text:
Wow, Evan is letting them have it with both barrels. There are no economic rights. I do not have a right to something that someone else has to pay for.
I am 58, and can answer yes to all three questions.
However, what about all of the money that's been deducted from my paycheck for the last 40 years? And, what about the trillions of dollars that have been "borrowed" from the SS Trust Fund to pay for little things like unfunded wars. I've made my plans for the future, and part of it includes SS and Medicare. The way things have been going, the other investments may not be enough and I'd have to depend on SS. It would suck, but at least I'd be thinking I'm getting something back for all of the money that's been withheld over the years.
Rupert Murdoch's news propagnada attack on this middle class. Wall street calling main street corRupt....what a freaking joke.! Who the hell sold us these homes 2% or 3% down payment anyways?
Classical Social Security is not an entitlement if you are receiving the benefits you paid into for X number of years. It is an entitlement if you are receiving anything other than that, and it becomes a complete entitlement the day it is "means tested".
It is amazing that this author calls people getting Social Security and Medicare in their old age a corrupt practice. He fails to mnetion that People get Social Security because they have paid for it all their life in order to get some guaranteed income after retirement. When I saw the heading Americans are corrupt, I was expecting to see the author identify the real culprits, the bankers and the Wall street manipulators who made Billions of dolars by cheating ordinary citizens. But they probably belong to the same group of rich folks as the author of the above article so how can they be at fault in any way?
May I suggest Mr. New mark to take a second look and identify the real corrupt folks rather than come after old people's so called entitlements that Republican party wants to eliminate. People are entitled to it because they have paid for it all their life so please leave it alone.
I came to America 43 yrs.ago and immediately upon employment contributed to Social Security and Medicare.For 43 yrs I never asked for a hand-out from the govt and continued to pursue the AMERICAN DREAM.Now I'm on social security and still have 2 yrs left on my mortgage.I have no other source of income and here you are calling me "corrupted" because I want my "entitlements"..What I worked for on all my good and healthy years,you just want to cross aside..I say,"SHAME"on you.If your parents are in my position,I bet ALL you folks won't mind being "corrupT"and will find ways to uphold the system.Change it now for the young but leave the old folks alone.IMHO
there is also tax cut for top 1% of the population mentality.
medicare and social security are entitlements and they are there in other industrialized countries and these type of programs have not bankrupted them. Because they are funded.
In some sense they are transfer payments from younger generation to older and thats the way society has operated for thousands of years. Its the younger generation who takes care of older people. In cruel societies, older people are abandoned or just die of neglect.
These conditions begin at the top and roll down to the middle class. Do the overpaid Executives at every major bank and auto maker feel entitled to their exorbitant wages, do the folks sitting on these boards pad their stipend and perks, does every elected official turn a blind eye to the wrongs of every other elected official? Can the same be said of every Doctor, Lawyer and Teacher. Leaders set these examples and we have not had a lot of great leaders in powerful positions in this counrty in the past 50 years. You want the middle class to behave in a reasonable manner? Start with the leadership of this country, including President Obama but you can not stop there.
The author forgot to mention this:
There have been surpluses over the past several decades in the Social Security Program. If those had been saved in a lockbox, or even in the form of treasure bonds, the Social Security Program would have been safe in the forseeable future.
The politicians squandered them all. And we allowed them to do that, happy with their promises of free lunches and free dinners.
I have never been out of work since 1975 and I have never collected Unemployment. I sure hope
with all my payments over the years, I may get a little SS and medicare. Were not all sponges.
You wonder why the American People have an entitlement mentality? Simple...........look at our legislative leadership at all levels.............YA'THINK?
Sure,blame it on the working class, and not the greedy bankers who took us down, the three gulf wars that didn't need to happen, the wasted war on drugs money, The last 20 years has seen the biggest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the Super wealthy. Just look at the income gap. It's incontrovertible.
I will gladly forfeit my "rights" to these programs today if I can stop paying into them today.
Fund entitlements (for which I have paid a lifetime in taxes ) by raising the cap on income subject to social security to the first million or so and while you are at it make hedge fund profits taxed just like wages.
This should provide enough to fund social programs and for congress to loot as they always have.
End the Bush era tax cuts and bring back rates of 70% or so on the ultra rich who have had their incomes rise while workers have had stagnation for a decade or more.
Social Security has been lending the government trillions, and now it is bankrupting the government? That is a different type of entitlement - the right of government to back out of a deal any time it's inconvenient. If pension laws had not been scrapped in favor of "defined benefit" plans, perhaps retirees would be less reliant on social security, but now there is no alternative.
I think the top 1% of the society is corrupted. Can the author state what % of wealth in US is controlled by these 1% now vs 30 years ago. And what policiies caused it. is it generous tax cuts, outsourcing of jobs unfunded wars etc.?
The corruption was Congress raiding the "trust funds" to pay for social programs while continuing the myth that people were funding their future Medicare and Social Security. There is a big gap between means testing to limit Social Security and Medicare and eliminating it entirely based on means testing. Will Congress also means test pensions, especially public sector pensions? I have saved all my life, and paid taxes on much of that because 401(k) contributions are limited, to accumulate assets to support retirement but have relatively little in pensions to look forward to. Meanwhile, many public sector employees are retiring on pensions that would represent millions of dollars of savings (every $40,000 of pension represents $1 million of savings equivalent.) Are they rich?
Ken - what happened to those 40 years of deductions is that they went to someone else. Now you and I have to count on the younger folks paying enough in the future to pay for our benefits. Yes, it really is a legal Ponzi scheme perpetrated by "our" government.
Ken, you have paid your dues and you're certainly "entitled" to SS and Medicare that's been withheld from your checks for decades. But it's gone. It's like saving 5% in a money market fund for 40 years and the day you need it, you find out your neighbor has been using it to pay his food bills...because he bought a BMW and second home on a $25k salary.
Great column, Evan! I agree with everything but the third question. I am 57 and have paid the maximum amount into SS for my entire career, but would likely fail a means test (my wife and I have been quite frugal). I only ask that instead of means testing we make it fully taxable at the recipient's marginal tax rate; that seems fair to me. Also, let's get a "flat" tax (excluding the first XX dollars of income) without the current myriad deductions; that is the only way to get away from the class warfare mentality yet maintain fairness.
If the wealth of the top 1% were not "controlled" by them, do you think it would just flow to you? In most cases, they create wealth by ingenuity and hard work. This is not land apportionment.
Evan is as mis-informed and incorrect as our leaders have been. There are plenty of home owners who had more than 3% invested that are belly up at the moment. It demonstrates a total lack of understanding of the macro economic and government policies that have been wrought against the american people over the last 30 years. It' solution is actually very simple, PayGo. And stop starting wars against countries that have nothing to do with us. China's military budget is 10% of ours. Just 91.5 Billion, Why is that? Why do we need to spend 750Billion on Defense every year, year after year.
I believe in living within means. But that does not prclude me from increasingmy means. the government can increase its means by taxing top 1% of the society.
And as faras social security and medicare is concerned, I have paid into these funds for last 30 years. So I am not getting something or free.
Social security is not completely funded. The cap on social security taxes can be lifted upward to cover first million dollar of income.
I am fine with ending Social Security and Medicare. Just give me back what I have put in plus interest for both since I started working. And then sign me up for universal health care so the elderly aren't hanging out using the ER like a doctor's office along with all the uninsured like they would be if Medicare didn't exist.
I think the republican party will have to get a severe drubbing in the elections, then their arguments will be muted.
I have contributed to social security my entire working life, 48 years. When Johnson declared war on poverty he also declared war on social security. Now that teh government has stoel my retirement money what the hell am I supposed to do? Yes I have a 401k and property, but when I retire every penny will count. And you know what I already paid for what I will receive.
Careful; there is a lot of anger out there and alot of it seems, at best misdirected. Some people bought homes they couldn't afford; but how many lost their homes after they lost their jobs? Health care, except for routine care, is virtually unaffordable unless one is quite wealthy----the hospital bill for 3days in the hospital after back surgery was billed over $200,000 of which the insurance company paid just over half-----that bill alone would wipe out most individuals or families. What income does it take to live....basic living expenses are not covered by minimum wage; health insurance is out of the question. There are alot of people who haven't done anything unreasonable let alone wrong, who are being hurt by the decisions of speculators, bankers, and business decisions that elininate jobs. There is plenty of work that needs to be done in this country; but I don't see much willingness to pay for it when that requires giving up some profit.
Several commentators here have stated their "entitlement" to all of the payments. Are they willing to refuse any payments that exceed the amount of money that they put in? The system is broke, but too many just want to say "gimme, gimme and to hell with everyone else". The sense of entitlement is alive and kicking, just as the author noted.
I'm tired of hearing about how S.S. is going broke. I would like somebody from Washington to tell me what they did with all the money that the so called Baby Boomers put into the system. Unless us Baby Boomers leave to be 90 years old we will never get back all the money we put in. Less we forget it hasn't been that long ago the reirement age was 55 now their wanting to more that age from 66 to 70. What's next 90?
I don't care if we don't get social security or medicare. The only thing I ask is quit taking deductions from my paycheck for them. The total amount of payments taken from my pay over my lifetime for social security is enormous. The problem is congress never set these payments aside like a company pension plan would. They have used it to fund other programs not related to social security. If a private citizen did this he would be getting out of jail in about 30 years. The problem is that Congress promises citizens future benefits for these deductions taken and we are stupid enough to believe they will keep their word. If we know up front that we have to save for our own retirement 100% we can plan accordingly. The Congress is either stupid or lying to us. I suspect a little of both.
Hey NewOpening.....
Those who rob Peter to pay Paul will always receive the support from Paul.
We have too many Pauls now and not enough Peters to support the socialist cause. Margaret Thatcher also was quoted saying:
Socialism is great until you run out of spending other people's money.
We have a socialist as a President and we have run out of spending hard working private sector tax money. I have a solution. Let's export unions to China. The unions in the USA can have a special 99% tax on all wages. All members would quit and the normal market supply and demand forces would set the price for the proper wages and benefits. Miraculously our budget problems wouldn't be as daunting.
Social Security would still be solvent if the Congress had not taken all our money and spent it on their own programs and such. Let's look instead at all the people that are collecting "refunds" on taxes when they never paid any; at all the SSI beneficiaries that collect monthly checks and never put a dime into the system, and all the other programs that give money away. Those of us that have paid into Social Security for 30, 40 or 50 years are not asking for something for nothing. We should however, get what we paid for!
I don't think that someone is "corrupt" or whatever for wanting Social Security payments. I will say though that Social Security is a PAYGO system. You're not depositing money - you're paying someone older than you. As population growth slows and real income (apparently) declines, then the newer generations are increasingly burdened with paying for the baby boomers. I don't think many of us realistically expect to reap the same benefits as retirees today.
All I can say is that, as a current college student, I have no plans to factor Social Security into my retirement planning.
Arun....This is why the problem will not be fixed. You take a swipe at the republican party by spewing the DNC talking points. I bet you couldn't name one item in the republican bill. The problem is that we are living so much longer then we use to. Work 40 years and etire for 30 years. Could you have lived on half of what you made minus taxes? That's what you sould have paid into SS each year. Sorry but you have to raise the retirement age.
EN... "Brovo"... you have finially reached the pinnicial of (Times) reporting on the arogont corrupt political uper class jackasses and elephants in Washington and in every other state of the Union that is running this once great country into the ground on the backs of all that have lost their jobs because of outsouricing, social security , medercare and madicade. (Gee, EN... just one question) are you now running for office so you can collect a gaurenteed medical and pension for life by becoming senator, congressman or just another hack writer on the take!
"Most Americans want each and every entitlement society can offer. They don't want "to live within their means." They want more than just a "little financial security.???
I guess you are talking about the Americans you personally know from Wall Street and Greenwich. My advice to you: You need to get to meet and know better people.
You hear comments all the time like " if you save so much money and get 8% interest you will be all set for retirement." Please tell me where you can get that kind of return and I will be very happy to forget all about S.S. I can answer my own question, just look at your bank statement or the rate of interest on a C.D.
Oh please.... Social Security an entitlement? Since when is recieving money back from a program I paid into an entitlement? It may not be an "account" in my name but I still pay into it and am told I will receive money when I a retire. That's not an entitlement. We are all Americans and we all must contribute to this society if we want a safe stable country. Otherwise we might as well live in someplace like Afghanistan.
Really! ? AARP what a sellout! The comments about the middle class reminds me of some upper crust that is likened to a beautiful car that thinks it can do without the engine that keeps it running
If what you really want is class warfare then let history repeat itself! Lets roll out the guillotines and let the firstt one roll down Wall Street!!!! Tell us what YOUR addres is smarty pants
I also paid into SS for 40 years. Given a choice, I would have gladly taken that money and invested it myself like I did with my other personal monies. The problem is, the politicians pissed it away as fast as possible. They could not stand the fact that money would just be sitting there.
They alone deserve all the blame. They have failed us for the last fifty years.
FlashGordon said, "I do not have a right to something that someone else has to pay for."
Again.. oh, please. Have you ever visited another state? And if so you must have travelled on their roads. By your logic what gave you the right to travel on the roads paid for by someone else? Don't you benefit by having an educated population in this country? If you own stocks, then the companies you own have to have workers educated enough to make those products to ensure the survival (and payment of dividends and/or increase in stock price) of those companies. Did you pay for their education? When you walk into a store and buy something those workers know how to count change and treat customers. Did you pay for their education? If not, then according to your logic, what right do you have to benefit from their education? Let's say you travel to another state and are in an accident.... what right do you have for the police, firemen, hospital workers, etc. to help you out? You don't pay any of their salaries. Why should you benefit?
The point is that taxes pay for all these services (and many more). No one in this country can claim that they "pay their way". It simply is not true. Unless they have their own ranch, never have contact with the outside world, do not use telecommunications, roads or any other service. They would have to live like cavemen. Our way of life is built upon taxes and other people paying taxes to support the lifestyle we all enjoy. Even the poor who may not pay income taxes still pay sales taxes and other sorts of taxes. So unless you live on a deserted island you cannot claim that you do not use or benefit from the contributions of others.
This article is a partial truth. What is the dcoto of our wars vs. social services? Much more. Where is the very helpful incentive of a progressive tax structure which always paid the expenses instead of the present one which makes the rich richer and the poor poorer and slowly destroys the middle class - since the time of Richard Nixon. Examples to say...this is a very one-sided, biased article.
