Posted on 06/24/2004 10:41:06 AM PDT by qam1
Whether you blame it on greedy geezers, selfish yuppies, young slackers or an irresponsible Congress, our tax dollars keep being spent for non-essentials while Social Security and Medicare edge closer to the financial brink.
The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office issued a report last week projecting that Social Security will in 15 years begin paying more in benefits than it collects in payroll taxes and that it will become insolvent in 2052. That date was, in fact, a pleasant surprise since estimates earlier this year put the insolvency doomsday 10 years earlier.
It will take only comparatively modest changes -- in retirement age, benefits and payroll tax rates -- to fix Social Security. Fixing Medicare will take whopping tax increases or benefit cutbacks that no prominent politician so far has been willing to discuss out loud.
Both programs require fixing because people scheduled to receive benefits are increasing in number far faster than those paying for them. Depression-born kids, such as myself, were few in number, had modest expectations and typically saved for their retirements. But we are being supplanted now by the huge Woodstock generation, born after World War II, which has not saved and will be looking to maintain the standard of living which it always has felt was its due. Boomers' life expectancies, moreover, will be longer than my generation's.
If demography is fate, our fate is cloudy. According to present estimates, the number of Americans over 65 will double over the next 35 years while those younger than 65 will increase by only 10 percent. I suspect that Asian and Latino immigrants, in particular, are likely to make the latter number closer to 15 than to 10 percent. Even so, that still will leave too few working-age Americans to support retirees.
These so-called entitlement programs -- entitlements because everyone, regardless of income, qualifies for their benefits at a certain age -- are huge federal burdens. When you add the billions needed for defense, war on terror, homeland security and debt service, there is little left over for so-called discretionary spending for all other federal functions ranging from highway construction to aid for education.
Given these realities, you would think that congressional Republicans and Democrats would since 9/11 have restrained unnecessary spending. The opposite has been true. They have added lard to the federal budget at an alarming rate.
A few days after the CBO red-ink projection regarding Social Security, the House of Representatives passed corporate tax legislation carrying an 11-year price tag of a net $34 billion in new federal obligations. It included a $10 billion buyout for tobacco farmers; benefits for the ethanol, ranching, horse racing, forest products, fishing and archery industries; and breaks for ship operators, native Alaskan whalers and importers of ceiling fans and nuclear steam generators.
Even conscientious officeholders like to bestow goodies on their constituencies, and take credit for them, without considering whether the spending is justified. Washington Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Norm Dicks, for example, are quick to claim parenthood for the billions in federal dollars attached to such dubious enterprises as the Boeing 767 air tanker project and Sound Transit light rail.
It happens at state and local levels, too. Gov. Gary Locke, legislators and local officials point proudly to their support for the more than $3 billion in extortion money pledged to The Boeing Co. when it threatened to take some assembly operations elsewhere. Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and City Council members consider it good news when they allocate money to a questionable Seattle monorail system or public subsidies for corporations able to operate without them. Meantime, vital public school, transportation, public safety and social service priorities lack funds.
Many theories abound as to why we can't get a handle on this syndrome. Robert Putnam in his book, "Bowling Alone," blames the baby-boomer generation -- the same boomers about to strain Social Security and Medicare and who now dominate our political, media and other institutions. Boomers collectively are so narcissistic and self-serving, he says, that they refuse to defer any immediate gratification for the larger, long-term good.
We Depression kids might like that explanation but we would be unwise to buy into it. Fact is: The United States, as other non-totalitarian societies, seldom moves on even the biggest challenges until forced to do so. We entered World War II, for example, only after Pearl Harbor was attacked and after Hitler and imperial Japan had long since overrun Europe and Asia. The Greatest Generation wasn't great until called on in crisis. We've always in the end done what we had to do -- at least until now.
Ted Van Dyk has been involved in national policy and politics since 1960. E-mail: t_van_dyk@hotmail.com
Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social aspects that directly effects Gen-Reagan/Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
Aaargh! The only "fix" Social Security needs is a quick death.
I think Republicans and Democrats will continue to milk the taxpayers for SS and Medicare as long as they can. What happens afterward? There is little evidence they care.
Fix them? How about we KILL both programs and allow private enterprise to provide solutions?
Fat chance. The big overgrown bloated government won't allow it.
This statement assumes that social security and medicare are necessities, let alone Constitutionally permissible. These two gargantuan programs have become "necessities" because the nanny state has conditioned people to rely on government goodies.
