Anonymous wrote:
Those of us who have been voting for more than ten years should have to give up our claims on entitlements. WE allowed our government to bankrupt the program.

The youth of today should not have to pay for my end of life care, nor that of my parents.

"We don't inherit the earth from our parents, we borrow it from our children". - Indian proverb. I think the sentiment applies to the economy too.

The youth of today will pay for it. We are the ones who have paid for their public schools and libraries and so on.
A civilization is measured by how it treats the weakest, the elderly and disabled and the infants.

Government tax payer money should go back to the people

Medicate is a big problem, but it is mostly because our cost of care in the US is double that of countries we should be compared to. Everything is better if we fix this.

Freeman wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When SS was first created, I believe there was about 155 people working and paying in to SS for every person eligible. Today the number is what? maybe 4? When I retire, the number will be maybe 3.5. It is unsustainable. Just like Medicare. Today and every day for the next 18 years, 10,000 baby boomers will become Medicare eligible. Ten thousdand every day. Unsustainable.

They've been "unsustainable" before. That's why the programs have been modified over the years. As it stands, SS would not have a shortfall for decades(I've seen years ranging from 2037 to 2042 usually), and at that point, it would still be receiving something like 87% of the revenue needed to sustain the benefits. And that assumes that nothing changes between then and now, an assumption that no one believes likely. We simply can't predict what will happen to the economy/government/markets/etc. over the next five years, let alone 20-30 years. Parts of Medicare will face the same issue sooner, where benefits outstrip revenue, but again, we aren't talking about going from fully funded to zero between one year and the next, only a difference of whether revenue will fully fund benefits.

For both programs, relatively minor changes(Such as Reagan's minor SS payroll tax increase back in the 80s, which extended SS by over 20 years) will extend the current estimates by 30-40 years, again, using the current numbers. I expect retirement age to keep creeping up as well, since people are living longer and staying healthier longer. To sum up, these "dire" warnings aren't really dire at all. No one believes the programs are perfect or can be sustained as they currently stand, but that doesn't mean an "all or nothing" mentality about the programs reflect the reality of the situation. They won't simply vanish in an instant.

So it's all political posturing?

Anonymous wrote:When SS was first created, I believe there was about 155 people working and paying in to SS for every person eligible. Today the number is what? maybe 4? When I retire, the number will be maybe 3.5. It is unsustainable. Just like Medicare. Today and every day for the next 18 years, 10,000 baby boomers will become Medicare eligible. Ten thousdand every day. Unsustainable.

They've been "unsustainable" before. That's why the programs have been modified over the years. As it stands, SS would not have a shortfall for decades(I've seen years ranging from 2037 to 2042 usually), and at that point, it would still be receiving something like 87% of the revenue needed to sustain the benefits. And that assumes that nothing changes between then and now, an assumption that no one believes likely. We simply can't predict what will happen to the economy/government/markets/etc. over the next five years, let alone 20-30 years. Parts of Medicare will face the same issue sooner, where benefits outstrip revenue, but again, we aren't talking about going from fully funded to zero between one year and the next, only a difference of whether revenue will fully fund benefits.

For both programs, relatively minor changes(Such as Reagan's minor SS payroll tax increase back in the 80s, which extended SS by over 20 years) will extend the current estimates by 30-40 years, again, using the current numbers. I expect retirement age to keep creeping up as well, since people are living longer and staying healthier longer. To sum up, these "dire" warnings aren't really dire at all. No one believes the programs are perfect or can be sustained as they currently stand, but that doesn't mean an "all or nothing" mentality about the programs reflect the reality of the situation. They won't simply vanish in an instant.

When SS was first created, I believe there was about 155 people working and paying in to SS for every person eligible. Today the number is what? maybe 4? When I retire, the number will be maybe 3.5. It is unsustainable. Just like Medicare. Today and every day for the next 18 years, 10,000 baby boomers will become Medicare eligible. Ten thousdand every day. Unsustainable.

Social Security is not in trouble as far as you and your parents are concerned. You are welcome to forgo benefits if you wish, but there is really no need. To the extent that Social Security faces problems down the road, there are a couple of easy fixes. However, most of the Chicken Littles warning about Social Security should not be trusted.

Just imagine Wall Street as being a giant vacuum sweeper trying to suck up every dollar in sight. Right now, there are billions of SS funds that are out of its reach. All this talk about "private accounts" and so on is merely an attempt to take those dollars and give them to Wall Street. Don't fall for it.

Medicare is a tougher nut. The key to saving it is controlling medical expenses. Most reform suggestions focus solely on cuts. That just passes the buck, so to speak. Medical needs for the elderly don't go away just because the government refuses to pay for them. If this is the type of reform that goes forward, I suggest investing in ice flows, because there will be a huge demand among our elderly.

I'm over age 40. I admit that I have failed to force my elected officials to take action to save social security and medicare when it could be saved. So did my parents, who are now 65 and over. It's not like this is a surprise; we all knew the programs were unsustainable.

Those of us who have been voting for more than ten years should have to give up our claims on entitlements. WE allowed our government to bankrupt the program.

The youth of today should not have to pay for my end of life care, nor that of my parents.

"We don't inherit the earth from our parents, we borrow it from our children". - Indian proverb. I think the sentiment applies to the economy too.