Marco Rubio Shoots Himself in the foot with a BAZOOKA. Calls for raising the retirement age

[stevenleser]

Did he forget for which state he is running to represent in the US Senate? Apparently so.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100525/ap_on_el_se/us_florida_senate_social_security

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Marco Rubio wants Americans to work longer and retire later to places like Florida, a stand that has drawn criticism from his Senate rivals and unnerves some in the Sunshine State where one out of every seven residents gets a Social Security check.

As the nation grapples with the fast-growing insolvency of entitlement programs, likely Republican nominee Rubio has proposed raising the retirement age and cutting benefits to younger workers. Rubio wants to raise the full-retirement age, which now ranges from 65 to 67 depending on a person's birth year, until it reaches 70 in the next century. He would exempt people currently over 55.

He also favors allowing workers to invest part of their payroll taxes on their own. That plan is similar to one that was advanced by former President George W. Bush six years ago and proved so controversial that Republicans then in control never brought it to a vote in either House of Congress.

[chelsea0011]

1. Work until you have one foot in the grave and then sit back and enjoy life.

[jljamison]

2. why would retirees care?

If they have already retired, why would they necessarily care?

Frankly i think it is a rational proposal and it will undoubtedly be a consideration by the deficit commission.

[Skidmore]

8. There are a large number of us, age 55 and over, who have not yet

reached retirement age and have become unemployed or seriously underemployed and who are being passed over for younger workers for jobs. Add to that the insult of having the banking and finance sectors piss away the retirement funds we worked for years to get and compound that with years of paying payroll taxes, only to have no assurance of having access to those in our senior years. When do you care to start euthenizing us? Oh, yes. We care.

[lib2DaBone]

17. Exactly. If you are over 55... no jobs... no future.. no help...

Republican answer.. "Just die.. and die Quickley".

[DCBob]

9. I think he's more or less correct but not wise to campaign on this issue in FL or elsewhere..

third rail.

[laughingliberal]

15. He's more or less dead wrong. It's theft, plain and simple. nt

[sendero]

20. Get used to the idea..

... because it is coming whether you like it or not.

[laughingliberal]

25. It very well may but I'll never capitulate to the spin that is sanctioning the theft that this is.

[DCBob]

31. Well it may be "theft" but that's the world we live in...

The "theft" problem is basically unfixable without an "of with their heads" revolution.

[laughingliberal]

34. With even Democrats sold out to the policies of Reagan, you may be right.

I have no problem with the off with their heads idea, however.

[DCBob]

35. No sold out on anything.. just facing reality...

BTW, I would be ready for revolution too if I thought it would work.

[laughingliberal]

39. If only...eom

[sendero]

40. SS was theft from the very get go..

... simply because the first people in paid little and got a lot and the last people in will pay a lot and get little.

That said I'm not sure how it could have been done much better, and I'm for the program in general.

BUT - it is unsustainable in its present form. A combination of benefit cuts and retirement age raising is going to have to happen.

And when you think about it, people are living longer so that it inevitable.

[alstephenson]

43. Wow. You got those talking points down good!

Guess you've been listening to the MSM spin it.

[sendero]

44. Sorry you are ...

... innumerate. Not everything is wrong just because a Republican says it.

The math is pretty trivial, you don't have to be an actuary to get it. But you don't want to get it so you won't.

Get some fresh sand to dunk your head in, that'll make you feel better.

[WinkyDink]

19. He's nowhere NEAR "correct". SS is SOLVENT, and to REMAIN so, needs to become non-REGRESSIVE.

TAX FROM THE TOP DOWN.

WHY IS THAT SO DIFFICULT TO DO?

[DCBob]

28. Social Security will pay out more in benefits in 2010 than it receives in payroll taxes...

If that continues SS will not be "SOLVENT" in the near future.

[Hannah Bell]

30. 3 trillion in the trust fund needs to be paid back before you start talking about insolvency.

oh, & btw, there have been several periods during which it paid out more than it took in. doesn't mean it's "insolvent".

[DCBob]

33. If SS continues paying out more than it receives it will become insolvent..

anyone who understands simple math can see that.

