ADVERTISEMENT

The Great Wealth Transfer

Hypothetical:

If someone told you that if they cut your benefits by 10%, the US could fund SS going forward another 50 years, or keep your whole benefit and the system runs out in 10, so that people like me get nothing, which do you vote for?

(No idea if those facts line up. Asking in the kinda abstract to highlight a point.)
Just lift the cap. Let JDB pay for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Hypothetical:

If someone told you that if they cut your benefits by 10%, the US could fund SS going forward another 50 years, or keep your whole benefit and the system runs out in 10, so that people like me get nothing, which do you vote for?

(No idea if those facts line up. Asking in the kinda abstract to highlight a point.)
If the plan is to keep it going then raise the top-end. I had many years where I’d get a bump as the tax was no longer taken out.
 
Hypothetical:

If someone told you that if they cut your benefits by 10%, the US could fund SS going forward another 50 years, or keep your whole benefit and the system runs out in 10, so that people like me get nothing, which do you vote for?

(No idea if those facts line up. Asking in the kinda abstract to highlight a point.)
That's a tough question because I wouldn't believe anything coming from the government. If (and that's a big IF) I could see that there was a serious effort to cut spending in all areas I would vote for the 10% cut in a heartbeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dr.jb and DANC
My boomer parents are spending like drunken sailors. Someone stop them.
Not enough info to make a judgement there. If your parents are well off and have saved then more power to them. If they are spending like you say and living on the edge then it is just plain dumb.
 
Not enough info to make a judgement there. If your parents are well off and have saved then more power to them. If they are spending like you say and living on the edge then it is just plain dumb.
Meh.

I'd rather they spend it all on themselves than give it to their undeserving offspring.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: DANC and mcmurtry66
Hypothetical:

If someone told you that if they cut your benefits by 10%, the US could fund SS going forward another 50 years, or keep your whole benefit and the system runs out in 10, so that people like me get nothing, which do you vote for?

(No idea if those facts line up. Asking in the kinda abstract to highlight a point.)
How does the 'system run out of money' in ten years when we have $Trillions to spend on CIA/Mossad wars over the past 75 years?
 
Hypothetical:

If someone told you that if they cut your benefits by 10%, the US could fund SS going forward another 50 years, or keep your whole benefit and the system runs out in 10, so that people like me get nothing, which do you vote for?

(No idea if those facts line up. Asking in the kinda abstract to highlight a point.)
I would do that if the money went into a 'lockbox' (thank you, Al Gore) for future funding.

But when it goes into the general fund, like it does now, no freaking way. That 10% would be pissed away on things like forgiving student loans.
 
If the plan is to keep it going then raise the top-end. I had many years where I’d get a bump as the tax was no longer taken out.
But you'd have to cap the benefits, which I'm OK with.
 
Hypothetical:

If someone told you that if they cut your benefits by 10%, the US could fund SS going forward another 50 years, or keep your whole benefit and the system runs out in 10, so that people like me get nothing, which do you vote for?

(No idea if those facts line up. Asking in the kinda abstract to highlight a point.)
That question has been answered. Boomers chose ⬇️


Get Money Bitcoin GIF by Bspin
 
Might need to do both.

But you're dodging the question.
Any solution that works has to have some tightening and some new revenue. The thing is, they should have done this long ago. Once people retire, it seems late to start cutting their social security when they have already made plans based on what was promised. So ideally we would have started back around 2000 before the mass of boomers began retiring. Based on those changes, many may have worked another year (or two). But we have lacked any will to do anything on either side of the equation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU and DANC
Any solution that works has to have some tightening and some new revenue. The thing is, they should have done this long ago. Once people retire, it seems late to start cutting their social security when they have already made plans based on what was promised. So ideally we would have started back around 2000 before the mass of boomers began retiring. Based on those changes, many may have worked another year (or two). But we have lacked any will to do anything on either side of the equation.
Yes, Boomers made this decision years ago. And based on your logic, it'll be A-OK to do it to people in my age group because we have enough time to "plan" for it.
 
Yes, Boomers made this decision years ago. And based on your logic, it'll be A-OK to do it to people in my age group because we have enough time to "plan" for it.

