Future of retirement in America

esquared

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 8, 2000
24,332
5,445
146
Well, here it is:

"The reason given for the proposed reform was to ease intense pressure on state coffers. Critics say the retirement age in many regions is higher than life expectancy."

Why pay them when you can let them die off first? :rolleyes:
 

Phenzyn

Member
Mar 18, 2018
137
72
61
At the rate in which we are going, the question now is "what future?".

And even if we have a future, and it's one you want to live because you're a Trump humper - the question then remains "what retirement?".

The fact is many millennial's know that there is no retirement for us. There wasn't under Obama either, there certainly isn't one now. Will there be one by the time we are set to retire? Highly, highly unlikely.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,273
7,780
136
"Paying employees a living wage AND benefits just gets in the way of making a decent profit. AND the gov't shouldn't have to simply give them money that rightly belongs to us aristocrats because they never earned it. When will the heathen peasants ever learn that all the wealth of the nation belongs to us because we control it so we get say how it's doled out."

NOT /s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
At the rate in which we are going, the question now is "what future?".

And even if we have a future, and it's one you want to live because you're a Trump humper - the question then remains "what retirement?".

The fact is many millennial's know that there is no retirement for us. There wasn't under Obama either, there certainly isn't one now. Will there be one by the time we are set to retire? Highly, highly unlikely.

Obama was President but the GOP (the Party of No) held a blocking position in Congress after Ted Kennedy died in 2009.

The GOP SCOTUS has now targeted some of the last people who have decent retirement plans- unionized workers. The whole country is right to work now. The free rider fools will drag them all down.

Late middle aged Trumpsters are right to be mad about it. They're just mad at all the wrong people.
 

Phenzyn

Member
Mar 18, 2018
137
72
61
Obama was President but the GOP (the Party of No) held a blocking position in Congress after Ted Kennedy died in 2009.

The GOP SCOTUS has now targeted some of the last people who have decent retirement plans- unionized workers. The whole country is right to work now. The free rider fools will drag them all down.

Late middle aged Trumpsters are right to be mad about it. They're just mad at all the wrong people.
Oh no, I understand. Obama was also a very centrist president, hardly fighting so fervently for the change he promised, but that is neither here nor there. That is simply a problem all democrats suffer from, they're all cowards. Say what you want, and I'll be the first to join in, about the right wing but they fight for what they want. They don't care that Trump is a monster as long as they get their tax cut, or whatever it is they want. And Trump is showing the difference between the republicans in democrats in that way, he will never stop fighting for what he wants. And it means the republicans in power won't stop fighting with him, as long as they get what they want too.

Democrats, meanwhile, will roll over immediately at the first sign of trouble and give in on the issues they claim to be so important. Meanwhile Trump will literally lock kids in cages if he thinks it will help him build his wall.

But again, I digress.

I was merely trying to point out that people have known for a really long time that retirement is simply not gonna happen for us. Generation X won't have it either, and perhaps even further up the generation chain. This article doesn't really shed any new light on that for me.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Oh no, I understand. Obama was also a very centrist president, hardly fighting so fervently for the change he promised, but that is neither here nor there. That is simply a problem all democrats suffer from, they're all cowards. Say what you want, and I'll be the first to join in, about the right wing but they fight for what they want. They don't care that Trump is a monster as long as they get their tax cut, or whatever it is they want. And Trump is showing the difference between the republicans in democrats in that way, he will never stop fighting for what he wants. And it means the republicans in power won't stop fighting with him, as long as they get what they want too.

Democrats, meanwhile, will roll over immediately at the first sign of trouble and give in on the issues they claim to be so important. Meanwhile Trump will literally lock kids in cages if he thinks it will help him build his wall.

But again, I digress.

I was merely trying to point out that people have known for a really long time that retirement is simply not gonna happen for us. Generation X won't have it either, and perhaps even further up the generation chain. This article doesn't really shed any new light on that for me.

Gawd. Dems haven't caved on anything. They're just powerless to stop the GOP until after the election.

Your bullshit isn't exactly helping that happen.
 

Phenzyn

Member
Mar 18, 2018
137
72
61
Gawd. Dems haven't caved on anything. They're just powerless to stop the GOP until after the election.

Your bullshit isn't exactly helping that happen.

LOL

Democrats are cowards IMO. I don't really care if you agree with me.

