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

To: AdamSelene235
It's a matter of time.

The boomers have lived all their lives above their means, saved too little for too long, and amassed too much personal debt.

They've pushed back having children, abandoned or broke the nuclear family bonds with the children they did have, and now there are literally fewer, and fewer still committed, to take care of them.

They've sold the country to foreign investors through their enlightened cynicism of patriotism and nationalism, and unrestrained consumption for instantaneous gratification.

Their example is being followed by too many of their children and grandchildren.

The longer we wait the more painful it will be. I will be surprised if much of the pain can be forced upon the productive owners/working class by the unproductive retired class in our capitalistic republic.

Unlike the current retirees, the boomers have not been known for frugality.

And you think Bush's two year deficit spending is a disaster?

I don't like the deficits, or more precisely, the debt, but I've seen no evidence that focusing on the deficit to fight tax cuts reduces spending, or the amount of revenue the government takes in taxes.

I think there is a requirement to freeze, if not cut, spending in the social programs, which are growing the fastest and pose the greatest threat. Either by phasing out benefits or at least privatizing them with subsidies. The issue is what is the minimum standard of living the government provided safety net will support. It's hard to look at the unwed, recently divorced, sick, disabled, and elderly (who have often put themselves into dire straights by their own decisions in life) and say no. But we've successfully extended our life expectancy at the same time the demographics won't support the Ponzi structured "pay as you go" social programs. I just don't see any other way over the long term.

"It is my view that what is important is cutting government spending, however spending is financed. A so-called deficit is a disguised and hidden form of taxation. The real burden on the public is what government spends (and mandates others to spend). As I have said repeatedly, I would rather have government spend one trillion dollars with a deficit of a half a trillion than have government spend two trillion dollars with no deficit." (Dr. Milton Friedman, Two Lucky People, pg. 354)
But there is a chance the X, Y and Z generations can win an inter-generational war against the boomers.

Characteristic Total population Total citizen
Total citizen Reported registered Reported Voted
Number Percent 90 percent C.I. (±) Number Percent 90 percent C.I. (±)
18 to 24 years 26,712 23,915 12,122 50.7 1 8,635 36.1 0.9
25 to 34 years 37,304 32,233 20,403 63.3 0.8 16,286 50.5 0.8
35 to 44 years 44,476 40,434 28,366 70.2 0.7 24,452 60.5 0.7
45 to 54 years 37,504 35,230 26,158 74.2 0.7 23,362 66.3 0.7
55 to 64 years 23,848 22,737 17,551 77.2 0.8 15,939 70.1 0.9
65 to 74 years 17,819 17,233 13,573 78.8 0.9 12,450 72.2 1
75 years and over 14,945 14,582 11,375 78 1 9,702 66.5 1.2
Younger 64,016 56,148 32,525 57.9 24,921 44.4
Baby Boomer* 81,980 75,664 54,524 72.1 47,814 63.2
Older 56,612 54,552 42,499 77.9 38,091 69.8
 
*Includes non-boomers born in 1965
 
Now I grant you that the first post-baby boomer generation won't catch up in numbers for about 30 years, when the baby boomers start reaching their life expectancy.  But there's two things working against the boomers' voting strength.  In 10 years, the older boomers are going to start impacting the younger boomers and the combined younger generations (X & Y) will outnumber the boomers.  In 10 more years, the younger working generations (X, Y & Z) will outnumber the all the boomers and remaining WWII generation combined.  Still 10 years before the dreaded 2030.
 
Either way, I don't expect it to be fought out solely at the voting booths.  It's an economic issue, one that will be decided at the corporate level driven by payroll taxes (and $$$ contributions to the politicians).
 
Maybe I'm missing something, but I see the "entitlements" growing faster than anything else (and driving interest on the debt), jeopardizing our financial security and positioning us for another generational revolt - which may be drawn out over 10 or 20 years depending how "French" the baby boomers are about their benefits.

 

http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p20-542.pdf

http://www.metlife.com/WPSAssets/19506845461045242298V1FBoomer%20Profile%202003.pdf

http://www.iea-macro-economics.org/dem_ecpol_2004.html

37 posted on 08/06/2003 5:52:43 PM PDT by optimistically_conservative (Can't prove a negative? You're not stupid. Prove it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: optimistically_conservative
straights -> straits
41 posted on 08/06/2003 5:56:48 PM PDT by optimistically_conservative (Can't prove a negative? You're not stupid. Prove it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: optimistically_conservative
BUMP
43 posted on 08/06/2003 6:06:12 PM PDT by GrandMoM ("Vengeance is Mine , I will repay," says the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: MEG33; nopardons; Cathryn Crawford
ping
47 posted on 08/06/2003 6:17:36 PM PDT by optimistically_conservative (Can't prove a negative? You're not stupid. Prove it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: optimistically_conservative
Could this chap be convinced to support us in "privatizing" social security.
80 posted on 08/06/2003 7:54:22 PM PDT by CPT Clay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | 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