As Tony Soprano said, 'ya aint entitled to "$hite"'. Social security trust fund? You mean accounting shell game on top of a Ponzi scheme. No entitlement is certain dummies, just the taxes that fund them are. Get used to it; welcome to communist Planet Earth & Obamie's Commie America!
Forced retirement combined with destroyed pensions and 401k's. This is not an entitlement. Does Globalization require this? I think, not.
A reason why class warfare isn't a good political strategy in the U.S. is because a large percentage of the population feel that they will become rich one day.
Entitlements? Social security, medicare and unemployment - We pay into these things our entire working lives. It's our money. "Medicare and Social Security, the programs that are bankrupting our nation." Not true. We are bankrupt due to an out of control military industry, two decade long wars, and the corruptness and greed of major banks, industrial agriculture (which poisons US citizens) and Wall Street.
Right On, Evan. No one wants to hear the truth. What everyone is "owed" who paid into the system is the
Treasury Bond yield on the funds they paid.
I am 26. All my contemporaries and myself recognize that we will not be getting what we paid in. The older generations are stealing from us. They don't give a crap about providing a better future for my kids, they just want want want.
Lets not forget that employers also have contributed and equal amount of money into Social Security using money that could have otherwise been paid to the employee either through wages or pension benefits. Money payed into Social Security by employees has already been fully taxed, yet many still have to pay tax a second time on this same money when they start receiving benefits. If you rich guys want to get rid of this entitlement, most of us would be happy to just get back a lump sum of both employee and employer contributions plus interest. You rich like to talk about a flat tax, except when it come to your own capped Social Security payments - if you want to steel back our "entitlements" and still treat the SS Trust Fund as central piggy bank lets have the government remove all caps instead of having us working poor pay for YOUR Corporate Wellfare.
So I worked and had money taken out of my salary for 40 years and now that I am receiving some of it back I am stealing from my grandkids? A few changes and the system will work again including raising the maximun taxes are withheld. Don't rob or try to make those that counted on and depend on this for income and healthcare feel guilty. You don't need different tests run by five doctors to find what is wrong with you. Why can't they look at the same test. 90 year olds don't need 40 tests run every time they enter the hospital, that have already been run by their doctor, to keep the hospitals making money, There is no incentive to not take another test or use a less expensive treatment by the patient or the health provider. We have a great system but again just a little common sense and less greed would save us trillions.
What a load of bollocks! Cancel my subscription to this filthy Murdoch-owned Republican lie machine!
Evan, please tell me what you think of an investment where you get $0.50 of value out for every $1.00 value you put in, would you? And what do you think of an insurance policy where you're guaranteed to pay a greater premium than you get as a benefit? Besides Social Security, do you yourself have a retirement account where some of the proceeds are given away to other people? And when you eventually pass away, hopefully many years from now, will the bank that holds your savings account automatically keep all the money remaining in that account for itself?
So then, Evan… what do you think of Social Security? It effectively does all of what I just described. Do you think people who paid into a system should get a fair deal on the money they paid in? Evidently you don't, if you think means testing is the "solution" to Social Security's financial problems. Well, then, my friend, don't be surprised if I consider your other opinions on matters of investment to be seriously suspect.
I don't want to be merely critical, so here's an alternative idea for you to consider: how about if we invest some portion of Social Security funds in insured municipal bonds? Imagine the radical thought of actually earning interest (gasp!) on a retirement account! It's certainly affords a much greater chance of providing some greater return to Social Security "account" holders than does your kleptocratic scheme. But will we be offered this kind of money-earning option, one which incidentally would improve capital investment in the U.S.? Not bloody likely. We'll just have more money stolen from us by such seemingly innocuous and deviously clever means as raising the qualifying age.
I'm 59, Evan, and I expect to do alright with or without Social Security. I just think that, whether you're in private finance or public benefits, it's simply criminal when you make a promise like SS did and then intentionally mismanage the funds entrusted to you. And therein likes the germ of another idea, one just as cynical as yours: why don't we make up the shortfall in Social Security with fines on the people who mismanaged the fund?
Gee, I was going to point out to still another know-it-all gen-x -er the folly of his reasoning by reminding him that I have been paying into Social Security/Medicare for over 40 years. I was going to emphatically state that if the government had given me the option to save the tens of thousands I have paid in, matched dollar for dollar by my employers, and let me invest it over those forty years then today I would have no need for SS/Med. But since I nor my employers given the option, it is a gross misstatement of the facts to portray me as a whiny American standing around with my hand out.
I was going to point all that out to the little punk. But since so many other people have done it for me, I don't have to.
It isn't so called entitlements that are bankrupting the nation. It's military ad war spending that's leaving us broke. The writer of this article is a buffoon. A quick look at the federal budget over the past 50 years will clearly show where the money is being spent. Social Security and Medicare are self funded so they can be excluded from the analysis. Military and related spending make up the vast majority of federal spending. Wars alone have cost this nation at least $10 trillion since the end of WW II.
we finally agree on something
One "entitlement" that all ages need to drop is the free access to expression of their opinions without attribution. That said, my comment to Mr. Newmark's article is that while I generally agree with EVERYTHING he says, I DO NOT AGREE with his characterization of social security. The problem with SS is that the jerks in Congress have used that fund as a piggy bank to "kick the can" down the road instead of fessing up to the American people that nothing is free. This is the President's extreme weakness: first he has no comprehension of the problems facing ALL Americans and second he does not have the staff (read that to mean the "Secretaries" and the "Chiefs" of the Executive Branch to do the job. They all are second rate and until Americans find true, honest and competent leaders, our great country will suffer and start down the road of self destruction that has obliterated so many of the civilatizations of the world.
I am drawing SS but do believe we need to give up some perks and stop using our funds to keep dictators in power and fund studies how to keep China's prostitute from drink too much. As the last Democratic "President said ask not what your country can do for you but what can you do for your country. "
Mr. Newmark - you must not remember when SS and Medicare got started. We were not given the option of opting out. We were all forced to accept this so-called entitlement. True, some people liked it. True, more people like it now. But many, if not most of us, would have preferred to have had the option of providing for our own medical care. We would have preferred, in fact, we did, buy our own medical insurance. The corruption you so smugly identify was caused by the government and the ideologies that argued that everyone should pay for each one. Not a very good, or very economical model.
I do not know Mr. Murdoch but I wonder if he is among the entitled. "Born on third and thinks he hit a triple"? I started working at 11, "on the books" at age 14, all through school, right up to this day. That is 41 years of paying in with no choice given. I become a lawbreaker if I do not pay in, but I am corrupt if I want back some of the money I paid in, as promised? There is something wrong with that reasoning.
I am forced to relinquish a substantial part of my hard earned paycheck for both Social (in)Security and Medicare. And of course I paid taxes on those deductions. And forced to do this for years. I along with most others, was given no choice in this matter. Okay, so that's part of life living in America.
So absolutely correct, if I live long enough to collect (which I hope I do) I want my benefits! Each penny that I'm entitled to. No more, no less.
In reply to an earlier poster, this would be the funds I parted with with interest. After all, if I wasn't forced to pay into these two programs, I could have invested those funds myself.
This concept is not called corrupt. This is called playing by the rules.
The author of the original article needs a refresher course in the use of "corrupt."
EN is playing USG Economist... Dr. Fraud!
90% of the blogs here about this article can't all be wrong. The Oz is right.
Evan, are you completely off your rocker? You are a discredit to journalism.
If any Americans have become corrupt in this regard, it is because they have felt victimized by the system. More and more, Americans are having their hard earned money taken in one way, shape, or form. If your house is burglarized, you feel some justice if you get to go to court, ect. What form of justice can you get from Washington? I think this may be in part why, if any, take more. Why not take what I can, look at what they take from us?..becomes some mentalities. I personally have always had too much pride and dignity to take more than what is mine. Many of us refuse to lose our values as our leaders have. I would want what I paid in..not a penny more or less..not even interest..give me what is RIGHTFULLY MINE. They have taken WAYYY more than from this country! This article disgustes me!
As opposed to the Masters of the Universe, the few and proud financial geniuses who engineered this CDO/CDS/SIV/EIEIO derivatives scam, and forced the taxpayers to bail them out. Nope, so self-righteous sense of entitlement there. Why, they even insisted on getting their retention bonuses for their "talent", because apparently it takes a great deal of "talent" to lawn-dart the economy and make everyone else pay for such a singular brand of geniuses.
There is a real point in this article, the average American *does* have something of an outsized sense of entitlement, not only the desire but the expectation of something for nothing. But this is peanuts in comparison to the overweening sense of self-regard in "people" such as Blankfein and Dimon, who seriously seem to think that the rest of us should thank them for what they've done, what they continue to do. You almost have to respect that kind of brass; they must have to carry their nuts around in a wheelbarrow.
So there ya go, America -- it's all YOUR fault, apparently for not figuring your own method of fleecing the taxpayers. Good grief.
Evan New-Mark you has no clue as... "The World Turns and Burns"! Big Wheels in Washington and Wall Street just keep on turning... and making profits off of us US Tax Payers.
Just a hint Oz, Evan is a much better speller than you. He is trying to do God's Work here.
Bottom line - People that are collecting SS, Medicare and all the other entitlements never contributed enough to cover all the money they are currently getting. All the assumptions used for contributions were way off - people are living longer than expected, they spend way more on healthcare than expected - everyone wants "all" that can be done for every type of healthcare problem - cost is never an issue - why - because someone else pays for it (the government)
Murdoch would do well to hire a bit more subtle army of Goebbels to run his defunct "news" org. Try not to smack the reader directly in the face. It's poor form.
Finally, someone has the courage to actually put in print what needs to be said about SS and MC. This country cannot sustain it. Bye the way, I'm 72 and believe Medicare should be means tested.
All my working life I've been paying sizable sums into government mandated retirement and health coverage programs. Now that I'm pushing 70, the rules are getting changed in the middle of the game. With the same money I've put in over the years, I could have provided for myself in a much more cost-effective way, and still have my principal left.
Mr. Newmark berates me for wanting to keep an unsustainable entitlement, and says I should live within my means. But it seems to me that while I've been frugal, I've been forced to support the government living way beyond its means. The promise has always been, "You pay us all this money now, and we'll take care of you later." Now they're planning to renege on this promise. So now, when I most need it, my capital has been diminished to the point where we are financially precarious.
everybody went nuts when bush suggested that we allow citizens to defer 10% of their taxes into a social security fund of their own choosing.
the screaming said people might loose those funds if the investment tanked.
so how is that any different than what's happening with social security now?
hell, at least if my 10% broke even - i'd still have something....
This article is a waste of time and money at the WSJ... EN go back to GS I'm sure you'll do just fine writing SS, Medicare and Medicade Wavers for their employees making +$800K a year holding acounts in offshore banking. Get a real job one that your really good at... can you spell reverse physicology blog articles.
I get my cackles up when I read of "means testting" I've been froced to "contribute " to social security for nearly 50 years, and never during that time was I asked to means test if I had enough money for my rent, food etc. The money was taken with the "promise" that it would be a portion of my retirement plan. I saved, invested and did everything expected of me to make certain, or as certain as possible , that my retirement would be properly funded. And now those who made bad mistake, forced me into a system that I would rather not have been in, and provide for myself and my family are looking like innocent babes, and I'm the corrupt one! I've reached the end of my rope with governments, they drafted me, got ready to send me to Viet Nam, when i got out, I was denied jobs becasue I was a white male, and now I'm corrupt - enough all ready. .
If they have to live in huts in Africa we ahould know what it is like here too! - That wat Oboma and his wife wont feel so ashamed of being American. The only jobs he creates are in Govt. or ocversees " Brazil want to big a big supplier and we want to be their biggest custoimer". Really? I want America to not rely on forein countries. After byurning oiur friends like Israel and England, no other country in the world, friend or foe trusts us!
This is just one problem of police corruption. I know of a drug task force officer who gets his drug addicted brother to ask everyone he knows where he can find pot, pills, or any other kind of drug. He gets the dealers to bring him the drugs, they get arrested and the cop's brother gets to keep the drugs. It's a win win situation because his brother gets his drugs by stealing it from drug dealers and pockets any money confiscated, while the cop gets a pat on the back for doing his job, what a joke. Police think they have more authority than they actually do and they abuse the system more than the criminals could ever dream of doing !
Is Evan a US citizen. His article reads like he has never read the Constitution of the United States.
Sorry to break this to you, but Social Security is just a tax. It is a tax on the young to pay for the old. The politicians have tried to redefine it so that we the people don't rebel and stop paying, but it is a tax. And when there are more old than young, this system will fail and nobody's going to get anything.
To me this is obvious to all except those who themselves are corrupted by their own entitlement mindset. "I've paid in so I should get mine". Yours is gone. Mine is gone. We are throwing good money after bad.
Social Security should never be means tested. It was sold as an inssourance policy for old age. Now that the insurance company, the U.S. govermentt stole the pre.emiums we paid it does not want to pay us. So the realaly
dishonest people are the polititions who sold us this.
Let's give it up for the Oz. Evan Newmark needs to start looking for another job, speak to my hands.
There is a reason they called you the "me generation". The author is absolutely correct. These people who say they paid in for 30 - 40 years and want what they paid for are the same folks who voted for middle class tax benefits since Reagan. Everybody keeps talking about the 70% tax rate, but the point is EVERYBODY was paying more income tax in the 70s and earlier. And by the way, the reason the TOP income tax rates dropped was so that we could stay tax competitive with the rest of the world. People who were subject to 70% tax rates were generally people who had the means of mobilizing their capital and practicing tax evasion. Corporations are leaving the U.S. because of Unions and high marginal tax rates. And the demoncrats keep playing the middle class off of the investment class, even though it is the demoncrat poison of socialism and dependence on the state that is at the root of this problem. And while I agree that we spend too much on defense and don't see much of a direct return for that spending, would you rather the Chinese take on the role of policing the world? How long do you think we'd be able to continue to spend on butter while we skimp on guns?
Social Security funds are gone when the President's salary is gone; when every legislator's salary is gone; when every federal employee's salary is gone; when every federal agency, NSA, FBI, IRS, EPA, DOE, Homeland Security, etc, is completely defunded; when every private federal contractor is terminated and gone; when every block grant to the states are gone; when medicare/medicade payments are gone.
