the chump generation

[aaron]

Re: the chump generation

Cheers

I am soon to be 59 and each year I get a statement from Social Security that tells me as a Greedy F*** Exactly how much I have paid into Social Security along with my employers for 42 years - It is in the huindreds of thousands of dollars.

I would not characterize myself as a Greedy F**** for receiving all or part of what I have contributed. Social Security is not an entitlement to me: I paid the damn money into it.

Be careful what you call or characterize people or else someone like me will point out what a damn fool you are!

Cindy

Cindy, your generation knew this was all a scam. If not back way when, certainly 20 years ago when Ross Perot used his fancy charts on national tv. If you expect my generation to pay for your 30 years of retirement you are ******* crazy AND greedy. You paid TAXES and voted to spend it. Whether that was called social security, medicare, or income tax.. it was taxes that you all chose to spend (mainly on bullshit).

[jpatter666]

Re: the chump generation

I'll give my perspective on this article based, I believe it is based naive hope and most likely fluff written to fill the opinion quota page of newspapers. I am 24 years of age and am familiar with the generation in front of mine, the late 20's to 30 to 40's and younger. From my experience, I can tell this generation is even dumber than the boomers, its like boomers^2.

I then look at my generation and I believe that the 20-28 year olds (approximate) are just as dumb and filled with false hope. They have no clue what is going on and completely in tune with the baby boomer philosophy^3.

I then look at my 16 year old brother and his friends and see that they have the same thinking processes as the boomers, if not worse. They are much dumber and more manipulated than when my generation was 16. I see very little potential in them.

In conclusion, nothing is going to change, these younger generations are just as dumb if not dumber than the boomers. They will continue to live and espouse the boomer values and lifestyle, how they will pay for that is beyond me.

I've hope. After all, the "slacker" generation turned into the Internet generation and has done some amazing things.

I do worry about the sense of entitlement some kids have (my sister-in-law's oldest kids pop to mind....). I remember in the Ought-years for many parents *nothing* was too good. $2000 baby strollers, etc.

But interestingly enough, it's the parents who are having to adjust most of all -- the kids seem to be handling it well. And while there may indeed by a crackup of the current financial order in the cards, in the long-run this may be a massive opportunity for this upcoming generation. They may be able to implement a near-total rewrite of the social/political/economic contract.

Now won't that be interesting to watch....

[ltullos]

Re: the chump generation

Welcome to Costco. I love you.

[Raz]

Re: the chump generation

some of us miss your babbling Jeff - when you "rant" . . . your understanding, perspective and wisdom

I don't.

But hey, what do I know? I live in a "cesspit like Alabama or Mississippi".

[runlikehe11]

Re: the chump generation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxGyPTndqms

Which Cats are you voting for in this next Election?

[media][/media]

[roxtar]

Re: the chump generation

A federal sales tax ( a GST or VAT ) would solve America's budget mess. Taxes have to go up, regardless of what the Republicans think. And the eco-frauds have to be driven-OUT of the Obama Administration because they have hyjacked the Democratic Party. Let these global warming frauds (the Al Gore bunch) have their Green Party, but they do NOT belong in the Democratic Party. There is nothing liberal and nothing progressive about the green agenda to-day. Living in caves and starving and smoking pot is not my idea of progress in America.

It may not be progress, but it sure would be fun.....

[Glenn Black]

Re: the chump generation

Cindy, your generation knew this was all a scam. If not back way when, certainly 20 years ago when Ross Perot used his fancy charts on national tv. If you expect my generation to pay for your 30 years of retirement you are ******* crazy AND greedy. You paid TAXES and voted to spend it. Whether that was called social security, medicare, or income tax.. it was taxes that you all chose to spend (mainly on bullshit).

You see? The generational war is starting already.

There is more than enough blame to go around. Don't worry, everybody will get more than their fair share of blame. Lots for everybody. Don't worry, you'll get your share too.

[aaron]

Re: the chump generation

You see? The generational war is starting already.

There is more than enough blame to go around. Don't worry, everybody will get more than their fair share of blame. Lots for everybody. Don't worry, you'll get your share too.

There are a few topics that make my blood boil. This is one of them. I do not know why.

I agree with pCow. No, we should not let old people starve... but, I am not prepared to sacrifice my children's health to keep people on life support for 20 years (thanks George Bush).

[jpatter666]

Re: the chump generation

There are a few topics that make my blood boil. This is one of them. I do not know why.