Republicans are monsters. Obviously the democrats are the lesser of two evils. But some of us who consider themselves true liberals can understand why the democrats fail so much. Some of us want true changes and not just centrist, status quo, establishment Democrats like Hillary.

Maybe the beautiful and intelligent lady from the Bronx can change things. She calls herself a democratic-socialist and has thought about dropping part of that since it's a bad word, that's right she was thinking about dropping the democrat part :p

Sorry bad joke.

EDIT: Also this is a good read

https://theweek.com/articles/782002...ng-dandies-need-grow-spine-throw-some-punches
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
LOL

Democrats are cowards IMO. I don't really care if you agree with me.

Republicans are monsters. Obviously the democrats are the lesser of two evils. But some of us who consider themselves true liberals can understand why the democrats fail so much. Some of us want true changes and not just centrist, status quo, establishment Democrats like Hillary.

Maybe the beautiful and intelligent lady from the Bronx can change things. She calls herself a democratic-socialist and has thought about dropping part of that since it's a bad word, that's right she was thinking about dropping the democrat part :p

Sorry bad joke.

EDIT: Also this is a good read

https://theweek.com/articles/782002...ng-dandies-need-grow-spine-throw-some-punches

And the double down on tearing down the Democrats, of course. They'll do more, a lot more, but not w/o a mandate from the People. It's functionally impossible.

You seem to forget that a lot of old line Dems voted for Bernie. It's still the Party of the New Deal & still a platform that Progressives wouldn't have otherwise.
 

IJTSSG

Golden Member
Aug 12, 2014
1,123
281
136
The further the Dems move to the left, the better it will be for the country.

Good job!
 

Phenzyn

Member
Mar 18, 2018
137
72
61
And the double down on tearing down the Democrats, of course. They'll do more, a lot more, but not w/o a mandate from the People. It's functionally impossible.

You seem to forget that a lot of old line Dems voted for Bernie. It's still the Party of the New Deal & still a platform that Progressives wouldn't have otherwise.
The party that basically made it impossible for Bernie to win? Yeah. I'm not even going to get into the media firestorm and lies the democrats sold to make sure Bernie didn't win the nomination. Perhaps they felt they were serving the greater good and Bernie couldn't win. Maybe they have learned that lesson. I still remain hopeful.

However I do agree with you for the most part. Just because I am critical of the democrats doesn't mean I don't support them. What I said about them being cowardly and what you said about them being a platform for true changes are not mutually exclusive. They are both very true.

Until we get money out of politics, corruption in the political establishment system we have in this country will not change. And democrats are leading the charge on that. The number of democrats running right now without corporate PAC money is incredible and absolutely thrilling for me. I hope the trend continues and the democrats become what we need.
 

crashtech

Lifer
Jan 4, 2013
10,634
2,206
146
All that's needed is a modest increase in the FICA, yet there is resistance from "bothsides" to this, one one hand because it taxes poor victim workers, and on the other because it is a tax, period. But it's the most equitable way to fix the problem, and the last time I had at the math, it would have taken less than a 1‰ increase to make ends meet for another half century or so. Since it's employer matched, a little goes twice as far.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The party that basically made it impossible for Bernie to win? Yeah. I'm not even going to get into the media firestorm and lies the democrats sold to make sure Bernie didn't win the nomination. Perhaps they felt they were serving the greater good and Bernie couldn't win. Maybe they have learned that lesson. I still remain hopeful.

However I do agree with you for the most part. Just because I am critical of the democrats doesn't mean I don't support them. What I said about them being cowardly and what you said about them being a platform for true changes are not mutually exclusive. They are both very true.

Until we get money out of politics, corruption in the political establishment system we have in this country will not change. And democrats are leading the charge on that. The number of democrats running right now without corporate PAC money is incredible and absolutely thrilling for me. I hope the trend continues and the democrats become what we need.

The DNC "made it impossible for Bernie to win" how, exactly? What active measures did they take?
 

Phenzyn

Member
Mar 18, 2018
137
72
61
The DNC "made it impossible for Bernie to win" how, exactly? What active measures did they take?
Oh my gosh. Are you serious?

The DNC lied constantly, even faking poll numbers against Bernie to show Hillary was winning when Bernie clearly had the most support in certain areas.

You just need to google to find loads of information. I'm not going to do all the work for you. The young turks covered it throughout the entire nomination process, you can just search their videos in 2015 and 2016 and find tons of videos along with links to back up their findings. They weren't making it up.

But here is one very telling post, I think.

http://observer.com/2017/05/ro-khanna-admits-democratic-primares-rigged-for-hillary-clinton/


Democrats did everything they could to suppress Sanders’ candidacy, including Wasserman Schultz changing a rule to help the Clinton campaign’s fundraising; Democratic Party officials perpetuating false, divisive narratives; the DNC whitewashing Sanders’ campaign; liberal media spreading fake stories that Sanders supporters threw chairs at the Nevada Democratic Party Convention; and then-DNC Vice Chair Donna Brazile giving Clinton debate questions ahead of time. T​

They even purged Bernie backers from the DNC.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CfFMmBSPT2A#

The amount of attacks he faced from the establishment media during the entire nomination process. Namely from CNN and ABC because of the huge sums of money they gave Hillary. Proof posted on reddit when poll numbers shown on these news outlets didn't line up with polls done in the areas by the cited sources.

You really need to educate yourself on the difference between the corporate democrats and the justice democrats because you seem to live in a fantasy world where all democrats are good people, and not out serving corporate interests just like Republicans do.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Oh my gosh. Are you serious?

The DNC lied constantly, even faking poll numbers against Bernie to show Hillary was winning when Bernie clearly had the most support in certain areas.

You just need to google to find loads of information. I'm not going to do all the work for you. The young turks covered it throughout the entire nomination process, you can just search their videos in 2015 and 2016 and find tons of videos along with links to back up their findings. They weren't making it up.

But here is one very telling post, I think.

http://observer.com/2017/05/ro-khanna-admits-democratic-primares-rigged-for-hillary-clinton/


Democrats did everything they could to suppress Sanders’ candidacy, including Wasserman Schultz changing a rule to help the Clinton campaign’s fundraising; Democratic Party officials perpetuating false, divisive narratives; the DNC whitewashing Sanders’ campaign; liberal media spreading fake stories that Sanders supporters threw chairs at the Nevada Democratic Party Convention; and then-DNC Vice Chair Donna Brazile giving Clinton debate questions ahead of time. T​

They even purged Bernie backers from the DNC.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CfFMmBSPT2A#

The amount of attacks he faced from the establishment media during the entire nomination process. Namely from CNN and ABC because of the huge sums of money they gave Hillary. Proof posted on reddit when poll numbers shown on these news outlets didn't line up with polls done in the areas by the cited sources.

You really need to educate yourself on the difference between the corporate democrats and the justice democrats because you seem to live in a fantasy world where all democrats are good people, and not out serving corporate interests just like Republicans do.

So you offer up an opinion piece & a video about how the DNC decided on Perez instead of Ellison, entirely after the fact of the election. And then made Ellison the #2 guy. The bit about 126K purged from the voter rolls in NY is particularly odious. How would they know to purge Bernie supporters? Never mind that Clinton won by 300K votes.

It's the same "Crooked Hillary!" routine trotted out by Trump & his Russian backers.

Bernie got his shot. He just didn't win. Contentions to the contrary are demeaning to Democrats in general.
 

Phenzyn

Member
Mar 18, 2018
137
72
61
Well I am obviously not going to convince you since you live in a fantasy world where all democrats are heroes and Republicans the villains. That wasn't an opinion piece. It was a dnc representative admitting to things we already knew about.

I imagine we agree and most things except that you fail to see fault, seemingly at all, with the democrats.

And what, you think Hillary isn't crooked? Of course she is. The Clinton's have accepted 3 billion in corporate money. Do you live in a world where that money didn't buy them anything? Of course it has.

The corporate donors don't just hand out money without expecting something in return. Hillary is the second most hated politician in the US and she was just the lesser of two evils. And lost to the most hated in the country. Mainly because many people simply couldn't and wouldn't vote for Hillary. Whether that was a Jill Stein vote or not voting at all.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,010
16,134
136
All that's needed is a modest increase in the FICA, yet there is resistance from "bothsides" to this, one one hand because it taxes poor victim workers, and on the other because it is a tax, period. But it's the most equitable way to fix the problem, and the last time I had at the math, it would have taken less than a 1‰ increase to make ends meet for another half century or so. Since it's employer matched, a little goes twice as far.

Actually dems did create legislation that would have raised FICO taxes, albeit it would have only affected those making above 400k. This was introduced in 2015.

If you are going to claim "both sides" I suggest you get your facts straight first;)
 

crashtech

Lifer
Jan 4, 2013
10,634
2,206
146
Above 400k is idiotic, no wonder it failed. Future recipients ought to be paying into their retirement, and with employer matching, it's really not a bad deal.
Actually dems did create legislation that would have raised FICO taxes, albeit it would have only affected those making above 400k. This was introduced in 2015.

If you are going to claim "both sides" I suggest you get your facts straight first;)
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,487
6,035
126
Al non-functioning bodies will be respectfully removed by Independent Contractors who sub contract Packaging and Delivery to other Independent Contractors.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,010
16,134
136
Actually dems did create legislation that would have raised FICO taxes, albeit it would have only affected those making above 400k. This was introduced in 2015.

If you are going to claim "both sides" I suggest you get your facts straight first;)

We aren't debating the merits of the policy but rather whether or not "both sides" resist raising the tax.
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,740
4,274
136
Well I am obviously not going to convince you since you live in a fantasy world where all democrats are heroes and Republicans the villains. That wasn't an opinion piece. It was a dnc representative admitting to things we already knew about.

I imagine we agree and most things except that you fail to see fault, seemingly at all, with the democrats.

And what, you think Hillary isn't crooked? Of course she is. The Clinton's have accepted 3 billion in corporate money. Do you live in a world where that money didn't buy them anything? Of course it has.

The corporate donors don't just hand out money without expecting something in return. Hillary is the second most hated politician in the US and she was just the lesser of two evils. And lost to the most hated in the country. Mainly because many people simply couldn't and wouldn't vote for Hillary. Whether that was a Jill Stein vote or not voting at all.

Remember me? Your favorite "Trump humper" i think was the word you used to falsely accuse me in another thread :) I was also a Bernie Bro and still am to some extent. But i agree with you on this issue. Any Dems who fail to see how the DNC acted are just blinded by their favorite sports team. The exact same way they blame Trumpers to be blinded. The facts are there, they just dont want to admit their team played unfairly against their own teammates.

One of the quotes in my sig puts it all into perspective about partisanship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phenzyn

Eno67

Junior Member
Mar 16, 2018
1
0
6
Like it or not everyone is going to retire either by choice (saving early) or forcibly (usually health reasons). Most employers are not going to keep you on their payrolls when you are in your 70's. People who think they're going to work until they die are fooling themselves. Employers now are shifting more into the "gig economy" where they don't have to pay you benefits such as insurance or retirement matching.

State pension funds, regardless of the political parties that run them, are funded differently. Illinois is famously underfunded while places like South Dakota and North Carolina seem to have their acts together. States act like people, some put money away for the future, some don't. That $10 Starbuck's latte is just like the $10 million dollar pork project to get some votes. That money could have been saved for later and grown with compounding interest.

They can raise the FICA tax and will probably need to and raise the retirement age. The problem I'm worried about is that the majority of the jobs that are being created in this country are minimum wage jobs. Those kind of jobs are not going to fund Social Security that much. You raise the minimum wage to a "living wage" and the cost of those service affected by this will go up. That $7 Big Mac will go up to $10. Either that or they'll just get a robot to do the job.

And the living wage debate. Where is that money going to come from? Bottom line to everything is money. Corporate taxes to fund it? So when the corporations start to relocate to other countries to avoid those taxes then what? Frankly how long will America be an attractive place to do business in when the pressures of retirement, repaying student loans, and lower wages reduce the purchasing power of consumers?

The government carrying such a huge amount of debt causes a lot of people to fear an oncoming bout of inflation but if prices get too high who is going to have the money to buy the stuff? There isn't enough of the "1%" to carry the economy. The government wants/needs to inflate its way out of it's debt but I'm having a hard time seeing a way to get past that point without a fair amount of pain/turmoil on the general public.
 

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
All that's needed is a modest increase in the FICA, yet there is resistance from "bothsides" to this, one one hand because it taxes poor victim workers, and on the other because it is a tax, period. But it's the most equitable way to fix the problem, and the last time I had at the math, it would have taken less than a 1‰ increase to make ends meet for another half century or so. Since it's employer matched, a little goes twice as far.

I have to laugh at people who think SS is retirement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McGerkins