“Today’s WSJ said by 2010, the outlays will exceed the tax revenue generated. What is your answer to this issue? The privatization angle doesn’t help the elderly who may currently live mostly on SS.”
Fair question. At a minimum, the age for going on retirement welfare (soc sec and medicare) needs to be raised to at least 70. People live a lot longer than they used to. We also have a culture in the U.S. that old folks live on their own through death. Back in the day, they lived with their kids, and extended families shared to make do.
The real change needs to be in people’s expectation that a comfortable old age should be paid for by the government by taxing the current workers and/or wealthy. IMO “social security” should be, at most, a safety net that is needs-based; not supplemental golf money.
Rather than save for retirement, people spend it all (plus take on ridiculous debt) to live it up while they are working; retirement planning to most people means “if/when I get old enough, the government will pay for everything I need/want.”
Baby boomers (of which I am one) are a self-centered bunch with no regard for their legacy to their children and grandchildren. Lip service is given to “global warming” or “sustainability” or whatever feel-good crapola of the month. But, ask a baby boomer to pass on uneeded govermnment hand-outs in order to make their country a better place for the future?? No freakin way. Their entitled to have it all. FU kids.
