I’m all for it. we’re living longer and healthier. adjust to the times.
3 generations ago, “retirement” was a rare luxury
we have forgotten and been lulled
Which is why this problem will never be solved leading to Social Security's unavoidable insolvency, which in my estimation is EXACTLY what the Dems want. They want to replace Social Security with a more comprehensive cradle-to-grave social program, and they'll do it out of the chaos of a failed Social Security.
Republicans need to clear out 90% of the Social Security “disability” payments. It’s going to the same folks who used to get welfare - but now don’t have to keep having kids to stay on for life. Also, the moochers undermine the program for those who really are disabled.
End it gradually. Let those who are 20+ years out get out of this ponzi scheme.
If I am able to do so, I’m going to take mine at 62. And run away with the money. :)
Boehner should be cheered for having the guts to recommend this.
Instead he and all Republicans will be vilified.
And what are those laid off over 60 workers who have been contributing all their lives (nay, FORCED TO CONTRIBUTE) going to do for the meantime ?
Try finding a job at that age after you have been laid off (often because of your age).
Why not try something else — LIKE STOPPING THE RAID OF SOCIAL SECURITY TO PAY FOR CURRENT BUDGET EXPENSES.
We’ve been talking about the lockbox since Al Gore made the term a comedy signature at SNL, but we have not even implemented it.
Means-testing would be a brutal betrayal of the tax-paying middle class. Forget it. Tweaking the eligibility schedule and regular increases makes sense.
I actually have no problem with this...HOWEVER...the fact that the Social Security system has been over-promised for years presents a problem....plus the fact that there is NO LOCK BOX for the funds...they’ve used them! er...they’ve STOLEN the funds!
When SS was first instituted the average life expactancy was 62 (women) and 56 (men) [I may be off a couple 0of years- I am going from my mory- but the point is] Social Security kicked in at age 65 - so no one was expected to collect on it, it was a MONEY GRAB
Then when people started living longer, it became a VOTING BLOCK
I feel no sympathy for oldsters who voted themselves their grand-childrens money
Hey! Why dont we just LOAN OURSELVES $10 trillion dollars- payable in the year 3000 (let THEM worry about it)
That's what this is all about.
Boehner has the rare and exceptional gift of saying the exact wrong thing at the exact wrong time based upon the exact wrong plan.
at the time social security was implemented the average life expediency was 65 to raise the age only five years will not be enough, we need the defined contribution model with individual oversight,yes good ‘ol personal responsibility!
Yeah there are those who hate that stuff!
I wonder what fraction of SS outlays is for people UNDER the retirement age. SSI, surviving spouses, etc.
Rot in hell, Boehner!
Just like a scumbag politician who doesn’t need the money to say crap like this.
I’ve been working and paying into this siphon since 1964, cannot collect full benefits until I’m 67, now he wants to make it 70?.
If I had all of the money that’s been stolen from me for the past 46 years, I could retire now.
Rot in hell, Boehner!
Then when people started living longer, it became a VOTING BLOCK
I feel no sympathy for oldsters who voted themselves their grandchildrens' money
Hey! Why don't we just LOAN OURSELVES $10 trillion dollars- payable in the year 3000 (let THEM worry about it)