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

Skip to comments.

A Generational Divide? Why is the younger generation reluctant to fund Boomer retirement?
American Thinker ^ | 05/27/2011 | Jeffrey Folks

Posted on 05/27/2011 6:59:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: ex-snook
You forgot to factor in the cumulative effects of Abortion, Illegal immigration and the tech boom.


This has greatly reduced the numbers of people here to do the WORK!! (I.e. paying SS for the sorry @ss boomers)


Don't worry team, we will have a major correction that will take care of all the boomers in their "golden years": Hyperinflation or CWII...

21 posted on 05/27/2011 8:29:41 AM PDT by Nat Turner (I can see NOVEMBER 2012 from my house....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

There were like 15 of us paying for 1 of them. There are only 2 paying for each of us. The burden is many times as great. I’m sure the current paying generations would not have a problem with the weight of the burden we bore.


22 posted on 05/27/2011 8:36:08 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Maybe the reason some these “greedy boomers” do not have much in retirement savings is because they were too generous to the little urchin who now want to throw mom and dad under the bus. I hear this from a couple of my nieces/nephews. My sister and brother-in-law spent their whole life working their butts off to give their kids a great home, solid education through college and helped them get started in life, and now all they hear is how hard it’s going to be to make it if they have to spend so much supporting SS and MC.


23 posted on 05/27/2011 9:06:06 AM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

It was supposed to be that only the exceptionally long-lived were around to draw benefits, which is why it could have been solvent in conception. We live so much longer now that people have come to expect it to support them for the last 25 years of their lives—not possible with the amounts paid in.


24 posted on 05/27/2011 9:08:39 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

boomers are selfishly intent on bankrupting future generations and driving America into permanent decline

boomers are selfishly intent on bankrupting future generations and driving America into permanent decline

boomers are selfishly intent on bankrupting future generations and driving America into permanent decline

boomers are selfishly intent on bankrupting future generations and driving America into permanent decline

boomers are selfishly intent on bankrupting future generations and driving America into permanent decline

boomers are selfishly intent on bankrupting future generations and driving America into permanent decline


25 posted on 05/27/2011 9:09:57 AM PDT by Oculus III
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

This author needs to read “The Fourth Turning.”

Even Tony Blair, in his book “My Journey,” recognized that Social Security really was nothing more than what should have been a one-generation response to help out the Greatest Generation for saving the world for future generations by winning WWII.

Their lives got severely disrupted. Society was grateful. That is all.

None of this should have been looked at as an entitlement that just went on and on in perpetuity.


26 posted on 05/27/2011 9:22:24 AM PDT by fightinJAG (I am sick of people adding their comments to titles in the title box. Thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: redangus

“all they hear is how hard it’s going to be to make it if they have to spend so much supporting SS and MC.”

Well lets see. A house in 1970 was about a year’s income. Now it’s 4.

Education, you could pay off your school working 4 months of the year. Now, you are lucky if you can chip away at half the cost.

I did it but it took me 8 years to finish. I don’t own a house. My boomer father did, and his father in law paid for it all.

So what am I supposed to be grateful for? The burden ratio is 2:1 for soc sec and used to be 15:1. Think killing off a third of our generation was a good thing?


27 posted on 05/27/2011 9:23:15 AM PDT by BenKenobi (Honkeys for Herman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DManA

And, on a related note, the total impact of the boomer generation as it moves through the pipeline of time is rarely contemplated.

For example, today there is already a three year supply of foreclosed homes to sell. That doesn’t count the rest of the homes that are or would be on the market if there were any buyers out there.

But within the next ten years, more and more significant numbers of boomers are going to be either transitioning to nursing homes, or similar, or simply going to meet their Maker.

Thus, more and more of the homes presently owned by boomers are going to be flooding the market, relentlessly as the years go by, with even fewer buyers in sight than there are now.

I already know a couple of families who have no clue what to do with grandma’s house. It can’t be sold and no one in the family wants it or wants to live in it. I know one family with vacant homes from BOTH sides of the family.

If you think the real estate market stinks now, it is only going to get worse in terms of more and more supply and fewer and fewer buyers.


28 posted on 05/27/2011 9:27:56 AM PDT by fightinJAG (I am sick of people adding their comments to titles in the title box. Thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

The Greatest Generation saved the free world and sacrificed a lot in the process, including enduring a complete upheaval of “the way things had been done” before the war.

I can see that generation getting something like social security. Many of these men were off fighting for years, family businesses were disrupted forever, people had to leave the family farm and on and on.

But it should have ended there. Even if there were reasons for society to “repay” the Greatest Generation with some extra security (and, as I said, I can see that), there was no reason for the boomer generation to be similarly provided for. It hadn’t earned it in the same way the Greatest Generation did, and nor has any generation since.

I posted upthread: I can heartily recommend reading “The Fourth Turning” on this subject.


29 posted on 05/27/2011 9:32:20 AM PDT by fightinJAG (I am sick of people adding their comments to titles in the title box. Thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi

I think killing off a third of your generation was a holocaust and a bigger stain on our Country than slavery, and yes we are just starting to see the ramifications of that aspect of the radical feminist agenda. I personally would like to see SS and MC phased out over the next 10-15 years, but it ain’t goin’ to happen, and I say that as someone who is turning 60 this year.


30 posted on 05/27/2011 9:33:05 AM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: redangus

It’s that or default. Those are the only two options.

There’s just simply not enough of us, unless you tax us all at 80 percent.


31 posted on 05/27/2011 9:42:39 AM PDT by BenKenobi (Honkeys for Herman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Nat Turner

A system based on an ever-exploding population isn’t really viable long-term either. (Though it is the stuff Ponzi schemes are made of.)


32 posted on 05/27/2011 10:07:50 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: decimon
That was my mistake. I didn't invest that spare $100,000 back in 1970.

I should have taken that second paper route.

33 posted on 05/27/2011 10:10:22 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
That was my mistake. I didn't invest that spare $100,000 back in 1970.

I should have taken that second paper route.

You bet your bicycle. ;-)

With $100K in 1970, I could have paid cash for a house and car and some other things and had at least $50K left for investment. And that's in New York.

34 posted on 05/27/2011 10:33:02 AM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: redangus
You have it brother, it gets aggravating bailing out your Gen-X kids after a while.
35 posted on 05/27/2011 10:34:15 AM PDT by Little Bill (Sorry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Little Bill

You know, out of all dozens people I know dealing dealing with failure to launch kids that keep returning...I only know of three who provided a stay at home parent and still had that result.

This was predicted. what was sewn is being reaped, and those complaining about the harvest ridiculed those who warned them decades ago.

I am not only short of sympathy, I am going to point out that the situation is just.


36 posted on 05/27/2011 12:54:52 PM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 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