I agree with pCow. No, we should not let old people starve... but, I am not prepared to sacrifice my children's health to keep people on life support for 20 years (thanks George Bush).

To me it's obvious where this is heading.

Both Social Security and Medicare are heading back to the original purposes -- a basic subsistence net. Social Security can not and is not supposed to be a "retirement plan". And medicare/medicaid can't be all-encompassing for the elderly -- it leads to buying votes (the prescription package) and near-fraud/abuse [IMO] (the motorized wheelchair commercials I see everywhere).

And prepare for means-testing as well.

Finally, for those who say other countries have done this successfully, I expect rollbacks there soon. As many people here have stated, with the rest of the world rising up, the Western economies are going to have to level down.

[Starving Steve]

Re: the chump generation

To me it's obvious where this is heading.

Both Social Security and Medicare are heading back to the original purposes -- a basic subsistence net. Social Security can not and is not supposed to be a "retirement plan". And medicare/medicaid can't be all-encompassing for the elderly -- it leads to buying votes (the prescription package) and near-fraud/abuse [IMO] (the motorized wheelchair commercials I see everywhere).

And prepare for means-testing as well.

Finally, for those who say other countries have done this successfully, I expect rollbacks there soon. As many people here have stated, with the rest of the world rising up, the Western economies are going to have to level down.

I beg to differ: Social Security and Medicare were, indeed, designed to be the basis of one's ability to retire. The Republicans have never liked these programmes, but they were designed so that everyone could retire and live good in America.

And I make this same comment in Canada: The Canada Pension and Canadian Social Security and Canada's socialized-medicine were designed so that everyone could live-out their days in Canada and live good.

It is when putzes like Pierre Trudeau came to power and did not index the Canada Pension to inflation that the trouble with entitlements not meeting the needs of Canadians began. And it was this so-called, "liberal" Pierre Trudeau who sold Canada's gold reserves in the 1970s and let the beaver buck float wildly. Trudeau thought inflation was good, and he spent the country into huge deficits.... I mean, let's tell the history the way it was. Trudeau's cute little beaver buck went down the toilet.

And Lyndon Baines Johnson in the U.S. fell in love with his Vietnam War and bankrupted the U.S. He was the liberal who got Medicare passed in the U.S. But his dirty war in Vietnam took priority for funding over his Medicare programme.

We need to re-call the history as best as we can and set the record straight, because the Republicans in America would like to say that socialized-medicine doesn't work. But socialized-medicine does work, and it works very well provided that it is honestly funded.

Liberalism is not a failure. Junk money and junk economics, confused priorities, and fuzzy-thinking about economics in our universities is the cause of our current economic demise. Make no mistake about that.

The current generation is not a generation of rock-music chumps. It is a generation, much like the baby-boom generation, who had their future stolen from them by deficits and inflation that they inherited from their parents' good times. Let's be very clear about that.

In hindsight, four or five decades later, Pierre Trudeau and LBJ do not look like liberals at all.

[skidder]

Re: the chump generation

I beg to differ: Social Security and Medicare were, indeed, designed to be the basis of one's ability to retire. The Republicans have never liked these programmes, but they were designed so that everyone could retire and live good in America.

And I make this same comment in Canada: The Canada Pension and Canadian Social Security and Canada's socialized-medicine were designed so that everyone could live-out their days in Canada and live good.

It is when putzes like Pierre Trudeau came to power and did not index the Canada Pension to inflation that the trouble with entitlements not meeting the needs of Canadians began. And it was this so-called, "liberal" Pierre Trudeau who sold Canada's gold reserves in the 1970s and let the beaver buck float wildly. Trudeau thought inflation was good, and he spent the country into huge deficits.... I mean, let's tell the history the way it was. Trudeau's cute little beaver buck went down the toilet.

And Lyndon Baines Johnson in the U.S. fell in love with his Vietnam War and bankrupted the U.S. He was the liberal who got Medicare passed in the U.S. But his dirty war in Vietnam took priority for funding over his Medicare programme.

We need to re-call the history as best as we can and set the record straight, because the Republicans in America would like to say that socialized-medicine doesn't work. But socialized-medicine does work, and it works very well provided that it is honestly funded.

Liberalism is not a failure. Junk money and junk economics, confused priorities, and fuzzy-thinking about economics in our universities is the cause of our current economic demise. Make no mistake about that.

The current generation is not a generation of rock-music chumps. It is a generation, much like the baby-boom generation, who had their future stolen from them by deficits and inflation that they inherited from their parents' good times. Let's be very clear about that.

In hindsight, four or five decades later, Pierre Trudeau and LBJ do not look like liberals at all.

"
Social Security: Tax or Insurance?
When Congress implemented Social Security in the 1930s, was Social Security intended as a social welfare program that would redistribute wealth to retirees? Or was it intended to be an insurance program that workers paid into during their working years and received benefits from during their retirement years or if they became disabled? An analysis of these questions might shed light on the direction of Social Security in the future.
Originally, President Roosevelt called for “social insurance.” He envisioned a plan through which workers would contribute and provide for their own future economic security. He specifically disdained the idea of reliance upon welfare. The original SSA embraced the idea of Social Security being an insurance program under which a group of individuals were insured against identifiable risks: disability and old age. Workers paid for their own insurance. The concept pools the risk of disability or loss of income due to old age among a large number of individuals and pays out to those who live long enough to reap the benefit. If Social Security is thought of as an insurance program, then only those who had paid into the system should receive benefits. In addition, the benefit should be payable only to the insured individual and not to the insured’s spouse or family. If the benefit can be paid to a spouse or family, then an individual without a spouse or family should be able to identify a “beneficiary.” Finally, there should also be a direct correlation between the amount paid in and the benefit received, without a benefit cap or the taxation of benefits for wealthier recipients.
On the other hand, should Social Security be considered a tax, with benefits paid based upon social entitlement? If so, then the benefit received would not correlate to the amount paid. Most kinds of taxes (income, property, sales) are paid without the expectation on the part of the payor of receiving commiserate benefits. Currently, Social Security benefits are calculated based upon the income earned by an individual, up to a capped benefit amount (the formula uses a smaller percentage as income increases). Under the current system, the AICPA has identified a redistribution of income from 1) single participants to married participants, 2) high-income participants to low-income participants, and 3) two-earner couples to one-earner couples. These net redistributions must be taken into consideration in evaluating the Social Security system. Any proposed changes must weigh whether Social Security is an “insurance program” or a “tax” for the redistribution of income. One current proposal, the use of a “means test” to determine who should receive Social Security benefits, would solidify the program as a tax intended to redistribute income. "

[dbarberic]

Re: the chump generation

To me it's obvious where this is heading.

Both Social Security and Medicare are heading back to the original purposes -- a basic subsistence net. Social Security can not and is not supposed to be a "retirement plan". And medicare/medicaid can't be all-encompassing for the elderly -- it leads to buying votes (the prescription package) and near-fraud/abuse [IMO] (the motorized wheelchair commercials I see everywhere).

And prepare for means-testing as well.

Finally, for those who say other countries have done this successfully, I expect rollbacks there soon. As many people here have stated, with the rest of the world rising up, the Western economies are going to have to level down.

Means testing presents an interesting investment decision.

You may actually be better off not saving for retirement and pushing the excess income that would normally be saved for retirement into paying off debt. The objective would be to hit retirement age with no debt (including house), but no assets or income either that would be counted against you in means testing.

[dbarberic]

Re: the chump generation

To me it's obvious where this is heading.

Both Social Security and Medicare are heading back to the original purposes -- a basic subsistence net. Social Security can not and is not supposed to be a "retirement plan". And medicare/medicaid can't be all-encompassing for the elderly -- it leads to buying votes (the prescription package) and near-fraud/abuse [IMO] (the motorized wheelchair commercials I see everywhere).

And prepare for means-testing as well.

Finally, for those who say other countries have done this successfully, I expect rollbacks there soon. As many people here have stated, with the rest of the world rising up, the Western economies are going to have to level down.

Means testing presents an interesting investment decision.

You may actually be better off not saving for retirement and pushing the excess income that would normally be saved for retirement into paying off debt. The objective would be to hit retirement age with no debt (including house), but no assets or income either that would be counted against you in means testing.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: the chump generation

Means testing presents an interesting investment decision.

You may actually be better off not saving for retirement and pushing the excess income that would normally be saved for retirement into paying off debt. The objective would be to hit retirement age with no debt (including house), but no assets or income either that would be counted against you in means testing.

Yup - sounds like a good plan to me.

[jpatter666]

Re: the chump generation

Means testing presents an interesting investment decision.

You may actually be better off not saving for retirement and pushing the excess income that would normally be saved for retirement into paying off debt. The objective would be to hit retirement age with no debt (including house), but no assets or income either that would be counted against you in means testing.

Oops! Gave myself away! :p

That's actually the goal for the wife and I for end-year. Absolutely no debts of any kind.