[Hannah Bell]

37. anyone who understands simple math can see the trust fund has a 3 trillion dollar surplus.

and that collections are in the neighborhood of 500 billion/year, while payouts are in the same neighborhood.

a person who understands math also knows that the pundits screaming about how SS is currently "paying out more than it takes in!" neglect to count the interest payments the trust fund is "taking in".

nor do they note that one of the reasons receipts are down is THE 2-YEARS-&-COUNTING RECESSION CAUSED BY THE BANKSTERS THAT CREATED 10% UNEMPLOYMENT.

Maybe those smart bean-counters could work on that before sending old people to sleep on the streets.

[Hannah Bell]

29. Because it worked for 70 years under the present formula, but something changed in the interim so

that we need to "fix" it?

how so?

[WinkyDink]

18. Unlike Republicans, we Democrats think of others. I don't get your point, frankly.

[Bok_Tukalo]

3. I don't see this being that bad for him in Florida

It would be sold as a way to protect current retiree benefits. The only problem would be the general unease felt by retirees when social security is mentioned.

But the I-got-mine attitude comes into play with this one.

[stevenleser]

11. Retirees dont usually have the "I-got-mine" attitude. When you talk about reducing or

raising the retirement age, they tend to get very pissed off. I saw this several times close up when I lived in Florida for 12 years.

They do not play around with people who talk about messing with Social Security in any way.

[Warpy]

4. That son of a bitch needs to dig ditches for a while

Hard physical labor wrecks your body. There is no way you can keep doing it past retirement age and some of us don't even make it to retirement age before our bodies give out.

Sure, raise retirement age to 70 for all the desk jockeys. However, reduce it to 55 for people who do physical labor.

[jtuck004]

5. I think it's reasonable to have tax rates at 90% for incomes over $750,000 a year too. n.t

[tinymontgomery]

6. Crap I'm only 53

I guess I should have been born 2 years earlier.

[rzemanfl]

7. When Nixon instituted the draft lottery people with high numbers

and their significant others were a lot less vocal about the war. On the other hand, people over 55 have kids, I don't want mine to have to work until seventy.

[DCBob]

10. Crist's odds of winning just went up about 10 points..

I dont see any benefit for Rubio except with his base who were already lock step with him.

[RagAss]

12. Fuck him !

[Scuba]

13. Why not 100 ? Corporate America loves cheap labor.

But not benefits over age, well no benefits.

[Vinca]

14. It's a moot point. Who can afford to retire anymore?

[Scurrilous]

16. Gusano @#$%.

:o

[Joanne98]

21. Don't retire but if you do die quickly!

[chill_wind]

24. +1

[Dappleganger]

22. So I guess that means Rubio doesn't need any votes from South FL to win this thing.

[lifesbeautifulmagic]

23. HELL NO

I have been working since I was 15. Raise the fricking cap and leave the retirement age alone.

[Orlandodem]

26. This is AWFUL for those people in their 50s. I hope the Dems target this

demographic in the campaign and constantly remind them of Rubio's plan.

[phleshdef]

27. Looks like we are getting Senator Meek or Senator Crist.

I want Meek, but I'll happily take either over this right wing piece of work.

[GreenPartyVoter]

32. Neither of my parents even made it to the current retirement age. How many others would also

never see retirement if the age was raised? (At least for my dad he did retire early due to medical issues, but really not so easy to enjoy that kind of a retirement.)

[Hannah Bell]

36. Person who's now 55, born in 1955, if they reach age 65, can expect

to live about 14 more years.

Person who's now 50, born in 1960, can expect about to live about 14.39 more years if they reach 65.

Those extra 3 months will be great ones, though --

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_09.pdf


& oh, person born in 1900 could expect to live about 11.9 years more if they reached age 65. so most of the boomers gained about 2 years on their grandparents -- but:

Age to collect full benefits has already been raised two years.


The big increases in life expectancy over age 65 don't come until you get to the Reagan generations born after 1980.

But those *predicted* increases are dubious for several reasons.

1. Those generations are likely to be poorer. Poor & reduced life expectancy go together.
2. Since those generations haven't lived very long, less info to base the stats on, i.e. "just a prediction".

So why should age to collect full benefits be raised more than the two years it already has been?

Oh, that's right, so more people will die before they collect anything.

[TexasObserver]

38. He does know he's running in Florida, right?

[AngryOldDem]

41. Work until you die.

Nice.

[Mudoria]

42. I'm 55 now and worked in manufacturing since I was 17

I highly doubt my body will make it to 67 much less 70.