It is less OK to do it without time to plan. As I said, the plan has to include cuts and increases. Raise the cap, raise the retirement age, and there may be no need for "cuts". But it is easier for someone 30 to adjust to what will happen at 67 than someone 66. It is like steering a ship, the sooner the turn is initiated the less sharp it has to be.

Whenever this comes up, I wish we had a way of letting people who do hard physical labor reach full social security ahead of us office workers.

Here's a solution, an estate tax that goes to Social Security from Boomers. The thread is about all this money we Boomers have, take it from us when we die and pay off Social Security, and then it is there for you.

Believe me, I have had no objection to raising Social Security taxes, something that would have impacted me. It isn't my fault that never happened. Raise the cap, raise the retirement age a year, and let's see what happens. We can then look at and 1/4 point of tax with lower COLA and see if that solves it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
He was exposing you to Solid Country Gold. Show some respect.
Other than Johnny Cash, I would far rather listen to The Beatles, The Who, etc than that. Heck, I may have been the last kid in America to hear the Beatles since he didn't allow anything like that in the house.

But I do have a deep respect for Cash. He was far better than Johnny Bitcoin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
Why? I don't feel entitled nor asked for anything. I'm simply making a point.

The point that you think Boomers have YOUR money?

Let me ask you this, you said 50% of Boomers didn't save for retirement. I see that stat. What was the % for Greatest Generation? Silent Generation? What is the percent for Gen X (hint, it isn't good either https://www.asppa.org/news/gen-xers-are-really-bad-retirement-savers-report). Can you prove that Boomers have been worse than others?
 
The Boomers were fortunate to have lived, worked and invested during a period when our country dominated the global marketplace. In 1966 the Dow Jones average reached what was considered a remarkable achievement at 1,000. Today it is over 38,000.

Sadly, not all boomers benefitted from their hard work and investing prowess as almost half will reach retirement with no retirement savings and will depend on Social Security. These folks, however, worked and purchased goods and services which helped make the more fortunate comparatively rich. Some of them may have owned their own businesses and failed Afterall, failure occurs in our competitive free market economy. Others may have become disabled or faced addictions along with other health problems.
 
Meh.

I'd rather they spend it all on themselves than give it to their undeserving offspring.
Well me too but I wouldn't want them to spend like crazy and then expect me to support them. Now if they had done they best they could and still needed support I'd be there. I was all time giving my mom money since I thought she did the best they could and still didn't have much.
 
Well me too but I wouldn't want them to spend like crazy and then expect me to support them. Now if they had done they best they could and still needed support I'd be there. I was all time giving my mom money since I thought she did the best they could and still didn't have much.

I've read a good many Boomers aren't concerned about leaving any inheritance. Many feel paying for their kids education was enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
I've read a good many Boomers aren't concerned about leaving any inheritance. Many feel paying for their kids education was enough.
Yeah but times have changed. Boomers and Gen. X have had it way easier than my generation where an avg home is half a mil and a car is $50k etc.
 
It is less OK to do it without time to plan. As I said, the plan has to include cuts and increases. Raise the cap, raise the retirement age, and there may be no need for "cuts". But it is easier for someone 30 to adjust to what will happen at 67 than someone 66. It is like steering a ship, the sooner the turn is initiated the less sharp it has to be.

Whenever this comes up, I wish we had a way of letting people who do hard physical labor reach full social security ahead of us office workers.

Here's a solution, an estate tax that goes to Social Security from Boomers. The thread is about all this money we Boomers have, take it from us when we die and pay off Social Security, and then it is there for you.

Believe me, I have had no objection to raising Social Security taxes, something that would have impacted me. It isn't my fault that never happened. Raise the cap, raise the retirement age a year, and let's see what happens. We can then look at and 1/4 point of tax with lower COLA and see if that solves it.
No matter when you make changes there are people that are in the position of just getting ready to retire. It has to be phased in but the government never does anything fairly and isn't concerned about being fair.

A good example of that is the Indiana rebate they gave everyone a year or two ago. The fair way to have done that would have been to give each person a percentage of the the taxes they paid as a rebate but instead they gave everyone that filed a tax return a rebated even if they didn't pay any taxes.
 