Until then, all we have is somebody picking favorites.
I would like to believe that no generation would purposely do to the next generation what the mismanagement of SS has done, and so, the only explanation is that they were misled. But folks are in denial if they can't see the facts. Politically arrived at defined benefits are unsustainable. SS would last forever -- as a defined contribution plan. Pay benefits from revenues, period. What will not be delivered is the unsustainable political promises of politicians long dead. They lied to us. They are still doing the same.
Look at the facts. SS started out at 1%/1% of the first 3000 in income, to pay the benefits of those who paid nothing. Then, a generation was taxed at 3%/3% of a higher amount, to pay the benefits of the 1% generation. Then, a generation was taxed at 7.65%/7.65% of a still higher amount -- now 108,000/infinite -- to pay the benefits of the 3% generation.
The horror is, this last generation was the Boomers. Not satisfied that that generation was already going to be paying a demographic surplus during its peak earnings and taxpaying years, our profligate OPM fueled government borrowed even more from the future in order to throw an even bigger Big Government OPM CronyFest on the Potomac. As proof of the wisdom of economic stewardship of some totalitarian concept called 'the' economy, that government is handing over to the next generation a broke-busted credit card after that period of record intergenerational demographic subsidy! The most massive Big Government FAIL in history.
When Medicare started in 1966, it was $3B dollars a year. Adjust that for inflation (x 7.5) and population (barely x2) and we get to $45 billion dollars. Actual Medicare costs: $465 billion dollars in 2011. More than a factor of 10x the earlier generations Medicarte spending, adjusted for inflation and population!
Are we kidding? We can't see the bloat? We can't see the totally out of all control tribal insanity?
JFK's budget was $100B. Same inflation and population adjustment to 2011 = $1500B dollars.
How do we explain the difference between that generation's $1500B federal government and our $3800B federal government? That is $2300B dollars.
Medicare bloat is one part of this insanity.
Politically arrived at SS benefits is another part of it.
A totally corrupt defense contractor culture surrounding DC is another part of it.
Don't extend the debt ceiling. Pay debt first. Fund the balance from what is left, cut as required.
And take it out on the backs of the politicians who have crapped the bed and misled the nation. Cut DC not with a scalpal, but with a blunt axe. Topple the imperial monuments, and spray paint on their ruins a message to the next tribal fascist wannabees, "and don't ever pull that crap again."
Nightly news reports of long caravans of moving vans hauling out of DC. A collapsed real estate market around Northern Va.
One way or the other, it is coming, and well earned.
I couldn't agree with this article any more. Evan hit the nail on the head why this country is in the position that it's in. The fact that people don't like the article shows that people still don't get it. Who knows what's going to wake people up. Or they just won't and their sense of entitlement will lead us to a declining nation where people will fight (i.e., corruption) for the pieces of the ever-declining pie.
I'm a bit disgusted by Newmark's tone of outrage. He acts like he builds a dramatic case, and the only relevant thing in the article is his question 3.
I view Medicare and Social Security as a form of insurance, not an investment (where by definition, I'm entitled to some or all of my capital back).
Simply put, of course I'm comfortable with means-testing for Medicare and Social Security benefits. I've paid into those programs my whole working life, but if my financial situation is good enough that I don't need the benefits come retirement, I don't want them. Leave mine in the pie for someone in need to draw on them.
In my mind, that's simple decency. I view them just as a type of insurance: if I need them, I get the financial benefit from them, and if I don't, then I don't. If I'm well-off when I'm retired, I'm not "entitled" to them.
Just like in life-insurance: no matter when you die, you're entitled to the face value of the policy. If you're alive, you don't get to touch that sum. (My whole-life insurance has a cash benefit beyond the face value, but that's not why I bought the insurance.) Again, these government programs are insurance, not an entitlement. Why should the government have to subsidize my healthcare and income if I have plenty already? These programs are a backstop that I have paid for, not money I "lent" the government (a la paying into a fund that I'm going to get refunded to me).
Means testing is just another way government punishes those who do the right thing and rewards those who don't. Student financial aid, mortgage subsidies, etc. Spend all you can and run up debt and there is a government program to bail you out. We all paid into social security but only some of us denied ourselves instant gratification and saved for retirement. It is time to share the pain. Social Security will need to be cut, but cut it for all not just those dumb enough to act like an adult.
The article is interesting and thought provoking. But it does not take a politician nor a political writer to know that America was far, far, far, bettter off, even with the same "entitlement" programs in place - which do need to be controlled and modified and improved from time to time. Those programs will be problems down the road but only because they tend to pay for the care of some of the people who are responsible for a country that allows l writer to give his own take on our problems, and place his own blame on those who really have nothing to do with it. Everyone knows the expenditures that have put us over the edge are all relatted to our decisions to expand our military presence, flex our military miuscles, and carry on extended wars on several fronts - at a billion dollars a day. One doesn't really have to carry on a war for 10 years at a billion dollars a day before there will be problems on every other area of our wonderulf lives. In making these statements, I am not placing blame or saying anyone was wrong. But lets face it - a lot of people got rich off Iraq. A lot of those people were friends of our then adminstration, their families, they own companies - so if you really want to investigate the foundation of our 14 trillion dollar debt - go back and start at the point where that debt didn't exist. Tnen move forward. Then tell us it is because Obama didn't mention a ticket fixing ring in NYC. Lets talk about the bailouts prior to when Obama took office - and lets talk about, and investigate, which bailuts have been repaid and who was in charge. And which ones have not been paid and who was in charge. Lets talk about why congress doesn't go after some of that moey and earn their keep and their golden retirement packages they voted in for themselves. if you want to write an article that does something besides try to sell us americans on all our troubles resting with Obama as the cause, you should be out of a job - or go get some of our money back. Use your talents to go track down our money and get it back. and then maybe some of what you say will have some credibility.
This is an interesting article. However, old people (and young people) who contribute to these entitlement programs should get out at least what they put in--therefore I have a problem with the answer to #3 having to be "yes." We all pay a TON of taxes into Social Security, Medicare, etc over our working lives. The programs should be privatized so that, like a 401K, you get out what you put in. There is no way that such a system is "unfair" as liberals would have you believe.
Your point about "insurance" is well taken. But unlike other "insurance" this "insurance" is overly costly. Of course there should be a program to take care of old people who are poor. But these programs do not do that. #3 is nothing but a wealth-transfer tax.
The problem with the socialisim this author suggests, is that eventually you run out of other peoples money to spend. It is not "corrupt" to want to receive the Social Security payments you were FORCED to give to the government as a "savings account"--which was then stolen by the government to fund other pet projects. Cuts should start by making Congressmen and women buy their own cars, match their pensions to that of the private sector, etc.
There's another problem here with the whole concept of "means testing". If you establish a means test and it becomes institutionalized, and everybody still contributes but not everyone collects, you will still create a huge number of people gaming the system. I see it in my life. My wife and I skipped buying new cars, going out to dinner twice a week, vacations to Disneyworld, expensive jewelry etc etc. Now we're set. We have a comfortable nest egg. The rest of America feels entitled to toys and good times during their working years. So I contribute, and just to be "fair" I get means tested, and must say no to collecting my social security? Look at the statistics on household savings. Look at the statistics on consumer spending. Look at the statistics on people using their inflated house values as an ATM. Tell me I'm not right, and that "means testing" stinks. The author is right. But he should extend that to means testing as well.
These people (myself included) are angry because of all the money that has been taken from their paychecks by force by the government. What they fail to understand is that the money that they paid is only a token amount compared to the funds coming from the current workforce.
My Grandfather and I used to get into it over how much he paid to SS during the days when he was earning $1 a day. He got mad when I told him that the money he paid along with interest was used up with his first SS check.
No more entitlements! The entire nation must understand that money doesn't come from the government, it comes from us.
I get it, "means testing" means that I work hard, save my money, plan for retirement, and they reward me by giving my money to someone else. PERFECT.
mchaun wrote:
A rerun of a recent Comment-
"255.HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
Winston-Salem, NC
March 4th, 2011
12:39 pm
Bring on the cuts! Britain was not prepared for their public sector cuts because they've been dependent on their governments for so long. It will take some time, but I have a firm belief their economy will be benefited in the long term due to the necessary cuts made.
Here, we haven't been quite so dependent on government. Now is the time to make those cuts before we get to the point where all of our needs are met by government. Some people in this country do not understand that government was not created to see to your every need. Individual responsibility is still required...
Recommend Recommended by 34 Readers"
F__k you Schadenfreude scum bags. 30 Years of Reagan / Bush Government may have seen to your every need, but me and mine have seen nothing but hard work and mountains of debt at the Company Store.
30 YEARS or more for a TWO INCOME FAMILY to buy a lousy ticky tacky house 50 miles from our jobs. 5 Years to buy a car. 10 or more years to pay off college costs preparing for a job that will be taken by an H-1B Immigrant whose education was paid for by his Father gouging another $0.10 per Kilo of Rice from his starving Peasants. Then S/He will remit his/her wages to prepare a nice berth for when S/He goes back home to retire and live like a Rajah on Social Security.
A Reagan-Gingrich CPI-COLA that screws Workers and Social Security Annuitants from 2 to 4 % per Year. Now a 3 year moratorium on any COLA in the face of soaring inflation.
Then the final indignity of being told we should have prepared better for our Retirement.
Monte Haun firstname.lastname@example.com
March 31, 2011 - 3:42 pm
"In the end, the folks I hear from in letters or meet when I travel across the country – they aren't asking for much. They're just looking for a job that covers their bills. They're just looking for a little financial security. They want to know that if they work hard and live within their means, everything will be all right. They'll be able to get ahead, and give their kids a better life. That's the dream each of us has for ourselves and our families."
– President Obama's weekly radio address, June 11, 2011
At this point, it's pretty amazing that President Obama can serve up these sugary homilies with a straight face."
Well, it works pretty well when you GD Shylocks give our jobs to the illegal Aliens "who just want a better life for their kids".
The NeoCon Media, you know, NYT, WashPost, NPR, WSJ and the like, are 24/7 "Entitlements must be controlled" and 10 to 1 bias against Liberal opinion.
Columns like this baits your Subscribers into comments filled with lies that even you people are ashamed to tell. And of course never a correction that might allay some of the BS, like Social Security.
The Means testing, beyond what the IRS already does, is a Red Herring designed to rile these Half-Wits that subscribe to your paper.
When you read these claims, about Social Security for example, you know very well that they are crap. What are you going to do about it?
I'll give you some friendly advice, Newmark; after the screwing we took from the Bankers plus the NeoCon Media's endless appetite for War and one sided support for the Economic Genocide of the American People, your street may not be as mean as you think and you might even get that smirk wiped off your face.
Monte Haun firstname.lastname@example.com
RE: "Social Security and Medicare are offered to all Americans of a certain age."
Uhhh, I've been paying for Social Security since I was 16. It wasn't offered to me, it was forced on me.
Obama is not qualified to comment on corruption, as he is owned and operated by the unions, the journalist hit the nail on the head. Our President is more than familiar with corruption, i.e. an elected official who is not trying to help our Nation or all of it's citizens
Wanting support in your illness, old age and times of trouble is nothing to do with corruption. Your article is both stupid and self serving. Let me guess, you don' have any of these things and your income is less than average eh? Get a life. Corruption is coming form the politicians, the corporate lobby, the wall street denizens with greed coming out their ears (I am a strong capitalist, so don't misunderstand, I appreciate what the economic engine is about and how it must be built and fueled - but what you are doing has to be something real and not just lining your own pockets). Obama has it right. Society is social and the way you run a country is to on the one hand have a capitalist free market system. And you build support for your citizens at times in their lives when they need it and America, of all places, must be able to do this - out of the greatest wealth ever amassed by any country on the face of the earth. Yet you want to call people looking for that support as corrupted. That is a sick idea.
You just dont get it do you? Yeah, spend trillions in Iraq and Afghanistan and dont take care of our people here in the USA! And how much cash did they air lift to Iraq that was never even accounted for?
Loved the article. Reminds me of a chapter called "Account Overdrawn" from a certain novel that explains our time to a T. It makes me sick that these clowns think that because they paid in x during their lifetime they are entitled to y. All the people pointing out that Evan didn't mention that people paid into SS their whole lives need to grow a brain. Clearly, he was pointing out that these payments don't in any way shape or form cover the payouts that today's and tomorrow's SS beneficiaries are currently receiving.
"Our economy is choking on over $14 trillion of debt brought on by millions of middle-class Americans "not asking for much," just their Medicare, Social Security and unemployment checks."
Don't forget college fundiing.
just give me the money i've paid since 1955 into ss at a 3% rate and the huge ammts i've paid since inception on medicare at 1% and let me pay my own way. entitlements my foot, all i would like is a mediocre to low return.
Couldn't agree more. It is the poor and middle class that are corrupting and bankrupting this country. It is the lack of moral judgment and an abundance of greed among the vast majority of people in this country-- and I mean as much as 99% of Americans have slipped right off the edge and are certainly heading for damnation, taking most of the country with them for no better reason than unadulterated greed and gluttonous habit of take take take take.
It is just a good thing the country has consolidated 40% of its wealth in the hands of the truly moral, saintly even, ONE PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE and 25% of the nations income.
"Why? Wealth consolidation. Nobel prize winning World Bank economist Joseph Stiglitz says the US is starting to look a lot like Russia. In the May issue of Vanity Fair, Stiglitz writes that the upper 1% of Americans now take in nearly 25% of the nation's income every year. In terms of assets, they own 40% of the country.
The entitlement issue should be directed at the entire nation. The entitlement to spend billions upon billions of dollars to be able to invade countries on a whim. Ten years later America has spent hundreds of billions of dollars in Afghanistand and Iraq.
More money is spent on the military than all the 'social' services combined.
I have said for thirty years that you can drop me from social insecurity, medicrud and all the other social warfare programs if you just give me the cash back tax free, with interest appropriate to the times I lived through (Remember 4% passbook interest and 11% annually on your money market?). I'll take the inflation hit that taxes everyone if I can just have the cash and control of my own fate. Since that ain't gonna happen, saying you shouldn't get the benefits is a bit like saying you don't want your stuff back from a breakin because you don't like how the cops caught the robber.
You cannot call people 'corrupt" for participating in a social welfare program at gunpoint. .And if you don't think social welfare programs are coercive, try not paying your 'fair share' of social security or medicare taxes. If you say no long enough, a man with a badge and a gun will come and collect it from you--or shoot you.
Of course Americans are all corrupted - we have all been acted upon for decades by the Corruptor in Chief, the US federal government. Everyone knows that these retirement entitlements are rotten corrupt Ponzi schemes, and most of us would rather have opted out when young, but our participation was not a matter of choice. Now, as we approach retirement after four decades of forced participation, people like Evan are tarring us as Greedy Geezers. We are not greedy, and we do not want to screw the next generation. We just don't want to be the bagholders in this scheme.
Yes, talk about all the greedy entitlement hungry middle class while we're spending thier money to the tune 100's billions on needless gifts to corrupt foriegn governments around the world.
The government has mismanaged our finances. They have been providing services (or the promise of future services) and not collecting enough money to support them. Shame on them, and shame on us for voting for them.
But whenever this issue comes up in the United States, the right wingers immediately begin insisting that this is evidence that social programs like education, health care, etc. are inherently wrong or bad. Sorry guys -- you just have to pay for them. Raise taxes, particularly for the top income earners. We can afford it (yes, I mean me). When we do that, we can build a compassionate society without enslaving future generations.
It's all about balance. Maybe we can't have cadillac social services for everyone, but we can ensure that everyone gets a basic education, receives reasonable heatlh care without risking financial ruin, etc. When you take those things away, you erode the fabric of society for everyone. Entrenched poverty, living in fear of getting sick or losing your job. Life is hard -- we've got to look out for each other.
Interesting article, though I suspect it's more to raise the question and people's ire - yes, we have an entitlement society, and yes, everyone does try to maximize their holdings in a free market society. However, those that have more financial and political power can adjust the circumstances to benefit them more greatly (i.e. greater tax breaks, better legal representation & asset protection, better access to politicians) than those that can't - I guess that can be called an entitlement as well.
If the author's theory is that everybody ultimately is in it for themselves, I don't have a lot of information to refute it, - just that ultimately, enough critical mass is going to be hit that entitlements for the rich as well as the poor are going to have to be cut, unless you want people rioting in the streets. In the meanwhile, maybe Mean Street should try working in a soup kitchen or working for 'Meals on Wheels' - for the declaration of charitable giving on their tax statement, of course, but maybe also to find what little soul he has left.
WHEN WILL the president live within his means
What an idiot you are. Social Security an entitlement? I paid into Social Security for over 30 years. I want my money out. It's irrelevant how it's structured.
Politicians have been buying the votes of one group or the other since the founding of this nation. Remember President Johnson's "Great Society" welfare boondoggles?
Social Security was recognized as a ponzi scheme from the very beginning ...albeit one that only the government could legally get away with fostering on the public.
Bottom line, is it the politicians fault, or ours, that we have continued to let them get away with it?
Social Security is the only money my grandpa has. The rest of the family is not exactly rolling in extra money either. How will we pay the nursing home bill if they get rid of social security? Not everyone has a 401K, you know. A lot of poor and middle-class Americans depend on social security. It's not like it's some "entitlement" that we don't need and could easily give up. Lots of Americans litterally couldn't live without it.
I identified with the Republican Party for years, but this attitude is why I've left the party, or rather the party left me. It used to be that a "bum" or "freeloader" was someone who took out and never paid in -- for example, a 19 year old who never had a job and was getting food stamps and public housing. Now days, Republicans and libertarians are including people in the same category who paid into Medicare and Social Security their whole adult lives and are now drawing out. And why no mention of the wasteful "defense" spending that makes up 20% ($689 billion) of the annual federal budget? Doesn't that contribute to the crushing national debt?
I was born in 1940. My answer to all of the questions is yes. I've paid into social security since I was 16.
I continue to work. My social security check is taxed as income. My present income is taxed for social security
and medicare. My social security tax exceeds my benefits. You ignore the fact that our congressmen,who have their own special retirement plan have raped and pillaged the social security system over the years.
Let me add a fourth question to your poll. Ask all born before 1955 if they would accept a refund with minimal interest on all that they paid into social security and call things even and forego social security
benefits. You might learn something, even though you seem to think you already know everything about
I agree, the current entitlement systems like Social Security in its present form is not good for our country. I propose to raise the age at which one is eligible for benefits as most of us are certainly capable and willing to work, as long as we can. Our minds are still good and we want to work, if given the opportunity; unfortunately, there is a great deal of age-related bias against hiring older workers. By the way, I am 67 and still fully employed and working in two businesses I built from scratch.
I would gladly be means tested and would give up some or all of my benefits. However, I do want to add the following fact that your article dismisses. I have paid into social secuirty since I was sixteen and I will never receive the same benefits that I would have if I had invested in an index fund. However, I was able to contribute and help others who were not as fortunate as I have been to enjoy great health and a great opportunity. So let's be fair. Those of us over 55 have paid into Social Secuirty and many of us, even if we are receiving benefits today, will never get out of Social Security what we have contributed. But that is OK, I consider Social Security just another tax. What we should also be talking about is how to make our tax system more equitable.
For example, I believe we should raise the limit on FICA tax. In my opinion, all of our wages should be subject to SS tax. Social Security tax unfairly taxes the middle class. Additionally, risk and return should be related. Carry for private equity and investment bankers should be abolished as they are not taking the risk that their investors are taking. These folks should fairly pay ordinary income tax on their earnings.
Nate, I love your responses. I was born in 1965 - right on the back edge of the boomers, so I've been paying into the SS fiasco for a while now, too. I would unequivocally take what I've paid into the program today in lieu of future benefits. The program is broken. It was meant to do one thing, but through the perversion of the gov't process is now, most certainly, taxing the younger generations in favor of those retiring over the next 20 years. Unfortunately, when I retire, I won't be able to count on SS, although I might get a sniff of what was promised. But boy would my retirement account look really good now if I could have redirected all the SS tax I've paid over the years into an IRA, or even into fully taxable investments.
You think this country has problems now, wait until you dump 100 million old folks on the street without a safety net. Try getting into an emergency room then. I hate to be so simplistic but this is exactly how and why revolutions are started. After reading all of the comments it's quite plain that the majority of people who responded are almost apoplectic at the idea of being robbed of what most of them have counted on their whole lives. If things are so dire, then why has there been no mention of the salary and benefits as well as the retirement benefits enjoyed by congress, how about all the military personnel and federal government employees who enjoy incredible before and after retirement benefits. Listen, if we let the elite and the entitled take what little is left to most folks, by way of a little financial insurance against being homeless and starving as we face old age, this country won't be worth living in...at any age. Cut the military from top to bottom, cut the cost of government by immediately cutting salaries, wages, benefits and retirement benefits. It cost $1 million dollars a year for ONE soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan. $1 million dollars folks! ... and they want to cut my $840 a month in Social Security? I'm loading MY gun! What an outrageous comedy!!!!!! But it ain't so funny anymore.
I totally agree with Nate and Chris. I would love to have my 7.65% and my companies 7.65% in my retirement account instead of paid to the government to "provide" me with retirement. It is not an entitlement program, it is a forced ponzi scheme. At least when people invested in Madoff, they chose to invest. It is a very broken system which needs to be stopped now. We will have to recognize that we are not going to get our "investment" back and those of us that are nearing retirement age are going to have to accept little or no payment for the years of forced investment. And this fiasco should tell us why, we sure should not be relying on the government to provide us healthcare.
what a nutcase.
The dirty Jevvs stole all the money. The filthy parasites fleeced Americans. We need a Hitler to straighten things out. We need another THIRD REICH!
Please don't cry to me about "As currently configured, Medicare and Social Security are transfer payments from younger and future generations of Americans to their elders." Have you seen what daycare and college costs today?
I couldn't answer "yes" to number three. Why? Because I've paid for Medicrap and Social Insecurity all of my working life. Understanding that I will likely NOT receive either, I am willing to make a deal - a buy out/bail out you can't refuse. I'll gladly sign away all rights to my Medicrap and Social Insecurity IF the government returns HALF of what I've paid in thus far and stops taxing my wages from here on out. Why do we feel entitled? Because we were forced into a contract by do-gooders who now can't deliver. Do we get our contributions back? Medicare is not a traffic ticket (close but no cigar). You can avoid a traffic ticket. You can't avoid government do gooder taxation.
Just because Evan is a lying cynical corrupted paraistic scoundrel like the most of his Wallstreet Bankster Buddies, he assumes that all of Americans are just like he is. He thinks It will help him to sleep at night .
Sorry about that Evan, every body in America is not like you and your New york cops.
Born in 1948, still working full time at age 63 and I'm in favor of means testing SS benefits. I won't claim till age 70 and my current estimate is more than I need.
Evan, you are bemoaning the end result of an entire country gone wrong - its just happened so slowly that everyone just thinks that this is "how it is" - of COURSE everyone wants more - all they can get their grubby little hands on in fact - because of very own government is filled with politicians that will screw the general population with laws requiring that you to buy things (car insurance, health insurance) pay taxes (illegal since civil war) and pay for "privileges" such as driving and gun ownership. Everyone is charged to death, with no parity or guarantee that a return will be forthcoming. So, we all connive to grab everything we can, before our "betters" in public office take it from us. The only way this ends is with revolution, with everyone becoming equal again. We are way to far gone to fix. But look at the bright side, at least we're not Mexico....
Former NYPD Captain, Eric Adams, alleges that ticket fixing and other "professional courtesies" are not corruption, and are the "norm in law-enforcement agencies around the country". Suppose that's true. It would be helpful to your non-law enforcement readers to know why so-called "professional courtesies" are extended. It's not that cops think and act like they're above the law. No, it's on a more elemental level - the instinct for self-preservation. When a cop is in trouble - about to get her ass kicked, or worse - she doesn't want her potential rescuers to have the slightest reservations about racing to save her. Reservations that, however unfair, may be in the back of their mind when recalling that she didn't give them a break over a minor infraction. If that sounds far fetched, I invite the skeptics to work for 30 years as a cop, as I have, and then give me their explanation.
I answer all three questions "yes" I have a decent income and have saved for retirement, and I think means testing is fair for Social Security as well as Medicare, why should billionaires receive the same benefits as low income folk? Means testing would assure people with limited means that they would still receive benefits. Medicare beneficiaries with a higher income and assets would receive smaller Medicare payments, in turn they could purchase secondary health insurance and pay for faster and better care- which is only fair as they are paying more. The NHS in the UK operates on a similar model. Social Security and Medicare would then function more as insurance with "benefits" rather than "entitlements". Itwould probably be possible to administer this system with low overhead, as there would be no "underwriting" or other machinations by insurance companies to denies claims as everyone would be "entitled" to "benefits".
What about debt relief? What ever happened to paying the loan back? Buying a house or anything else with a loan always runs the risk of being "underwater" . This is another example of people not willing to take responsibility for their actions.
Well written article. Most people want it all and want someone else to pay for it. Do not blame Obama. Blame President Johnson and his Great Society. I certainly am not going to work 60 hours a week so some bozo can drink imported beer and watch television every day. No way. I say that they cut out welfare (we used to call it relief in the old days) and get people to clean highways and work for a change. No work = no eat.
I'd rather pay an extra $1000 a year in taxes and have those bozo's watching TV at home then have them breaking into my home or shooting each other in the streets.
What people are missing about the Entitlement aspect is this...
-this is not "an investment" - it is a tax - the money you put in was long ago paid out. There is no fund that creates monies for you to receive your "benefits" - taxes are taken and paid directly to you. Look up what the word investment means!
to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
Are you seeing "profit" in any way shape or form? Has value appreciated?
-Congress may change the level of benefits at any time
-you are "guaranteed" NOTHING should congress change the rules regarding SS.
-when created the age of eligibility was plenty over the life expectancy. FDR knew what he was doing in omitting any mention of indexing the eligibility to the ongoing rise in life expectancy
-anyone who complains about what vouchers would do - so you are okay with ostensibly unlimited spending per person???
I'm 35 and I'm not even factoring in SS in my retirement plans. AT ALL. The gov has demonstrated that they cant be relied upon to make correct choices.
Entltlements are a morphine drip.
If you have paid into them for 40 years and have been told you are getting something, that's all well and good - but it is exceedingly unrealistic to expect any sort of ponzi scheme to sustain itself indefinitely. You were part of one and we're all paying in to it - but that doesnt mean it can survive an ever changing world without itself changing to keep figures in the black.
SS and Mecidare *NEED* to change. If you're denying that, I've got some great oceanfront property in Nevada to show you, for a reasonable fee!
Bottom line - people are getting more in benefits than they contributed during their lives. When Social Security started life expectancy was around 65 and benefits started at 65. Now life expectancy is 80 and people still get benefits at 65. When medicare started people just died from what we assumed were natural causes and nothing could be done for heart problems, cancer etc. Now everyone wants "everything" possible to be done to prolong life - cost is not an issue. Problem is people diid not pay enough during their lives for all these benefits. Sure they paid some amount - but not enough.
So here's my concern about means testing social security. I work hard and save for my entire life. I've paid my bills and paid more taxes than 90% of all Americans. I put my kids through college without student loans. Now you want me to give up this plan I've paid in to so that someone who made just as much money as I did and spent every cent, declared bankruptcy and who has left his children in debt can live offf my children's payments. Let me have my social security check so I can give it back to my children directly. By the way, both of them contribute the max in to their 401-k plan.
Fix they system, treat the disease and not the symptoms. Don't allow the federal government to raid the trust fund - it is the fault of our politicians and not our people. Just go look at the corn ethanol subsidy and you will see what is wrong with our country.
This article makes absolutely no sense.
It's been said before, democracy will fail once the populace figures out that they can vote themselves money from the treasury.
Now that Murdoch owns the WSJ, we seem to have a lot more of these silly commentaries.
One example. Americans that think they are entitled to paying 2% down and not losing their homes. Sadly, I know a number of people who bought these homes. They didn't think they were entitled. These crazy guys in the mortgage companies told them they could afford these homes. Now they are losing those homes. I have never heard one of them claim any entitlement.
I recently mentioned to a friend who was an officer at Bank America the sad state of Bank America. He sadly noted that when the Bank was located in the blue state of city of San Francisco, there was a much higher level of ethics than when its headquarters were moved to the Carolinas and the California employees were shoved out.
Sad. Sad.
This article is false propaganda and full of lies. SS, medicare, unemployment have been there for over 60 years now. The 14 trillion dollars of debt was built in last 10 years. In 2001 we were at a surplus. The entitlements are a needed social net, where as tax benefits for rich, oil companies, wars are the root cause of the debt. The author should be ashamed for this blatant lies in the face of evidence and blame the social net as people greed.
VERY well said Doug! I agree with all three including the last one but with conditions. I want every penny + interest I paid over all these years AND while I fully agree with the columnist, this question he asks cannot be addressed until the corporate subsidies their friends have given them ends along with foreign aid and the IMF who give our billions of borrowed monies to their failed banker friends and corrupt regimes.
Great article, and very true. But what's even more fascinating are the negative comments here from the entitlement class. They're going to fight reality tooth and nail to the end...
"not asking for much"
ZZ Top> I ain't askin' for much. I said, Lord, take me downtown, I'm just lookin' ... I'm just lookin' for some tush.
Government by fantasy never ends well.
Look you are trying to reason with a demagogue dishonest politician who is clueless about the american economy. Obama has never had a real job, could not run a lemonade or a hot dog stand and thinks he was elected to redistribute wealth. His economic philosophy can not work has not worked, never has worked and will not work, but his narcissism will not allow him to admit a mistake. You need to defeat him at every turn. He makes these simplsitic general comments than turns around and keeps destroying the economy. As the late Paul Tsongas a liberal democrat wise said. How can you be for the employee and be against the employer.
When people talk about cutting entitlements such as medicare and social security do you realize you are probably talking about killing people? There are no jobs. Maybe a few lucky people are working at age 67 (in businesses they started). That doesn't mean that everyone will be able to keep working after 65. You need to realize what you are saying. You are saying - more money for me now even if it means that others - and possibly yourself in 20 years - may die or go hungry.
You must be so rich that neither you or your children or parents will never need government help - even if you lose your job or very stupid. Either way you are very cruel.
People who talk about cutting entitlements are talking about people's lives. Are you so wealthy that you are sure that you'll never need Medicare or Social Security even if you lose your job? Will you be able to carry your kids and your parents too? Or are you just stupid? Yeah, a little more in taxes now and you can have security in the future. Not to mention that your philosophy is vicious. Do you go to church? Not everyone can work after 65. Yes - lady who is working in 2 businesses she started at 67. Should everyone who is not as smart as you just drop dead now? Have some compassion.
There would be enough money in social security if Congress had not used it all for other things.
We have been accumulating our net public federal debt for decades. Although, some years have actually seen an annual balanced budget or surplus. The net public debt was roughly $3.4T in yr 1990, and $5.7T by the beginning of yr 2001. The debt then increased $5T to about $10.7T during the eight years of the GWB administration. It has increased to $14.2T (a 33% increase) during the 2.5 years of the Obama administration. There's plenty of blame to go around. However, we need to reign in the deficit now. It cannot be sustained at current growth rates. We need real leadership. Pres. Obama has yet to submit a plan for balancing the Federal Budget. He's simply given speeches calling for "taxing the rich" - as the dems define it (the middle class). The budget he submitted this year, for instance, was voted down 99-0 in the Senate. Not ONE senator would support the President's budget.... He has no real budget or deficit reduction plan. He is not leading. period. At least the Republicans are driving the government to address this critical issue for our nation's future. I disagreed with the columnist. Peaceful Revolution is in the air. 2012 will be a conservative landslide if the republicans stick to their guns and make real changes. If not, we're toast...
The vast majority of SS recipients will have received by death more than they (or their employers!) paid in plus any reasonable amount of interest/earnings. Moreso for medicare. And this doesn't even get into the disability insurance aspects of it which had value also. So yes, I do think a good solution for the entitled older folk is to give them a check for the amount that they paid in plus interest, minus the implied disability insurance premium over the years, and then end the system. They're going to be disappointed with the amount of that check, though.
I've bought some insurance policies. One of them is income protection. If I should get sick or have an accident, is the insurance company entitled to turn round to me and say: "The cost of paying you out is more than the insurance premium you paid, so you can't have it?"
That's what you're suggesting here.
I thought the readers of the WSJ knew some basic economics. The cost of paying people to keep a decent lifestyle in their old age is less than the cost of throwing them to the wolves. I had cancer last year and my treatment - thank you German taxpayers - would have run into the tens of thousands of euros. But (a) it was cheaper than if I'd had to pay it myself because the German government can get a group rate on drugs and so on and (b) my partner and I are now fully functioning tax payers again because I'm cured. I will have another 30 years of paying into the tax system than I otherwise would have. Plus, as a professional, I'm an asset to the economy because I bring specialised skills to a project, that is creating work and bringing money into the country. So my personal financial contributions won't cover the cost of what's been spent on me, but my professional skills and productivity certainly will. We all got a bargain, I think.
So how does that relate to your call to throw old people under a bus? How much productivity will you lose because family members will have to drop out and take care of them, put off their own reproductive wants (less little future tax payers) etc etc. How much money will the economy lose because a whole demographic isn't able to spend? What will the cost be of emergency care for people who have no insurance and no prospect of buying any? Or are you suggesting the medical professionals should just let them die?
Oh hang on, you probably are.
It makes no sense that I do not have a choice when it comes to paying into SS. I am forced to do it so i can retire at a certain age. If i could i would put that money into a separate account to ensure i will have access to that money. Its my DAM money!!!!!! I am ENTITLED to it!!!!!! not someone that has only been in this country for a few years. So therefore, SS should not be draining this country. If only the people that paid into it can access this money there will be plenty to go around. Unfortunately, our shitty government hands it out to anyone.
I personally have family (by marriage) that have only been in this county for about 10 years. Sold there mercedes dealership in Iran, came to america to retire, and they are recieving SS benefits. How the hell does that happen!!!! Its these dam politicians...They all need to go and we need to take our government back!!!!!!!!!!
You want to talk corrupt, just look to the politicians who have squandered our money on vote buying to keep him or her in power.
we payed for our social security and there was a surplus untill Bill Clinton embezelled it and spent it on god knows what . that was our money and we want it the government has know right to steal it ..
Amazing the number of writers complaining about having paid in for 40 years and resent being called corrupt ....
That is beside the point ... I have paid Federal Insurance "Contributions" Act and Medicare taxes for over 30 years, myself ....
I don't understand why most of those posting on here don't just save their 'breath' and go to the social security website ... EN is not making anything up (with regards to the precarious position of SS/MC 'entitlements').
It matters not how much you have had withheld in payroll taxes ... it is a pay-as-you-go (sometimes 'PAYGO') system. Due to demographics and the current population growth (not to mention the generally poor economic conditions and outlook), there is not enough to pay for all of the benefits that were 'earned' (and I use that term advisedly).
"Entitlements" and interest on the national debt make up a far greater portion of federal spending than discretionary spending (in which military spending is included). Although there may be some 'room' to increase taxes there is no way a 'balanced' revenue increase/spending decrease will work unless the ratio of the former to later is 10/90 ....
Seems a lot of the angry / hateful comments are a total waste of breath (as usual) ... they only make the one posting look bad ... please check yourselves, folks ....
We can't have entitlements AND some of the lowest marginal income tax rates of any western industrialized country. Guess which one we will be getting rid of?
What bothers me about comments like the ones presented by this author is that no one in the 'cuts only' camp will acknolwedge the history behind current levels of taxation. Back when George W. was elected, he pitched tax cuts down to today's levels as a 'temporary' mechanisim to give back some of the surplus he inherited from Clinton to the tax payers. Google articles around the time that the cuts were passed and you will quickly see that said cuts were passed on the basis that they were temporary.
They were temporary because keeping taxation at such low levels would inevitably result in running a deficit even if spending was not increased. Our current deficit is the result of both increased expeditures and lower revenue streams.
It seems to me that inorder to rectify the situation we need to abolish tax cuts and make cuts to spending.
Otherwise you are basically saying that to right the ship, we need to make cuts so that spending levels fall below even where they were in 2000. I honestly do not know how we will be able to achieve such a thing without severely gutting government services and programs to the point of bringing them to their knees.
And I just don't think most average americans truly realize how much they depend on government services to keep energy and transportation infastructure safe, make sure the food we eat and the products we consume remain safe and regulate energy companies so that they do not continue to make the sort of blunders we saw out in the gulf last year.
My Grandfather told me that the only thing that keeps the poor from slitting the throats of the wealthy is a healthy middle class. A greedy man he was not, nor will I be. It amazes me the distain that my peers have for the less fortunate in this country. I love banking and finance but I work with some of the most selfish people on the face of the earth. A massive bail out that literally saved the fortunes of countless of welathy people and the response is to double down and push for a mass glut of government services so that folks can retain low levels of taxation. How much of where we are at from a deficit standponit was done to save the value of financial assets in this country? Where would all of our net-worths be right now if the gov hadn't stepped in with all tax payer funds (not just the top 2%) to backstop the value of financial assets?
I remember the deflation spiral of a few years back and I will never forget the look of panic on my collegues faces. Masters of the Universe until they find out they are a couple of trading sessions away from losing their entire kitty.
There are some in my neighborhood who think that they can use their wealth to create their own utopian society, that many government services are not needed, that they shouldn't have to subsidize anything that doesn't directly benefit them.
I wonder if they ever took a step back and thought about what created the environment that they were able to financially thrive in - an educated work-force that they can hire to help them profitably run their business, an educated work force that has the means and capacity to purchase their products and services.
An infastructure network to ship goods and services and allow workers and consumers a way to commute to places of business. A safe environment for their kids - safe water to drink, clean air to breathe and green spaces to relax and enjoy themselves in.
I for one, will vote to raise my taxes and I'm betting and hoping that the 98% of the people in this country who will not benefit from one iota from what the GOP is selling will do the same.
Only time will tell....
Blame this is on the entire concoted system of debt and control created by the globalists and rockefeller types. American greed exists because our government is spun out of control. The whole sh*t storm is about to bust and anyone with half a brain can see that.
Blame this is on the entire concoted system of debt and control created by the globalists and rockefeller types. American greed exists because our government is spun out of control. The whole sh*t storm is about to bust and anyone with half a brain can see that.
People continue to think in the box. If they could get outside, they would see that the world has changed. We have access to medical procedures that allow us to escape much of the suffering, crippling, and premature death earlier generations experienced. Those procedures are expensive and we must expect to pay more for them. Our order of spending used to be house, car, and medical expenses. Now it should be house, medical expenses, and car ... or even medical expenses, house, and car. Such a long period of time exists between having the money and having the need that only the government has the long reach required to cover the gap. We should concentrate on getting the corruption out of government. Put some people in jail for misappropriating funds.
How is social security bankrupting our government? An individual can only receive from social security what they paid into social security as they are "entitled" to this money, because it was theirs in the first place.
So, if the government operates under a (revenue - expense) model, and we removed social security, we'd be in a bigger hole that we were before because there is still more money going into social security than currently coming out.
Last point, instead of picking out programs that are designed with good intentions and to benefit the less affluent (and yes, the programs need improvement) why not call out the true "corrupt" Americans who keep money hidden overseas to avoid paying taxes? Seems to me this group borders between unpatriotic and treasonous.
All factions involved in this struggle want all they can get. That includes the Banks Owners, Big Business Owners, Small Business Owners and Workers. And then there are also the greedy investors. No one policy suits all of them. Creditors want austerity and debtors want inflation, Workers want their jobs and entitlements and businesses do not want to hire them and do not want to pay taxes (does anybody?).
When you say, "Our economy is choking on over $14 trillion of debt brought on by millions of middle-class Americans 'not asking for much,' just their Medicare, Social Security and unemployment checks", remember that there are Creditors who have loaned them that $14 trillion without realistically analyzing how they would ever be paid back. Big and small businesses do not want to pay the workers enough to pay it back - they want the Government to continue to subsidize unemployed workers - but banks and corporations are both with Geithner on raising the Debt ceiling and keeping interest rates and inflation at zero to continue the status quo which serves them so well. All factionswant their own side of the bread heavily buttered.
What people like the author of this piece do not undrstand is that the status quo cannot continue, but one faction cannot have it all and leave the others with nothing on their plate. There is a compromise that must be made.
The banks and businesses cannot have everything they always had and leave the workers to rot, and they know that. They want the Government to continue to subsidize the Workers with more debt; they just - they don't want the Government to default because that would make their credit more expensive.
The best solution for the American people and a general economic recovery is to monetize the Debt - pay it off with printed dollars - but that would cause inflation which means it would be the creditors would take the hit in loss of the value of the outstanding loans they have make to Government and to homeowners and to consumers. Average people would benefit by the inflation caused by monetization because it would decrease the value of their debts at the same time eliminate the National Debt so their children would not be burdened by it. Government would end up debt free after 25 years of monetizing Deficits and the Debt as it becomes due. What could be better for People?
Taking one side in this debate only shows one's ignorance. Only a compromise can succeed.
Seniors Beware!! You are under attack by economists. Economists believe that the ends justify the means and therefore attack people who save money. It started with the marriage penalty in 1969. Economist found that married people saved per capita then single people. Economist and the government went around stating that a married person paid less tax than a single person. That was a lie. Prior to the law a married person paid the same per capita tax that a single person paid. Remember that a marriage consists of two people. Now, Obama declared the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. Did he then send a directive to the IRS to begin collecting the marriage penalty on gay married people? Many gay married people could split income under the states community properly laws. Don't forget that Social Security was sold to the public as an insurance program. There is no means test for insurance benefits .Economists have led us down the prim rose path to an economy dependent upon irresponsible spending backed by irresponsible lending. The US has one of the lowest per capita savings rate in the world. Economists should step forward and take the blame for the current mess.
I don't have any kids but I answer yes to all 3- I believe in giving other people's kids a better life,too.
The government has used the Social Security funds as a piggy bank, raiding it whenever they wanted to. After paying into the system for 45 years, I don't consider it an entitlement. It's just a badly managed retirement account, teaching me to leave nothing up to the government.
A year ago a company I have invested in sold a property. My income went up by 3 fold for 1 year. My medicare premimum has increased from $95 a month $524 per month for 1 year. How can Evan Newmark make a case that Medicare is NOT subject to "needs testing"?
