate and House politicians a part of retirement that the rest of the taxpayers are under. It would get fixed PDQ!
The vast majority of America doesn’t vote either, while government workers vote in larger numbers than the population at large.
I agree with everything you say but political reality is what it is. Ask any elected politician they will readily admit they are not about to buck the Government employees union.
Just think about it, if you threaten government workers jobs they are going to turn out at the polls in record numbers. Do you think the supporters of this plan will turn out in similar numbers? I doubt that congressmen are going to bet their jobs on it.
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.