The Boomers were fortunate to have lived, worked and invested during a period when our country dominated the global marketplace. In 1966 the Dow Jones average reached what was considered a remarkable achievement at 1,000. Today it is over 38,000.

Sadly, not all boomers benefitted from their hard work and investing prowess as almost half will reach retirement with no retirement savings and will depend on Social Security. These folks, however, worked and purchased goods and services which helped make the more fortunate comparatively rich. Some of them may have owned their own businesses and failed Afterall, failure occurs in our competitive free market economy. Others may have become disabled or faced addictions along with other health problems.

A lot of Boomers not much older than me saw manufacturing as the way to a good life, then in about 1977 that suffered a horrible demise. A lot of jobs went away, and those that stayed were not nearly as high up the middle-class ladder as they used to be. My hometown, Columbus, had a mall standing almost completely empty. In 1984 in Centralia IL working for Hart I saw a town in even worse shape. It all can be summed up by the song Allentown.

In addition Vietnam left a lot of people scarred mentally and physically.

No generation has it easy. Today's youth deal with the high cost of college, the loss of interpersonal relationships due to technology, and a huge drug epidemic. I'm not arguing Boomers had it worse. there are reasons Xers are having trouble saving just as there were reasons Boomers did (and certainly Greatest and Silent).

Sadly, pensions mostly went away. I know several that still have pensions, their retirement looks amazingly golden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Sadly, pensions mostly went away. I know several that still have pensions, their retirement looks amazingly golden.
Yeah pensions are an unknown cost to a company so they don't like them. My wife and I both have pensions but I think the company just bought an annuity that pays a certain amount until we die so in a way it was a fixed cost to them.
 
What assholes.
Hard to argue with any of this.

 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
A lot of Boomers not much older than me saw manufacturing as the way to a good life, then in about 1977 that suffered a horrible demise. A lot of jobs went away, and those that stayed were not nearly as high up the middle-class ladder as they used to be. My hometown, Columbus, had a mall standing almost completely empty. In 1984 in Centralia IL working for Hart I saw a town in even worse shape. It all can be summed up by the song Allentown.

In addition Vietnam left a lot of people scarred mentally and physically.

No generation has it easy. Today's youth deal with the high cost of college, the loss of interpersonal relationships due to technology, and a huge drug epidemic. I'm not arguing Boomers had it worse. there are reasons Xers are having trouble saving just as there were reasons Boomers did (and certainly Greatest and Silent).

Sadly, pensions mostly went away. I know several that still have pensions, their retirement looks amazingly golden.
one thing i will say is people are in better shape today and take care of themselves and can presumably work much longer. look at these pics below. my god wilfred brimley was 49 in cocoon. rob lowe is 60. fillers, microneedling, hair meds. weights. diet. no reason to be or look old. you feel good you can keep doing new projects. keep it going. after rob lowe's pic i linked vanished aesthetics. you and unclemark shoudl skip a football game or the next d&D convention and treat yourself to youth. apparently their spa is on walnut. get your skin going and THEN look into some fillers. i wouldn't be surprised if it followed with a promotion at work. and who knows... a girlfriend??

DUYaXAcXcAEfyBo.jpg



cacoon-tfeat-uproxx.jpg

rob-lowe-e1579383764467.jpg


 
one thing i will say is people are in better shape today and take care of themselves and can presumably work much longer. look at these pics below. my god wilfred brimley was 49 in cocoon. rob lowe is 60. fillers, microneedling, hair meds. weights. diet. no reason to be or look old. you feel good you can keep doing new projects. keep it going. after rob lowe's pic i linked vanished aesthetics. you and unclemark shoudl skip a football game or the next d&D convention and treat yourself to youth. apparently their spa is on walnut. get your skin going and THEN look into some fillers. i wouldn't be surprised if it followed with a promotion at work. and who knows... a girlfriend??

DUYaXAcXcAEfyBo.jpg



cacoon-tfeat-uproxx.jpg

rob-lowe-e1579383764467.jpg


william h macy take notes GIF by Showtime
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT