Posted on 01/29/2023 9:19:11 PM PST by SeekAndFind
How about get rid of social security instead?
I just retired at 62 and have no desire to go back to work, let alone another 13 years. One of the main reasons was what you said, that we older people don’t fit in with younger people and their terrible work ethics. Employers also subtly and not so subtly start pushing you out, too.
the one we have now is the poster child for why its a very bad idea...
Most of them are unteachable, because they THINK they know everything. They’re lazy, entitled, on their phones, unprofessional, disrespectful and a real drag to be around. Many supervisors are inept when it comes to dealing with them and expect older workers to carry the dead weight that would have easily been fired 20 years ago, and rightfully so.
I'm 66, retired and will never join AARP for one reason only: their militant cheerleading for all things DNC. Really bad during Obama years, which we are once again under.
When Social Security was started, life expectancy was about 65. It was intended that you were supported for just a few years prior to death and maybe not even make it that far. With increasing life span, people now expect to have 10-15-20 years of retirement.
Social Security also destroyed people’s motivation to save for retirement by making people think the government would take care of them. During my working years I paid into SS the max required. I once did the math on how much money I would have had if I had been allow to keep and invest my money in a IRA or the like. How much I am going to actually retrieve from the gov’t in SS payments is going to be much smaller. All the payments I put in are going to be diverted to other people.
A system which, as the article points out, is doomed by demographics. That which cannot continue will not continue. You will maybe get a benefit, but your grandchildren, assuming you have any, will curse your memory.
If you did not have kids then you will retire on the backs of other people's kids. If you did not have kids then you should have been able to retire nicely on the money you did not spend raising kids.
The people broke the deal by not having enough kids to pay for it all
Medical science increased our average lifespans considerably since these programs were implemented....thus meaning more years receiving a pension for everybody.
Less money coming in (relatively) and more money going out does not work. Trying to import 3rd worlders to take the place of the kids they never had doesn't work. It turns out humans are not a tabula rasa. They're not just going to be good little workers bees. They come with cultures and values of their own. If you're not the one making and raising them, those cultural values/expectations are not going to be yours.
So if outsourcing having kids doesn't work, what's left? Raising the retirement age and/or dramatically slashing pensions. There's no other choice no matter how angry anybody gets about it.
In a just system, interest from savings would at least match inflation. After 40 years of work, the money saved should earn enough to live comfortably. Instead, every year, bit by bit, savings are eroded.
Close the border and impose a fee of say $50,000 per H1b visa per year and viola! American companies will magically discover older workers and other Americans are employable after all.
Raise the cap to 400K. That’s more reasonable.
Life expectancy in 1941 for a 30 year old man was 69 years old vs 74 today— so the “big” difference” was due to deaths in early childhood, not that people are living much longer today. The authors basic premise is false, and thus his entire argument crumbles.
Why could someone like you not shift to a butt-sitting job at that time? Hypothetically, that is.
I keep thinking there is a business opportunity there. I’m probably missing multimillion dollar idea somewhere.
It was rolling strong in the 1990s.
“Fine. Who is going to hire people in their 60s and 70s so they can earn a living until the Mises Libertarians think they should be eligible for Social Security?”
Hi, welcome to Target. Is there anything I can help you find today?
iF “Life expectancy at birth today is 78 years”, then raising the eligibility age to 75 seems grossly too high, as almost half of payees wouldn’t ever live to receive benefits.
The other thing that needs to be considered, is that as people age, they develop an increasing number of ailments. It’s true that some people can keep working, but others are sidelines by conditions that they may be able to live with for many years but doesn’t make them ideal employees.
Started investing when the Dow was in the 700’s. It’s now 33-34,000. Had I put my SS contributions into a managed account, I’d likely do much better than what SS is giving me now. But this is unacceptable to the government since it would turn us into a nation of capitalist investors.
Linda Graham will propose this as a GOP top priority in October 2024 in order to sandbag the election of Trump or DeSantis.
“My late Dad and I retired at 67, that was enough.”
My late Dad retired at 62. I was hoping to do that also, but the current idiot in the Whitehut and the one prior to Trump made it nearly impossible. Trump got me to a good point, then Biden screwed it all up. So 67 it is.
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.