Posted on 01/17/2005 12:44:45 AM PST by kattracks
THE AARP's new ad cam paign strips the debate over Social Security re form down to its core tension: One generation of future retirees vs. the next.The Social Security debate has always threatened to devolve into an intergenerational feud — for the problem is this: In two decades, if Social Security isn't overhauled, a shrinking class of young and middle-aged workers will have to pay higher taxes to support a growing class of retired baby boomers.
[snip]
This month, the AARP — the lobbying group for Americans over 50 — came out against President Bush's plan to allow workers to invest some Social Security taxes in personal accounts. The group ran a full-page ad in 60 newspapers to make this point: "If we feel like gambling, we'll play the slots."
[snip]
The AARP lobbyists haven't even seen Bush's formal proposals yet — and they're summarily rejecting them. This may be a blunder. First: The AARP may be wrong about the boomers. Senior citizens broke for Bush in the '04 election — 53 percent to 46 percent — despite Bush's emphasis on entitlement reform. An even greater percentage of younger seniors — those between 60 and 65 — voted Bush. If boomers follow their lead as they age, they'll prove the AARP got a signature issue wrong — and destroy the AARP's political clout.
Boomers should be eager to revisit Social Security with Bush — to see if they can take advantage of the improvements in stock-market investing and retirement-risk modeling that have taken place over the past 20 years.
[snip]
If some boomers want to let their retirement-insurance program collapse onto itself within their lifetimes, their children had better vote for representatives who will let them put more of their money away while they still can.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Clarification "because of the AARP's opposition to..."
that is simple and catchy but I would personally opt to get nothing back. My contributions have been squandered and that is history. But I have saved enough (at age 42) that I can probably retire in 20 years or so. I could even retire now, but I would have to live in a cave.
Fine, you can give yours to somebody who's never worked, if you want.
Or donate it to your favorite charity.
JUST GIVE IT BACK!!!
Robbing houses? I resent the hell out of the implication that I'm a thief.
Not until I researched my column this week did I discover how AARP is run. The Board controls both the nomination and election of its own replacements. AARP is a dictatorship. There is no hint of democracy in its Board -- which of course controls both its money and its staff. Click below for details.
Congressman Billybob
Take a look at the internal election processes of AARP that I researched and wrote about in AARP this week. I'd be delighted to play a small part in such a revolt, if it could be launched.
Congressman Billybob
The personal savings/retirmement accounts are a step in the right direction. However, I would prefer that they allow anyone to opt out of the system alltogether and waive any future benefits (and 'losing' out what they have already paid).
I am 27 and pay over 12% when I include my employer's matching contribution (and I use the word contribution loosely here). I would be more than happy to be off the hook for that, consider anything I've paid in to be lost forever, and increase my 401(k) contribution by 12% annually. Or invest more in IRAs. Or help buy a car.
Time to register anti-aarp.com. I am not necessarily against elderly people but theres a lot of people drawing a lot more benefits than they paid in.
That's an understatement!!!
If these young people are capping out their social security payments at $90K this year (and I wish everybody that success), they are promised (not guaranteed) a social security benefit of $1858/mo. when they retire. If they take their social security payment, stuff it in their mattress for 45 years, and then use it over a 25 year retirement (0% return, 0% annuity!!!), they'll have $1764/mo. to spend.
I'd place more faith in my mattress than in the promise of the social security program!
Bottom line is this: do we want to keep growing the Robin Hood mentality, or do we want people to have a real ownership stake in their future, and in the future of their children and grandchildren?
If I had a $5.25/hour job for 45 years, social security promises me a stipend of $561/month, $214 less per month than I make at that minimum wage job. If I take my social security payments, invest them at a 2%!!! lifetime return, and buy myself a 5% annuity when I retire, I can have $575/month. If I'm fortunate enough to make a lifetime return of 10% (average long-term stock market return is ~10.7% after inflation), I can retire with nearly $1 million, and my monthly annuity payment would be $5750!!!.
Most importantly, in either private case, the money's mine, and it goes to my heirs if I die before my annuity pays out. Social security dies with me.
If you listen to the detractors, they tell you it'll just take a little tweaking: raise the retirement age, increase the payment cap, increase the FICA tax, and means-test the program. That's all liberal-speak for taking money from the rich (and the middle class!) and giving it to the poor. And, even then, if you look at the minimum wage example above, you're not even giving the poor a good deal! The fry cooks of the world are supposed to be happy to have a $561 social security check, when they could have had $5750?!?!
Tell Robin Hood to get a day job and give me my FICA money!
Why not just pay every person in lump sum what they have paid in? Let's call it even and just dump social security. Sounds fair to me.
You make some good points, on some I agree, and on others I don't.
But I'm with you on one thing: give us back what we paid in, and shut the damn thing down.
We will never have any idea about the AARP membership numbers, because they give memberships away, often to people who don't ask or care. They won't release their numbers. Modern Maturity magazine has a stated circulation of 22,000,000. I don't know what the US population figures are, of people 50 and over.
And the boomers DIDN'T give you legalized abortion, the Supremes did.
One of the great ironies is that the RAT Admin used the SS money to help finance the Viet Nam War and for their endless giveaway programs. Then they lost the war and the welfare programs were a failure. The so-called SS Fund is also a mirage since the RATs in Congress put it into the general fund. The RATs still think a separate SS Fund exists but the fact is clear --they spent it. RATs are scum!
Okay, the AARP claims 35 million members. From their site at:
http://www.aarp.org/leadership/Articles/a2003-01-13-aarphistory.html
US citizenship is not a requirement, over 40,000 are members who are citizens of other countries. Their budget is supposedly around 600 million a year. Main office is in DC, where else?
There are 77 million boomers, so you are likely close in your estimation that half are AARP members. I don't like that, but I also don't necessarily believe their figures. I'll have to do some more looking around...
Actually, genius, I suppose I should have gone to prison and been stripped of my rights for felony Tax evasion, instead of paying in. Maybe I should have founded my own religion and messed with God instead, but gotten out of paying Social Security or my Self-employment Tax??
Hell for that matter, if you add up all the extra-Constitutional crap the Fedgov does, like Pell Grants and student loans, welfare of all stripes and myriad other programs, I shouldn't have been paying more than two or three cents on the dollar.
There is no "trust fund", (never has been), and my little vote is not enough to sway the elections. I know, I have tried.
So unless you have avoided paying any taxes, you are just as d@mned stupid as the rest of us.
That said, what are YOU doing to fix it?
I think a really good start would be to remove the golden parachute programs the Congress have voted for themselves. As far as prison goes, yep, most of them belong there, but I'd hate to pick up the tab for that country club.
Sounds good to me.
Post #4 well said.
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.