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

To: cuban leaf

RE: If your life expectancy figures for today and a hundred years ago only inlude people who make it to, say, age 18, people really are not living all that much longer.

Krauthhammer assumes that people can continue to work till way pass 65 and THEIR COMPANIES WILL CONTINUE TO EMPLOY THEM.

Does he not udnerstand that there is RAMPANT AGEISM IN AMERICA where when a company wants to cut cost, the ones who get layed off first are those in their mid or late 50’s?

Trying looking for another job and competing with people in their 30’s after you get laid off and let’s see if you can do it....

A minority can, but on average, it will be extremely difficult.

Let’s say the age by which one can claim SS is now increased to 70... what if you get laid off at 65 and are trying to find a job? What company or business will even consider hiring you at that age?

In the meantime, you should have been eligible for SS but have to wait 5 more years to get it. Is that what Americans will have to look forward to from now on?


5 posted on 09/16/2011 7:40:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind

“In the meantime, you should have been eligible for SS but have to wait 5 more years to get it. Is that what Americans will have to look forward to from now on?”

I don’t think anyone is suggesting they raise the age tomorrow. They are talking some 15-20 years out, by many tables and another year for shorter terms. That would correct the problem, by offering those under 40 to opt into a VOLUNTARY combination of public/private savings account. The public part would support the ongoing cost, the private (naturally) would yield higher dividends to pay them out in the out years.


8 posted on 09/16/2011 7:50:27 AM PDT by jessduntno (Obama shanks. America tanks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

I’m reading a Michner book called Chesapeak. It starts with the life of an indian in the 1600’s and follows the inhabitants from there based, somewhat, on actual records.

We have it so easy now as to be downright laughable. If the only hardship is that they increase the age at which people can get ss, it is but a blip. I admit I’m using a semi-fiction book to illustrate this, but my belief is that we are about to go down so hard that in a few years people will yearn for the world in which we currently live and the addition of higher SS with NO hope of getting any back.

No, I’m not predicting Mad Max. More of a post WWII europe sort of thing, with elevated gamma rays maybe.


14 posted on 09/16/2011 7:58:13 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Krauthhammer assumes that people can continue to work till way pass 65 and THEIR COMPANIES WILL CONTINUE TO EMPLOY THEM.


So, because a company finds it unprofitable to employ some geezer, you want someone else to pay for a perfectly healthy person to sit at home?

Ever hear of SAVINGS?

Live modestly, save, and not be a ward of your fellow taxpayer for decades of able-bodied retirement?


24 posted on 09/16/2011 8:17:46 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Are you better off now than you were four trillion dollars ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

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