A lot of people are still pretty head-in-the-sand when it comes to this. Got into it with my wife's aunt and uncle over at the Father's Day gathering last Sunday. Retirement came up as a subject, and I opined that SS wouldn't be there by the time I get to that age (I'm 48 now). My wife's uncle (retired, and drawing benefits) and aunt (state pencil pusher for the liquor control board) think that if "The Government" doesn't continue to pay out benefits, there will be civil war.
I said, "Where are they going to get the money? If they raise the payroll tax to the point where it covers the baby boom generation, you'll see civil war coming from the other side of the age spectrum!" Apparently, this was too complicated for them to understand, as they think the baby boom makes no difference to the equation. They just believe that Big Government will always be there to write a fat check. Unless of course, we re-elect Bush!
Unfortunately, their mindset is typical of the reasons that this state will vote for Kerry again, and a host of Rats at the state officeholder level. Sigh.
Don't count me as one who wants you to pay for it. I switched over to a line of work that I can enjoy doing until the day I drop dead. And when my body stops working, its time to check out of Hotel Earth with some dignity.
The only thing I favor increasing the deficit for is to fight our overseas enemies. It was good that previous generations borrowed and spent the money needed to win WWII, and the Cold War (what I call WW III). Now, if we have to go into hock to defeat Islam (WW IV), it makes a better world for the future generations of Americans.
If this guy is waiting for the Boomers to become a Great Generation, he is in for one hell of a disappointment. Like their counterparts in previous generational cycles of history, the Boomers will be spoiled brats until the last one of them is cold as clay. And the subsequent three generations will be paying for the debt they racked up during their party.
Our next example of the "Great Generation" (Hero archetype) is currently 0 to 20 years old (most of the men (and women) in Afghanistan and Iraq are either the older members of Gen-Y or younger members of Gen-X).
Since this Islamic War Against Civilization will probably continue for at least twenty more years, it is likely that this entire younger generation will be personally affected by it. If the nation survives, these Heroes will repeat the rebuilding process the world experienced in the 1950's.
Unfortunately, these Heroes will give birth to the next cycle of Boomer-type kids. If we teach them well, hopefully they will keep their boots regularly implanted in their kids' behinds to avoid a repeat of this century's disasterous liberal policies.
While I know that I need to save for my own retirement. I really do not believe that SS will be there when it comes my turn (I'm 29). So I wish I did not have to pay for it.
I thought Gen-Y which would be those who are 8 - 23 (or 28 depending on the definition) years old right now are the next "Great Generation"
Since this Islamic War Against Civilization will probably continue for at least twenty more years, it is likely that this entire younger generation will be personally affected by it. If the nation survives, these Heroes will repeat the rebuilding process the world experienced in the 1950's.
I don't think it will last that long, Iraq and Afghanistan will stabilize and be shinning examples, The Baby Boom generation (those born from 1979 - ~1990) of Iran are actually a great generation who unlike our baby boomers will bring positive change. That doesn't mean there won't be trying times ahead but assuming Kerry doesn't get in (Then all bets are off) you are going to see great changes in the middle east in the next couple of years. But yes Gen-X and Y will be and are effected greatly.
Unfortunately, these Heroes will give birth to the next cycle of Boomer-type kids. If we teach them well, hopefully they will keep their boots regularly implanted in their kids' behinds to avoid a repeat of this century's disasterous liberal policies.
I'm not sure Gen-Z with be like the baby boomers because they will be living through the Social Security "Crisis" so they will be more like the Silents, Their kids may be the next Baby Boomers but I doubt they will be as bad. The Baby Boomers who control the media and academia right now maybe patting themselves on the back on what a wonderful, great generation they are but once they are gone history isn't going to be kind to them and I don't think any future generation would want to or be allowed to emulate them.
It works like this: All money paid into the SS would be refunded back to the worker via a lump-sum payment. The worker must put this money into a Private Retirement & Medical Account (PeRMA) and a minimum of 10% of their annual earnings into said account.
Those 51 and older will be given the option to opt out of SS and Medicare and the money they put in will be refunded back to them, or they can remain on SS and Medicare, in which the systems will phase itself out over a number of years.
The PeRMAs would be overseen by a non-profit board that meets quarterly to discuss the rates. Private health or financial companies would be free to enter tihs new market and issue plans. The SS numbers that everyone receives now would be used for these new accounts.
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.