We need a leader who will tell it like it is, and get us on board and tell me my social security is a suppliment and not a full support PENSION, instead of all these creeps who insist nothing is wrong and we can have it all, (and have someone else pay for it!) I go without spending now, and I put something away for the future, and I fear that when that day comes, I will be called the mean, selfish "rich" person, and not the wise saver who lived within his means.....
Lets all thank the Republicans and BUSH for getting us in the worlds biggest mess.
If your conservative look in the mirror and ask this question, am I a greedy billionaire? If your not your ideological views are skewed.
" I will be called the mean, selfish "rich" person, and not the wise saver who lived within his means…"
Being wise and frugal with your investments so you have a cushion for retirement is by no means the same as acquiring wealth and becoming "rich" as your so certain you will be seen. Working a high six figure per year salaried position and saving/investing as much as you possibly can will not yield significant enough financial gains to attain any real amount of wealth.
The author of this article and so many voices from the comment section fail to understand the reality of the economic situation: the inequality of wealth between the richest families and everybody else has become insurmountable.
The argument you present favorably views the hard-working, honest, 1950's style American dream. The American Dream only our Grandparents held to be true. The rich paid higher taxes in the past and those taxes paid out incredibly large entitlements: the Interstate System, Universities, Medicare, Social Security, Massive Welfare Expansion, even a $200 Billion Shuttle Program. Those romanticized pieces of our past (1950's/1980's) remains the Conservative idealization of our society: people worked hard, moved into/created the suburban society we all know and love today, sent there kids to college, paid off their homes, retired with a good a pension/savings and an economically stable end of life.
That scenario is no longer possible for the vast majority of the population. A far greater portion of public expenditures have been passed down to far lower income earners (THAT is why small government and deficit reduction has become so important: those efforts provide the only plausible way this system could remain sustainable). Concurrently real wages have increased approximately 1% over the past 20 years when adjusted for inflation. Exponentially increasing medical costs, fuel costs, etc. continue to erode any chance for middle class economic security. The richest will get much, much richer before the end. The poor much poorer.
"If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich."
- John F. Kennedy
(Personally I can't wait to see how this all plays out)
Kevin you need to get a reality check. Quit looking in the rearview mirror to see whom to blame, there will be democrats and republicans there....and maybe the democrats will outnumber the realists. People like you who wear blinders are what is hurting this country, we need to vote for the best person no matter their political affiliation.
I just started receiving SS last year, and Medicare this year. I was foreward looking and dedicated enough to serve in our Armed Forces long enough to earn a retainer. That amounts to about 50% of a comparable Federal overnemnt employee. Many state employees do even better. An additional benefit of that service was very affordable healthcare. When I moved onto the Medicare rolls, by premium rose by 300%. And, as we all know, Medicare is not a choice.
For all of our childrens' lives, we have been helping them financially. I can't see that changing in the foreseable future. So if means testing were applied, would big brother look at what I've been able to save, particularly by "living within my means", and that I continue to assist my children since the cost of living so outpaces their wages, or would they just look at my savings? This cold be tricky, and with the uncertainty of America's future under this administration, question #3 cannot be answered in the affirmative, except perhaps by government union workers. For the rest of us, it's a crapshoot.
The average person who retires today will have paid $155,000 into Medicare over their life and they should get that back. Plus interest.
But under current law, they will get $400,000 back. who should pay the difference and why?
If they didn't want to give me Social Security benefits, they shouldn't have taken 3-7% of my pay for the last 50 years. I would have been happy to invest that money myself and provide more for my own retirement, and as for medicare, give me the medicare deduction, plus interest, that was taken from my pay for many years, and I'll pay for my own health insurance. I never did want goverment involved with my plans.
people are mad when their homes get foreclosed upon not because of overbuying or too little a down payment or whatever, they are mad because the same set of rules do not apply to everyone. when the banks and brokerage companies went out of business due to bad business practices or crooked behavior the goverment simply bailed them out, and it is business as usual, fine, but the same set of rules should apply to all. TJ
The real issue is that fact that Wall Street Americans and Main Street Americans play by two different sets of rules.
The AARP is an insurance company.
Here's a simple fact... if you eliminate the Bush tax cuts...which obviously ten years into them haven't created jobs and then scaled back defense and war spending (most bloated and overpriced military in the world equipped with hideously expensive weapons which if used anyway would result in a nuclear exchange therefore guess what...we don't need them in the first place).
The divide between main street and Wall Street. If a company goes broke... it just reforms or reorganizes then comes back as something else and can get loans and financing right away. If a consumer goes broke/gets foreclosed they have a stain on their record that lasts for years and causes them to be charged hideous interest rates for anything they want to buy. Pile it on the little guy anotherwords...thats the way Wall Street works.
If a regular schlub employee does a bad job...they get terminated and may get some small severance or unemployment. If a CEO does a bad job...they get a $ 20 million severance package and the ability to cash in their options for millions more....
Are you kidding me? You're saying that the tiny amount folks get from SS and Medicare makes them greedy? Living within your means is one thing, but you're advocating for the idea that only the wealthiest 10% deserve the American dream! Who's really greedy here? Raise taxes on everyone making more than a QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR and everything will be fine. You're a lying propagandist.
Eliminate social security completely won't help. The govt would still be spending more money than they collect in revenue. The govt has singled out the two most expensive programs, social security and medicare, for cuts as the solution because they lack the courage to cut out all the pork that keeps them in office. It's looking like the deficit in 2012 is going to be 1.7 trillion. If the cut 4 trillion over the next 10 years, it will still be 1.3 trillion. That's not progress. Come on Senators and Representatives, this is not rocket science. If you run a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit for the next 10 years, we going to be 27 trillion dollars in the hole. Has everyone gone insane?
The third question is all or nothing. I've paid hundreds of thousands of dollars into the system, through the employer and employee side of social security. There is another option. Reduce the amount retirees will receive based on the years out from retirement. For example. For every year that you are away from your current social security retirement age, your benefits will be reduced by 3%. Once you are 30 years out, all benefits will cease. This will give the retiree time to plan for retirement if not already doing so. Those over 30 years out will have a privatized system. Their contributions will be owned by them and the employer half will go to the general fund. Also, for every year out from retirement, one month will be added to the current retirement age.
To those that claim social security pays back more than I paid in, I say "phew." If I apply the time value of money to the payments I made over the past 40 years, it adds up to about $500,000 dollars. If the govt gives me back $13000 a year, they going to have to do that for about 38 years before I break even. They told me they were going to provide in my old age. Now I'm old and they look like they planning to reneg (sic)! This country has lost it's greatness when it's government resorts to cheating it's citizens. We going to end up paying a lot of money for the administration of nothing while we go broke doing it! It's time to reduce federal salaries and pensions. Lets base the reduction on a percentage of the GDP and pass a constitutional amendment to enforce it.
Creavitve ways to finance Social Security through the bump years of so many retiree baby boomers: add a 50 cent tax per gallon of gasoline bought at the pump until revenues can pay expenses in the program (many years from now) Don't limit revenues to funds deducted from paychecks. BTW, we cannot afford US foreign policy, too much wasted spending on wars. What for? Meet your obligations with your own citizens first, before venturing offshore to spend taxpayers money.
If you cut 2 and spend 3 in my math that is a negative -1 These guys must of went to school here in Atlanta
The author does not seem to like Americans much. Or maybe it is just the middle class and the poor that he despises. All of us underlings sponging off the genius of the rich and privileged. How dare we think that we deserve a piece of the pie. After all, anyone can do our jobs right? Anyone can be a teacher, policeman, social worker, mechanic, construction worker, factory worker, janitor, and small business owner.
The author makes me sick. Raise taxes on the rich to the rates under Clinton!
My present plan is to retire in 2017. By then, I will have paid into Social Security for 51 continuous years. And this guy says I'm not "entitled" to get something back for that?
Don't blame the deficit on Social Security. It is probably the only government program that has always paid its own way. Don't blame retirees and future retirees for the fact that politiicians raided the fund to pay for other things. Now they say I'm "corrupt" to expect them to return my money. Had they left the money alone, there would be no need to pay it back.
Madoff did the same thing with his ponzi scheme as our elected leaders did with social security and thats the publics fault? SS has become a corrupt tax. Pilfered by whoever holds office for the benefit of a vote. This would amount to a breach in fiduciary responsibility if it were a private trust.
What horse(Expletive deleted). The author sets out from a ridiculous point of view and then presents his "fix" in the form of a biased opinion poll question.
Thanks, but take a flying leap buddy.
Why don't you go out and ask these three questions and see what the elderly say:
1) Is social security affordable for our country?
2) Is medicare affordable for our country?
3) Is affordability the only question you need to have answered before you support/retract support from a government program?
The answer to (1) is yes, since social security cannot add to the deficit by law. The answer to (2) is it depends on how you fund it. The answer to (3) will surprise every politician. Since most people support those programs even if they found out that as currently funded, they are not affordable.
80% support amongst Americans. That is the support for these two programs. By comparison, 30% of Americans support our military actions world wide.
I would find the politicians more believable if I didn't know where this is going. If they can eliminate these programs, they are not going to lower taxes. They are going to pocket the difference and the trust fund (which they pretty much have already) and give it away to their friends and corporate backers. Americans will feel typically ripped off, but oh well we only have two parties and you have to vote for one of them.
What horse patoo. This idiot calls baby boomers "corrupt" because they paid their fair share into a program that would have remained fiscally sound...had politicians not robbed it for pet programs.
A lot of us wanted to cease paying into social security, years ago, but were not allowed to. The theory being that we could use that same amount to invest wisely, and provide a supplemental income after retirement. We were forced to invest in a broken system and most would like to at least reap what we've paid...plus the interest we weren'ta llowed to make privately.
I'm not quite sure how that is corrupt.
The rich need to pay up!!! Voodoo economics never worked and never will! Because companies hoard thier cash and send jobs overseas. Wealthy indiviuals always want more and don't care about anyone else.
Were's all the jobs for these bailouts and tax breaks??? Ask goldman who pocketed the most and is now taking jobs overseas.
Our economy is choking on over $14 trillion of debt brought on by millions of middle-class Americans "not asking for much," just their Medicare, Social Security and unemployment checks. - Really??????? Thats where all the debt has come from? What about two wars off the books, the bailouts of banks, the bad loans given to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And the reduced revenues because so many americans out of work? :How in the heck did you getthat number?
You wrote "Our economy is choking on over $14 trillion of debt brought on by millions of middle-class Americans "not asking for much," just their Medicare, Social Security and unemployment checks."
That's bull. The debt was caused by
the war in Iraq,
the half trillion dollar cleanup and reconstruction after new orleans was completely flooded,
the mortgage loan crisis
and the huge spending increases top prevent the 2008 depression from becoming much worse.
If those events had not taken place there would be a manageable size deficit.
Dont blame entitlements that everybody wants after they are too old to work, or disabled. You too can get too sick to work and lose all of your savings.
Dont tamper weith social security and medicare.
We became an empire by military capabilities and by the number of military bases worldwide but without "the spoils" as a result since it's not ethical now days to simply steal the wealth of the host countries.
We are the "Policeman of the World" without compensation and its all financed by borrowed money?!?!? Is anything dumber than that?
I agree completely. It's our own fault -- the shape we're in. And part of it is lazyness. We send politicians to Washington and expect them to take care of our business without our having to keep an eye on them. Not so! We have to watch them all the time or they will take care of themselves and their friends at our expense.
I am 47 and my wife is 40 , we live within our means. We have savings, we have no debt except the house, paid off all college loans, we don't drive the nicest car's but they are paid for. We may have to wait to save up for something we want, ie. new furniture, but we do eventual save up the money and buying it is sweet when we actually saved for it. I can't talk for anyone else, but it's whole different world when you don't owe much to anyone. It's actually ok to live within your means, we have pretty much everything we want, it just takes a bit longer to get.
Is Congress also lowering their benefits? I mean, as leaders they should lead by example. Right?
Oh, all this self-flegellation about how venal we all are. What about all the people who really can't afford a decent retirement without Social Security and Medicare? What about those of us nearing retirement age who always lived within our means, but included within our means the existence of some basic social safety net at retirement age and therefore adjusted our savings accordingly. And for all you high minded folks who think you are so great because you lived within your means -- really? did you do it without debt? Did you take your mortgage interest deduction? Did you take all your other deductions for education expenses and use tax-deferred 401k or 403b or IRAs? If so, then you are just as much on the tax payer's teat as anybody else and all those things you relied on to "live within your means" are exactly what's at stake here.
Yes, people have paid into SS. The problem is that people are living longer and are getting paid out at a higher rate than what they paid in would justify. If you pay in $0.75 and get out $1, you've got a $0.25 entitlement. Individual SS accounts would expose this, but that got shot down a number of years ago.
If social security is corruption, then what is the politicians who in their innate wisdom moved all the funds in social security and future funds into the general fund, because there was so much money in the social security fund that it could never be spent. Now they discover that our corruption is bankrupting the pile of money that they have been spending like drunken politicians. Don't want to insult the sailors.
nobody in this country feels more 'entitled' than wall street bankers and no one has benefited more or received more handouts than the bankers and 'captains' of certain industries who have profited, literally, trillions from the middle class taxpayer's expenditures for our corporate welfare subsidies and tax breaks, wars to protect the oil supply and economy and the bailout of the investment banking and mortgage industry. Spare me my father's medicare, as he only worked for 30 years as a public servant and his pension doesn't quite cover all the health care industry profits necessary for our privatized health industry to continue to please wall street.
So I am one of those self entitled americans, who is upper middle class, and I paid into unemployment for years then when it was time to finally and unfortunately take my "turn" most of the money was used by others. "My "self entitled" social security is taken out by the self entitled government, I didn't ask it it just is, My self entitled welfare is there to protect me in the advent that I need it. God forbid I do but I have been paying into this mismanaged fund for years. So before you go ideolog on all of us, why don't you wake up and smell the coffee, you pay social security, you pay fica, you pay unemployment the same as the rest of us. I am willing to bet when your turn comes and it will you will have your hand out to. It not self entitled, we paid for it you moron!!!!!!
Medicare and Social Security are not bankrupting our nation. The wars are.
Excuse me, but it seems that the "entitled" and mean Amrican is the person who runs for office and lies about what he will stand for (his constituents) and actually uses office to get wealth and power and ego gratification If I have put money into accounts (bank or pensions or taxes), I am ENTITLED to believe that I will get benefit for those investments and not some politician spending my money on wars that I do not support, roads that should become new rail lines, and oil which shoul be morphing to wind, solar, etc. etc.
What is MEAN is politicians asking Americans to accept sacrifices that they are unwiling to accept themselves.
I've been self-employed almost all my adult life and have been paying into Social Security both the employee's share and the employer's share. I pay more self-employment tax than income tax most years, and I have not managed to save anything for retirement -- my goal is just to get out of debt by the time I'm 66. I would much rather have kept the money I have paid into Social Security for all these years, but that was not an option. Please don't suggest that it is selfish of me to expect to receive Social Security payments based on what I paid in.
I just looked at my pay stub......guess what Evan? I have been paying into SS for 35 years under the guise that it would be there in my retirement. Guess what Evan? It is not the "greedy citizens" who are the real greedy, nope, it is the greedy politicians who have bankrupted this country. SS is bankrupt because unlocked the vault during the '60's, putting the funds into the general coffers. Also, Evan, how the hell do you equate corrupt policemen with people wanting their SS? Pull ye head out of ye arse there Evan.
Non partisan economists (not the angry extremists you apparently listen to) state and document that unfunded wars, Medicaid Part D, tax cuts, and recession are major contributors to the current crisis. President Obama's "spending" has not even moved the needle yet. You and the other extremists who blame middle class Americans for the mess we are in forget that a massive transfer of wealth has occurred over the 20 years. Everyone including the poor have health 'insurance' already in this country as ERs are obligated to treat all patients. President Obama is simply trying to put a better, less expensive structure in place. Every run a business Evan? Understand what it's like to have health insurance costs double every 4-5 years? That's a tax that chokes commerce and kills jobs. You are consistent, like Hannity, Levine, Limbaugh and Beck--loud, hysterical, angry and never back anything you assert up with a hint of documentation. Look up some facts and we may let you sit at the adult table if you mind your manners, stop whining, and get a clue.
Hi Evan:
Are you that thick? It is "public servants" including that dude in the WH that are corrupted. Do not insult my intelligence!
There's a LOT of misinformation here. Before commenting on Social Security and how it's broken or how it should be fixed or eliminated, it might be good to find out whether or not you actually know what you are talking about. Here's a preview: most of you will be surprised.
First, SS has a surplus of well over $2 trillion, which by law has been loaned to the federal government, who will have to pay the money back along with prevailing market interest when SS finally needs to dip into these funds. Loaning money to the federal government is a very bad idea, as we, the taxpayers will essentially be paying ourselves back when that time comes. Fixing SS is simple. Stop loaning to the government; start loaning to creditworthy, low risk borrowers; increase contributions by 1%, and eliminate the tax cap on earnings. This will stabilize SS for the long haul and allow an increase in benefit payments from around 1/3 earnings to 50% earnings, placing more money in the hands of the people who will spend it, increasing demand for goods and services, stimulating the economy and creating jobs.
Next, getting back more than we put in is a fallacy. Here's the math. SS is taxed at 6.20% from employee AND employer, for a total of 12.40%. The median American income is around $45K, and we'll say that people work around 45 years, on average [start work at 20 and retire at 65]. So, combined we pay in around $5580 annually, which totals $251100 over 45 years, not including interest. The average SS payment is around $1000, which means that our contributions cover us for around 21 years. That brings us up to age 86. The life expectancy for women in the U.S. is around 81 years; for men, it's only around 77 years, according to the most recent available U.S. Census figures. So, essentially, women are leaving about 5 years worth of contributions in the trust fund, while men leave behind about 9 years of contributions. Sure, some people live longer, but some people die a lot sooner, too. See why it's a fallacy that we get back more than we paid in? We didn't even account for all the accrued interest.
Social Security keeps an estimated 40% of seniors from living in poverty, and the poverty level is shockingly low. Plenty of people never make enough money to pay all the bills every month, let alone save any for retirement. And, so we don't all start feeling bad for the wealthy, a fun fact: the wealthiest 20% of Americans control 85% of America's wealth, leaving 80% of America to share the remaining 15%. Fair tax? Let's tax based on wealth rather than just income; I'm sure a lot of people could get behind that.
Politicians LOVE it when we don't take the time to arm ourselves with facts; they prefer that we remain ignorant, and believe what the people on the "news" tell us to believe. Don't be a sheep; be a leader. Doesn't take long to get the facts; let's arm ourselves and spread the word, and the slimy politicians [and the special interests who pay them] won't be able to get away with nearly as much in an informed society.
I am offended by this article. It is not the norm to expect others (like the government) to take care of you. In fact, people born before 1955 are some of the only folks who understand this. It was after 1955 that government started to 'borrow' from S.S. So much so that it is almost bankrupt! That was not the original plan. It was intended to supplement people's savings for retirement. But it (SS) got 'fat' and the government simply could not keep its hands off from the loot. (because they overspent other people's money!) A government grown out of proportion will always need more and more money. In fact the government fostered a couple of generations now of dependent-thinking, parasitic citizens. (to say nothing about the illegals!) And these dependent individuals now need cash to sustain themselves, and the Dems need voters. Voila! A perfect combination. Until the citizenry starts to think and do for themselves, the government will grow bigger and its citizens more and more handicapped. (and the country will fall apart!)
I have worked and paid into SS for over 45 years. My first contribution was working in a car wash in 1960. I am currently receiving benefits and working part time because people call me to work. Sometimes I say yes and sometimes I say no. Served my country in the Army-honorable discharge. I worked myself through college, one of the easiest things I ever did. Raised my family, got them educated and always provided, even though I always paid the maximum SS tax. It seemed like when I made $60k a year SS tax was the first $60 and then the next year $61k and so on. What I am leading to is; Your question is a no-brainer. Of course I am happy to say yes to all 3 questions. It should be that way for all Americans-just like when I was in high school all the males assumed they would have to do "Service." I would suggest to you that things went off the tracks in the 80's when Reagen taught all Americans (not just old timers) that it was okay to be greedy.
You are absolutely right. The 60's generation ( and I was born in 1958) has ruined our country with its greed. These fat cats have feathered their nests to the point that my grandchildren will have nothing. I will be more than happy to p*** on their graves.
It's not okay for the rich not to pay their bills , or taxes and expect Americans to provide them with the social welfare to sustain the way of life that they have been accustomed to while they rob from all under the middle class.You cry about the small things that are not really causing the deficit, and you are being the sign holder for the fat cats that pay these mouthpieces to promote their wealth, that makes you a pawn in this ultra-rich man's game.Start learning the facts, and promoting what really counts and that is your family's well-being. I smell hatred and it stinks.Start out by showing respect for your country's leader by calling him President whether you like him or not , that would make your argument at least somewhat meaningful even if not fact filled. Go read and see if what you spew is true. Research is a deal breaker for a fear monger.
Funny how he blames the unemployed, yet says not one word about the welfare just handed to criminal bankers, which is well over a trillion dollars. Hey, if unemployment dropped to a low level - think about the tax revenue generated from salaries.
You really believe that people enjoy living on a fraction of their previous salaries?
I was a waiter before I graduated from college and worked in the professional world. Finance as a matter of fact. I traded stocks, not subprimes. Until a few years ago, I was well employed but overqualified.
Have you tried getting a clerk/server job with a good degree and professional experience? They don't even hear that you're going back to school. I didn't think I was supposed to be fluent in Cantonese for employment when I was taking classes or I would've pursued it.
The managers laugh me off and run me out of their restaurants. My restaurant managers from my college jobs loved me. The restaurant managers now for some reason think that there are tons of jobs for us for some unknown reason. It's not that I don't want to work, the pizza places won't take me seriously.
The girls who flunked out of Cal State have two minimum wage jobs. I can't get one.
Again, the managers will not take me seriously. I've dumbed down my resume. But I'll get caught if I lie on one. Believe me, I have.
And you're blaming us for the mess that is the budget?
You're lucky if you experience karma instead of revenge.
Great article, but the difficulty is that all of us over 55 played by a set of rules not of our making and planned our lives around these rules. I did not vote for them, had no input on money the government confiscated to pay for them, and now, at the end, just before receiving the small amount that I paid for (I would have been better off with my pittance invested in the market and not merely transferred to someone's grandmother) I am now confronted (rightfully so I might add) with the younger generation who now understands the ripoff that is government. Hell, you guys voted for Obama, I sure a hell didn't.
Great piece. All very true. If somone seriously proposed accross the board meaningful cuts to entitlements and military spending as part of a package deal with thoughtful tax reform, I think the country would get behind it. But that would take courage and leadership. Something quite lacking in Washington.
Means testing???? These people have paid into Social Security for over 50 years and deserve to receive what they paid for. It is politicians like Obama who have stolen this money and thus can't pay per contract unless the debt ceiling is raised. You appear to be a revisionist who changes history to match their limited current thinking. America is in trouble, lots of trouble, if people like you are in charge.
Are you kidding me? First of all, middle class people dont want unemployment checks, they want jobs. There maybe a small percentage of people who want to sit home and get welfare, but it's not what most folks want. Finding decent work that you can support yourself and your family on is hard to do these days. Secondly, the monies for any of these entitlements are coming out of our paychecks. We pay for them. The 30% or so that's missing from my check every couple of weeks is used to pay for these entitlements. When I pay for something, I expect to get what I am paying for. If I have paid for my Social Security checks during my career, yes I feel entitled to get what I paid for.
The sad part is State Senator Eric Adams is the problem, but his statement appears to be in fact the 'norm'. Many ordinary citizens fear to speak out, or have their complaints simply ignored when they do complain. Most citizens who think attituted like Adams are wrong, they do not want a problem with a group that already thinks itself above the law, and in many cities acts that way with impunity. All you need to do is go to one of the popular video upload sites and see the shear volume of police misconduct actually caught on video. In Sao Paulo, some one uploaded a video what looked like an actual execution of a reported drug dealer by police because the guy had a gun hidden in his boot, taken behind a van and shot down right there in the street,
What do you mean entitlements!! Yes the Social Security System started as a Ponzi scheme, but it was corrected with the Greenspan recommendations of 1983. The entire system was sold to Americans in the 30's as an Insurance program. The Social Security Trust fund was kept separate from the General Fund. I remember when "balancing the budget" meant balancing the General Fund. In the Johnson era, upon the recommendations of economists the politicians began including Social Security Fund surpluses to offset General Fund deficits. The Social Security Trust fund can be easily fixed by applying retroactively, the taxes on Social Security benefits to the Trust fund instead of the General Fund. The real problem is that we Americans for decades have consumed more that we have produced. The difference has to be made with borrowed money either by individuals, corporations or governments. Economists have an "attack the saver" approach starting with the marriage penalty in 1969. Because older Americans tend to save as opposed to spend, a tax on health care benefits was proposed. The sponsors did not tell you that a person age 64 would pay twice the tax that a person age 48 would pay on the same plan. Let's face it; economists and the politicians that follow their advice have built an economy dependant on irresponsible spending backed by irresponsible lending. The US has one of the lowest personal savings rate in the entire developed world. The savings rate in China is 30% after taxes. The US savings rate after hitting a low of 0.6% in 2006 is now around 3%. If the Republicans get their way and reduce Social Security benefits, it will send a strong message to younger Americans to save more. What will that increased savings do to the economy?
The reason cops and prosecutors are allowed to be corrupt and the reason the Supreme court recently gave procesutors express permission to commit felonies as they please while doing their job, is because they terrorize poor working people and steal their money, and pass it on up to the politicians and corporations whom they loyally protect. They concentrate on screwing the majority of the citizenry for the non-working, lazy wastrels the author so obviously adores. When cops investigate and arrest the wrong people to any significant degree (wealthy, connected elites), they lose their immunity. That's why they never do. Most are corrupt because you want them to be; for your classes benefit. Now you complaint that they have immunity? That's the deal you struck dummy. Cops leave corrupt elites alone to commit crime, corrupt elites leave cops alone to commit crime. Every contract has to have consideration on both sides. Is that too complicated for the author or does he think elites can keep their immunity if they don't grant immunity to others who do their dirty work? If you don't believe the deal exists, try making a citizen's arrest of a an attorney or a media member for committing a misdemeanor in your presence. Let me know how far the cop lets you get with that.
Immunity granted amongst the classes of persons who work with or for the racketeers who are financially raping this country has grown so vast and co-mingled that we basically live in a fantasy world, where good people are labeled criminals, and criminals are continuously honored and feted in Washington and New York. It's anarchy for most of us, so a few can swim in ill-gotten money without fear of arrest. Nothing safe from the gang; your 401k, or anything else not existing and held in your hands. Nothing exists to stop attorneys, the IRS, and other protected goons from stealing everything you own. Now they want to flood the country with immigrants to shield their class from our wrath.
New victims get to go the front, as long as they'll clean their homes without complaint, or screw the people of America from a high-level position. Just do the racketeers bidding and you are golden. Work hard. That's for losers who deserve nothing but a potters grave (if that). Loan 16 trillion to the banks and then annihilate the retired workers to cover the losses. Oh, they're sooooo 'entitled'.
We should identify all persons who have collectively granted immunity unto themselves, and collectively deny them food and other sustenance, until they agree to turn on each other.
"Our economy is choking on over $14 trillion of debt brought on by millions of middle-class Americans "not asking for much," just their Medicare, Social Security and unemployment checks."
The $14 trillion of debt sure didn't come from Social Security, which has run a $2.5 trillion surplus over the last 20 years, except that it was misappropriated to fund income tax cuts. Try two unfunded wars, the Medicare Part D gift to the pharmaceutical companies, and those irresponsible tax cuts that turned surpluses into deficits. Throw in an out-of-control financial system that caused the worst recession since the 1930s...
It isn't the average American expecting the Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment benefits they paid for for decades that has put us in this fix. Shipping jobs overseas, irresponsible tax cuts, and socialization of banking system losses are far more relevant. BTW, $8 of the first $10 trillion was run up under Reagan and the two Bushes, but of course only the $4 trillion under Obama, largely caused by Bush's failures, is of interest to the born-again deficit cutters of today.
Typical WSJ garbage. Say hi to Rupert when you visit him in jail.
