• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

This would suck for ski day trippers and long commuters

Warp Daddy

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
7,995
Points
38
Location
NNY St Lawrence River
Nah, the SS and medicare problem started at its birth, when the age of retirement wasn't indexed to life expectancy.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html

If the retirement age now was 77, there wouldn't be an issue. Also, the philosophy that it's part of a retirement plan instead of welfare for those who can't otherwise afford to retire and can't work.

Any other tangents here we can find?

Pretty radical concept Mondy -- oh i forgot you are NOT there yet - sorry
 

mondeo

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
4,431
Points
0
Location
E. Hartford, CT
Pretty radical concept Mondy -- oh i forgot you are NOT there yet - sorry
You're right, I'm not there yet. I'm the one the ones that are at the last layer of the Ponzi scheme before it implodes.

Obviously, it would have to be phased in. You couldn't just tell people that are 65 years old that, nope, not gonna get benefits in 2 years, it will be 6. Make it so people that are 50 now get a retirement age of 70, people that are 40 retire at 75, those at 30 don't get anything. Or something to that effect, giving people time to adjust their retirement plans accordingly. One of these threads I had a riots in the streets comment. This is one of the things we need a riot over.

But this is the reaction that will cause nothing to be done with Social Security. People that are on it or soon to be on it will think just because it gets phased out for those born in 1980 or later means they'll take the hit, so panic sets in and any congressman from Florida votes no against it.

Nobody under 35 that I know thinks they'll get Social Security in a meaningful way anyways. Why not just make it official now, and be done with it? The longer we wait, the bigger the problem gets.
 

Warp Daddy

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
7,995
Points
38
Location
NNY St Lawrence River
You're right, I'm not there yet. I'm the one the ones that are at the last layer of the Ponzi scheme before it implodes.

Obviously, it would have to be phased in. You couldn't just tell people that are 65 years old that, nope, not gonna get benefits in 2 years, it will be 6. Make it so people that are 50 now get a retirement age of 70, people that are 40 retire at 75, those at 30 don't get anything. Or something to that effect, giving people time to adjust their retirement plans accordingly. One of these threads I had a riots in the streets comment. This is one of the things we need a riot over.

But this is the reaction that will cause nothing to be done with Social Security. People that are on it or soon to be on it will think just because it gets phased out for those born in 1980 or later means they'll take the hit, so panic sets in and any congressman from Florida votes no against it.

Nobody under 35 that I know thinks they'll get Social Security in a meaningful way anyways. Why not just make it official now, and be done with it? The longer we wait, the bigger the problem gets.etty

Dark and Grim analysis Mondy - You'd have loved Thomas Malthus
 

bvibert

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
30,394
Points
38
Location
Torrington, CT
Nobody under 35 that I know thinks they'll get Social Security in a meaningful way anyways. Why not just make it official now, and be done with it? The longer we wait, the bigger the problem gets.

I'm almost 34 and certainly not expecting to get anything out of it.
 

Warp Daddy

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
7,995
Points
38
Location
NNY St Lawrence River
In 2037 the SS Trust Fund IF UNCHANGED will pay out 78 % of the current benefits -- so it's there Brian.

The political will to enact serious radical change is NOT there yet due primarily to the fallout from the Demographic Wave from both sides of the aisle who vote .

Moreover the potential shortfall of 401's and other DBR's to provide the resources MAY be an issue for many so SOME form of additional security is needed .

Ryan's plan is running into some serious resistance in some KEY GOP district special elections that heretofore should have been a LoCK .I'mwatching one such action in NYS

But having heard this for several iterations in the 70's 80's , mid 90's and again now this argument is always raised in difficult recessionery times . It resonates with some but not the majority of voters.

I believe that this recession will be a slow recovery BUT we will recover and hopefully rethink our role as the world's police force which has ratched up the resource requirement geometrically to maintain that choice .

At any rate we are living in interesting times and will no doubt see some modifications to the Trust . The question is will Domestic Issues Trump Foreign Affairs concern and to what extent and at what cost in both real and psychological terms .

have at it :D
 

Cannonball

New member
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
3,669
Points
0
Location
This user has been deleted
I have my car jacked up right now and spinning in reverse Ferris Bueller style. By the time this bill gets passed I'll have earned enough negative miles to get a huge tax reimbursement and retire.
 

darent

Active member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
1,548
Points
38
Location
nantucket ma
yeah.. But you know if I were president and i was in the middle of a huge budget crisis - i'd look at any an every way to increase revenue.

thats all this is.. Another option of many...

Well that and a way to make the president look bad..

how come the first thought is always to raise revenue, how about reducing spending. If my finances go into the red that is my first thought, reduce spending!
 

darent

Active member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
1,548
Points
38
Location
nantucket ma
This.
I can't figure out how the hell they can take a cut from the billions of gallons sold

Answer:

With 3 yep 3 UNDECLARED wars in separate theatres of operation AND the cost of Homeland Security, BORDER Patrols and TSA's all of which were HYPER expensive add-ons to the base budget originally have had to be ANNUALIZED and each have EXPANDED beyond the original missions.

Moreover couple that with the demographic bubble of Boomers drawing both SS and Medicare and given the medicaid problems associated with it's pretty easy to see where the problem is Glenn. Roads compared to these priorities are not seen as tier one priorities.

The SS problem really started back in the 80's when the THEN power structure decided to Borrow the SS trust fund $$ for Tax cuts an dthen again in the mid 90's when we had a surplus in hand from the Dot com run up , OUR congress refused to RESTORE the $$ to the Trust Fund

So in essence this issue was Birthed in the 80's

I thought the first borrowing of the SS funds was during the vietnam war, the problem started when it wasn't a trust fund anymore and the politicians put their mitts on that money and started borrowing it and not paying it back
 

riverc0il

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2001
Messages
13,039
Points
0
Location
Ashland, NH
Website
www.thesnowway.com
You're right, I'm not there yet. I'm the one the ones that are at the last layer of the Ponzi scheme before it implodes.

Nobody under 35 that I know thinks they'll get Social Security in a meaningful way anyways. Why not just make it official now, and be done with it? The longer we wait, the bigger the problem gets.

Pretty radical concept Mondy -- oh i forgot you are NOT there yet - sorry

Dark and Grim analysis Mondy - You'd have loved Thomas Malthus
Nothing dark and grim about it Warp, mondeo is right on. 32 here and expecting to contribute significantly my entire life and get jack crap back. I don't call it a ponzi scheme--the problem is that the program was put into place without controls for the current situation happening nor the future situation which is about to get a whole lot worse. Those that wrote the regulations for SS were concerned about those currently alive, not those born beyond the the last third of the century. It is a good idea, poorly executed. And it doesn't help that the surplus has been raided for Medicare/Medicaid all these years instead of compounding. That would be like taking money out of your 401k everytime you had a medical problem instead of finding a different way to pay for it.

Obviously, age has a lot of influence regarding someone's perception of SS. I don't hear anyone in later adulthood complaining about it and I don't know anyone my age that likes the current situation. By my generation will suffer financially and the reason is simple: the only way to fix SS is to decrease benefits or increase payments. No politician is going to vote for that type of proposal... at least not until it is too late (i.e. when the generation I belong to attains a certain age and the system is broke any ways).
 
Top