Let me keep the 6.2% Social Security, .8 Federal Pension (CSRS) and 1.45% Medicare that are currently deducted in payroll deductions and allow ME to invest them. Clearly the federal government is incapable of managing my money. Quit referring to social security and medicare as 'entitlements.' I paid $119.53, $28.04 and $41.26 respectively from my paychecks in June.
Tax me.
If we want to keep Social Security and Medicare, then we need to pay for it. -- Me too ... not the 'rich fat cats' ... but me too - A 55 year old middle class working class guy. I can't stand the hypocricy - 'tax rich people (not me)", tax corporations (not me), cut those other benefits (not mine!).
Means testing - Yes, Raising the retirement age - Yes. This will hurt me, but its the only honest way to live.
Like others, I take issue with the situation where money I paid into these programs will not be available when I can use it. The altruistic "greater good" part of me should be settled with the knowledge that any means test will probably exclude my ever getting any of what I have paid in. But this would almost be okay if I thought that those who will collect it are worthy. Unfortunately the pessimest part of me knows that perhaps someone who hasn't been responsible throughout their lives will likely be getting it, and I resent that.
Entitlement or not, for someone in this country, these programs will be lifesaving and I can feel good about that if it happens. As a society I wish we would be better at discovering who the truly needy are and filtering out the cheaters.
You do realize that both Social Security and unemployment aren't handouts, right? That they are paid into by any American with a job. The people demanding they get those just want to get the money back that they paid into it.
I'm amazed you haven't killed yourself yet by trying to chew gum and walk at the same time.
Um, this is the most simplistic "reasoning" I have seen all day--which these days is saying something.
There was a *surplus* in Social Security funding by the late 1960's, which Lyndon Johnson (facing an ever-more expensive war in Vietnam) then decided to make Social Security REVENUE part of the "general fund" of the United States--he did this to offset US debt in order to make it appear that the US owed less money.
Social Security would arguably BE JUST FINE, if it weren't for "elites" who decided to dilute Social Security benefits and spread them to the winds of the US annual budget--In simple terms, that meant Social Security revenue (as paid by the American worker) went to build bombs, warplanes, pay for Congress's lunch, send "aid" to foreign countries, etc.
Do you honestly believe that blame for the current debt crisis rests solely on the backs of the single largest source of revenue the world has ever seen: the American Worker of the mid to late-Twentieth Century?
You can't really be that stupid, can you?
"The entitlement mindset is most destructive when it comes to Medicare and Social Security, the programs that are bankrupting our nation."
Social Security has a $2.6 trillion dollar SURPLUS. What has bankrupted our nation is huge tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, two never-ending wars in the Middle East (one of which we should never have gotten involved with), and the financial crisis and recession that was caused by Wall Street fat cats.
And as many readers have commented above, the "entitlements" you mention are programs that ordinary Americans PAY INTO as part of a social contract. If I have paid into these program my whole life, am I not entitled to get my money back??
Social Security is NOT bankrupting our nation. It has been proven time and again it is solvent for AT LEAST until 2050 and is paid for by WE THE WORKING PEOPLE. I pay for SS with EVERY paycheck and all that money HAD BETTER be there when I need it! Corporations and the Greedy Right (the hand maidens of the corporations) are bankrupting our nation by sticking to a false and self-serving idea that trickle down economics works. it does not. It only serves to make corporations richer on the back of WE THE WORKING PEOPLE. The Greedy Right are trying to dismantle the VERY PROGRAMS that made this country great in the late 20th century in order to stuff their own coffers. It's disgusting and wrong.
Yeah your right. Pay into SS all my life and the Government borrow and misuse the money and I should just up and die without benefits when I need them. Where is the Good faith of the U.S.A. I don't what school you went to but somebody mess up your rational thinking. Bernie Madoff got 150 Years for stealing a lot less.than 2.6 trillion
you guys are clueless as they come. Yes SS is paid for By the people for the people... But there's not enough paying in to take care of those who have requested it. People who never paid into it are getting it... People who worked jobs barely making $250 a week are receiving just as much in Social Security as they were real pay checks. I know for a fact none of you are making $250 a week and paying in $250 a week in FCIC taxes..
As for the program.. You got poorly calculated numbers. The program is set to be bankrupt by 2035. Growing faster and faster as more people become disabled or reach 65. These people will be paid by far more money than they EVER paid into the system.. Wake up... Social security and welfare is a scam. It's a pyramid scam.
Wait till you retire, you will have nothing!
Evan Newmark's parents should smack him around to wake this silly boy up. I also hope he would one day be paying for his parents elderly care. Oh, maybe he was an ophan with no parents, thats why he have no concept of what he was talking about. Anyway, he will retire one day and find out then what a fool he was.
There are so far 233 that think you are an idiot, any last words?
Medicare and Social Security are promises the US made to its citizens. When you make a promise, you must keep it. Before SS, nobody felt entitled to something that had not been offered or promised to them. Same with Medicare.
A government that cannot keep the promises it makes to its citizens is not worth the paper its money is printed on
US society is divided into two camps... Those who work for the Government and those who pay for these people. Those outside the Government system will live and retire on virtually nothing as even a max social security payment won't even cover the insurance tab for old age. Yet the Government entitlement group will live on high retirement package and insurance covered. The people are begging for more government and more programs so that the "slaves" outside of government keep paying for those in the government system. Sad but true... Guys retiring on $60 to $100K per year while we are slaves paying in. It isn't about rich people not paying fair share it is about us dumb citizens paying for half the country working for the government.
Vilifying the elderly by comparing them to people participating in illegal activities is just wrong. I was born after 1955 and watched both parents struggle with deciding which meds they would risk living without for 3 months every year when they hit the Medicare max payout in October. Guess what? Cancer is EXPENSIVE! They worked hard all their lives and paid Social Security and Medicare taxes. My mother had to be put in a nursing home for the last two years of her life because I have a job and wouldn't quit and live off welfare so I could care for her in her home. I guarantee you neither one of them got cancer to fleece the system out of loads of cash they felt entitled to. They just wanted a chance to see their grandkids grow up.
Yes, Yes, and Yes. Middle class family, high school education (some college/no degree), only debt is for home and home is still above water, have a savings that is equal to one years current salary, worked since 14 yrs of age. Served in active military in the 60's and in Reserve of the AF for an additional 27 yrs. Have paid into SS, medicare and medical as required by law. Recently retired, did some part time work, and live off of savings, investments, SS, and retirement for military and private sector employment. Modest, but good living. Did not spend beyond my means, invested and saved from 10 to 16%d of my salary throughout the years. Have always lived within my means, both vehicles are paid for and no credit card debt. I have watched my co-workers, neighbors, and friends spend on cruises, new cars, boats, time shares, partying, etc. Most of them have nothing and are unable to retire at 65 or even 70. I am discussed with our government spending more than they take in. Today, $0.43 of every dollar the US Gov spends is borrowed. Borrowed in part from SS Trust funds. Many people receive SS funding beyond the amounts they paid into it. SS has become the pot of gold government uses to provide a living for almost anybody suffering from aids to alcoholism and obesity. I don't think the SS funds were meant to be used for all the ills they are currently being used for. Throwing money at problems in our society is the only provision government seams to use. They need to discover the root causes and address them. People on the dole don't normally improve their situation and more and more are added to their roles.
I would get to Yes a lot easier if the exact same test (and benefits) were applied to our elected representatives. What is stopping them from adopting that position?
Please tell me that you are joking with this piece. It is clear to me that you haven't looked at your paycheck lately. Medicare and Social Security are forcibly taken from you and your employer. You don't have a choice. This is done with the promise that it will be available to you when you retire at 67. Then the same government stole money from those funds to off-set the tax breaks they gave their friends and financial supporters. Those same companies that are trying to convince us that by giving them such breaks they would provide jobs. The same jobs they they sent overseas for the cheap labor. Now the government wants you to believe that you must make sacrifices because they misused the money you gave them, yet you should continue to support the tax breaks that their wealthy supporters need so that they (once again) can provide jobs for you. You must be a real idiot to believe that this is the right thing to do.
1. The culture of entitlement is just as pervasive, perhaps even more so, among the rich and corporations, as it is among the middle class. Don't blame the middle class.
2. Social Security is not contributing to the national debt. Although outflows are greater than inflows, the Social Security trust fund still has a balance of $2.7 trillion that is funding thos outflows. The social security trust fund lends money to the US goverment and is the largest holder of US debt (approx. 19%)
Social Security and Medicare are not fair because there is a cap on the amount of income subjuct to these taxes, so those who earn the most, pay a lower rate of taxes as a portion of their total income. As far as SS and Medicare being a transfer of money from the oung to the older - yes, no kidding. It works the same as private private pensions, insurance contract, annuity, . bond, etc. We use the cash inflows from today, to pay the obligations incurred previously. While social security may face a deficit down the road, it is currently funded better than most private, corporate, pension plans.
Love all the comments and the debate. However I'm very glad I'm a dual citizen, Franco-American. We will return to France to live, and sadly watch from a distance as America, a once great nation, tears itself into pieces.
I am 46, grew up in a lower, lower middle class family. We were eligible for federal welfare, yet we did not take it out of pride. I knew I could not afford college, so I joined the U.S. Army and earned a college scholarship. I worked hard, completed college, and have WORKED my way up to a family household income that exceeds $250K. I constantly hear comments that the "rich" are not carrrying their fair share of the tax burden and every problem is the fault of the rich and the banking system for "loaning us the money". I have news for you sponges. If you had the basic common sense to prepare a household budget using addition and subtraction, you would have known that you could not have afforded a McMansion. I was prudent, lived within my means, and my family is now being asked to pay for the irresponsibility of you morons. You knew exactly what you were doing (i.e., living beyond your means). America will ultimately declare bankruptcy whether you want it to or not. Mathematics are not something that you can change, regardless of your emotions. When our country is borrowing 40% of every dollar it spends, how long do you think that will last? If my family utilized this plan, the banks would cut us off completely (and justifiably so) within a couple of years. I hate to believe it, but our country will never learn to live within its means until the everyone cuts off lending to our federal government. DO NOT RAISE THE DEBT CEILING. But even if the government does, it is a short period of time before our kids and grandchildren will pay for our excesses when the laws of mathematics finally catch up with us and we simply cannot repay our debts other than declaring an outright default or printing funny money to pay them off. Our generation has let down the future generations. Let Rome burn. I love my country, but I love the original ideals for which it stood more than the government itself.
Top of the list for any entitlement reform should be that Congress should lose their Cadillac benefits and receive only Medicare and Social Security for their retirement. That would help them prioritize where the cuts should go.
Social Security is not a "gimme" program. I have paid IN well over $100,000 in my working life and you BETTER believe I want it back. The government does not pay me a dime in interest and there is NO increase added to it. If they had let me keep it, it could have been worth over $1 Million if invested wisely. If I die before I get it, THEY keep it. It is not added into my estate for my children to have a better life, the government just KEEPS it, and sends my wife $250 to cover my funeral. What a joke!!!!! It is a HUGE TAX!!!
It is sad to think that Americans can't look after themselves but believe the government should do this for them. They should be saving more so they don't have to rely on Social Security for so much of their retirement and stop spending on things that companies constantly market to people who can't afford these things. My dad always said to see life by what is really important. He said the only things important are the things that are eternal, which to me, doesn't really leave alot that is important but makes what is important alot clearer and more meaningful.
#1 - Many homeowners who faced or are facing foreclosure made a 20% or more down-payment.
(I know this for a FACT). I didn't state that everyone did - but I belong to a huge group of homeowners nationwide and most of us made respectable down-payments.
#2 - We believe in living within our means, but there's not much you can do when you lose your job and finding a new job is near impossible. (I realize some readers live in states where unemployment is not as horrible as where I live - which is 2nd or 3rd on the list of top states with unemployment).
#3 - Everyone who pays into Social Security deserves their retirement benefits. (That's why it's called an "entitlement"...look up the word).
#4 - Unfortunately, our government has been making it easier for jobs to be created overseas. We need to re-visit our trade policies like NAFTA, CAFTA, ect..
#5 - The more people who are WORKING means more people will be paying TAXES. People need a living wage.
#6 - We need a job creation stimulus / incentives for small business. "Jobless Recovery" is on oxymoron.
#7 - Our government has been bought and sold by lobbyists - time for campaign finance reform.
#8 - Wall Street gambled with our future - and guess what? They won and "the people" lost.
#9 - Why is it so easy for some people to disregard the fraud in the foreclosure crisis? It's real. I've seen it live and up close.
#10 - The debt ceiling is real, however it was made into a crisis that never had to be so politically played. The debt ceiling should have been raised unattached to any other strings, amendments or concessions, just like it's been raised umpteen times in the past.
Evan has a few valid points, however the implied need to means test social security is not among them. At a minimum, this is a very dumb idea. As others have said before me, we paid for social security. To have it stolen from us late in the process is not acceptable.
I will support honorable and realistic measures to make social security and medicare sustainable. I will not support the mass theft that means testing represents.
Part of the dream (while on a fixed income) is also to afford to remain in your home.
With Federal and local taxes, that may not be possible these days.
My parents were orphans, raised five kids and sent them to Catholic schools. My father died at 85, the company he worked for told me after his funeral that my mother's share of his pension was "discharged as a debt in bankruptcy." So I sold everything they had worked for for sixty years to keep my mom solvent. The company? It came out of BNK just fine. Yet you say it is my mother who is corrupt?
Was this offensive article meant to increase readership? I can't believe that Evan is as selfish, cynical and uninformed as he comes off in this piece. Apparently many other middle-income subscribers are as disgusted this kind of writing as I am. WSJ, your readers aren't all fat cats...
It's pretty ridiculous to blame allegedly entitled Americans while ignoring that we've spent on average $750 billion a year every year for the last 10 years on military and wars. And who was it with their hands out when they broke the economy? Ordinary Americans? No, it was business executives and Wall Street figures.
Deal Journal is an up-to-the-minute take on the deals and deal makers that shape the landscape of Wall Street, including mergers and acquisitions, capital-raising, private equity and bankruptcy. In short, wherever money changes hands. Deal Journal is updated throughout each trading day with exclusive commentary, analysis, data, news flashes and profiles. The Wall Street Journal's David Benoit is the lead writer, with contributions from other Journal reporters and editors. Send news items, comments and questions to firstname.lastname@example.com.