Our generation paid for our parents and grandparents social security check

[dkf]

By borrowing from our kids.

So our best and brightest face a world saddled with college debt, fruitless job searches, the burden of trillions in debt, plus our social security and our health care.

They aren't wondering if social security will be around when they retire...they are wondering how they will survive period.

I sure do hope we get our act together by the time my kiddies have to face this world.

[JDPriestly]

1. Wait a minute.

I didn't borrow from my kids. Members of Congress, the Bushes, Clinton and Reagan may have borrowed from my kids, but I did not. I have borrowed very, very little in my life.

I paid for my parents' Social Security out of my paychecks. Well, not quite, one of my parents died before he qualified for Social Security. Speak for yourself dkf but not for me.

And yes, all children have to provide for their elderly parents. We provide for our children when they are small and then they provide for us when we are old. That's the way nature planned it. For most people, there is no other way.

Human children cannot provide for themselves. They cannot earn their livings. Neither can elderly humans.

I did not decide to go to war in Iraq or Guatemala or Nicaragua or Viet Nam. I did not decide to waste my children's futures on those adventures. Sorry, if you feel guilty go to it. I did not make or support the decisions to waste our children's money in pay-offs to companies like Halliburton.

[dkf]

2. But look at the social security "surplus" and look at the national debt.

We paid into our retirement fund and went into debt. So we expect to get funds for our retirement yet expect the kids to pay our debt? Is that fair?

We say that wasn't our debt, we didn't want this war or that expense but we are the ones who had the power to vote and to organize. What power did these kids have?

[Lasher]

4. We've paid down the national debt before without stealing from old people.

[JDPriestly]

5. I was born in 1943. My parents' generation could have been accused

of putting our country in terrible debt -- to fund public works during the depression, the new Social Security system (which at that time had no reserve whatsoever) and the horrific war debts.

My parents and other Americans bought War Bonds -- all of which had to be paid back. My generation worked and the world kept turning. No one defaulted on Social Security.

Our GNP grew as a result of the hard work of my generation and that of my parents, and the debt for the Depression programs and WWII became relatively small. Today, American workers (at least on paper) are more productive than ever before.

Our problem is not that we have too much government debt but that thanks to our trade policies, the outsourcing of jobs and the importing of products and services, our middle class does not have the personal income from which taxes can be derived to pay off our debts.

Debt is not our big problem. Our trade policy and the unemployment it causes are our big problem. Change our trade policy and put Americans back to work, and the debt will take care of itself.

[dkf]

63. I'm confused about the idea that we can get these jobs back at a salary they will do the work at.

Most of the jobs probably now get paid at the level of migrant farm workers. If the jobs came back here they would be paid just as badly as the jobs we no longer want.

[JDPriestly]

70. If we did away with the trade agreements

and imposed import taxes on finished products coming from other parts of the world, our wages would be in proportion to our costs of living.

The problem is that our currency, the dollar, is the international currency. It's value is manipulated so that other countries can sell things to us in our market at low prices. In fact, the standards of living are very good in many countries in which hourly pay is lower than here.

The problem is that our standard of living is declining while theirs is rising.

I would add that an aspect of our problem that is ignored is that our problem, in addition to the outsourcing of jobs and importing of products, is not so much one of trying to increase productivity or trying to reduce the cost of labor but rather equitable distribution of our every increasing productivity.

We need stiff import taxes. We need the national freedom to impose them.

Why should we buy products made by people in China at subsistence wages in factories that are so polluting their environment? Who really profits from that? We will soon discover that we are not profiting at all? The cheap products are a come on.

It's like the advertised bargains in a store. They are simply a hook to get you into the store so in the hope that you will buy their overpriced items on impulse. We have fallen for the scam. We are now buying imports for what look like good prices. But the cheap imports are destroying our jobs, our economy and our country in the bargain.

The Republicans talk a lot about how budget deficits are stealing from our children. The truth is that free trade is stealing from our children. It is stealing their futures.

The goal is to end democracy and the United States as we know it. Free trade is anti-American, in my view. I cannot see how free trade can be reconciled with our longterm existence as a country. How can we maintain our identity as a country, as a politically independent entity if we continue to have free trade?

Please explain how you think we can do that? I have not been able to figure that out.

[Hannah Bell]

8. oh god.

[pinboy3niner]

10. You keep bringing those freeper talking points here

Once again, you couch your anti-Democratic spew in oh-so innocent terms like "I sure do hope...."

Your attacks on the Social Security system are as transparent as your anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim screeds.

Why is it that, after every one of your posts, I'm left wondering if you shouldn't be posting on a different message board?

[polmaven]

17. Those were exactly my thoughts

When I finished reading the OP I was shaking my head, and wondering why the OP is here. :crazy:

[Ikonoklast]

26. The amount of "Concern" is staggering from this one.

Flying low gets you under the radar, but it also means you fly into mountains.

[dkf]

64. I have always been against debt...always.

And I do understand that republicans practice cronyism. They can't be trusted with the people's money and they have nothing to offer beyond lowering taxes. Moreover, they let corporations run amok putting us all at risk.

I'm a Democrat because we are the adults in the room. But I also don't believe in magical thinking and I believe in reasonable budgeting and in paying a fair share. I don't believe that tax policy should redistribute. I believe that labor policy should ensure living wages and fair pay.

So yes I have my own world view on how things should work and I'm not a knee jerk liberal. I hate being told how I need to think because I consider myself a Democrat. Sometimes I wonder if you all think through your views or if you buy into everything that comes with the label.

[Lasher]

68. Why shouldn't tax policy redistribute?

Fair distribution of compensation is certainly not being dictated by any labor policy.

[northernlights]

35. And I'm sure that W's trillion dollar wars

and 30 years of offshoring jobs,blowing and bursting false economic bubbles, and a multi-trillion dollar bank bailout have *nothing* to do with our current trillion dollar debts. :eyes:

[sabrina 1]

66. What do you mean by 'expect kids to pay our debt'? Whose debt?

What utter nonsense that statement is. There is 2.5 trillion in the people's SS Security Fund right now, that will increase to double that amount by 2023.

WE have no debt. WE didn't borrow and spend or receive anything from the money borrowed. THEY borrowed OUR money and spent on WARS and on BAILING OUT WALL ST. and on cutting taxes for their wealthy buddies.

Do NOT include working people when you talk about the debt. They PAID their bills, which is why SS is still solvent and even now, in this bad economy with high unemployment SS will still have a surplus this year.

You are part of the problem when you don't have the facts and put up nonsense like this. And THEY count on this kind of ignorance of the facts to keep stealing from the people.

The Baby Boom generation paid for their parents retirement AND for their own. They are the first generation to do that. So get some facts before you post please. This is just rightwing-generated rhetoric which there is simply no excuse for because the FACTS are easy to find, and you don't even have to leave DU to find them. This really is a disgrace to see here on a democratic board.

[malaise]

18. I'm totally confused

Didn't parents pay into the Social Security fund?

[Lasher]

3. Our generation paid for our parents' Social Security checks while paying in advance for our own.

We paid extra payroll taxes for 30 years, saving $2.6 trillion so far in the Social Security trust fund, so that we would not be a burden on the next generation when we retire. And you know what, I've never once resented paying into the system that supports our helpless people in addition to providing a modest income to all in their later years.

[Synicus Maximus]

24. There is no "trust fund". No money just special non negotiable

Treasury bonds.

[Lasher]

32. What is the trust fund supposed to have in it, a mountain if diamonds?

Is that what you have in your checking account, diamonds? Or is it a balance of what the bank owes you on your money that they've loaned out for others to spend? I'll bet you don't even have a 'worthless piece of paper' to account for your balance. I don't, I do my banking online.

The trust fund bonds don't need to be negotiable. Your checking account isn't either. As it now stands the general fund is required by law to redeem all the trust fund bonds. If that's not money in the bank, nothing is.

[Yupster]

43. It would have been better if the trust fund surplus had been

taken away from the government and put into cd's, insurance fixed accounts, even foreign government bonds. Even if there were losses, at least there would actually be something there.

The idea of owing money to yourself is a charade.

[Lasher]

44. Is that a fact?

What about the $800 billion federal pension trust fund? Is that all fake because it's money we owe to ourselves? There will be no military pensions because their trust fund has been spent and it's worthless pieces of paper? What about the highway trust fund? More fake money owed to ourselves according to your 'logic', and yet we somehow manage to get money out of it every month.

[Yupster]

61. We spend the money because congress wants to spend the money

That would be true whether there was a trust fund or wasn't.

It's just an obligation of congress like any other. The trust fund is immaterial to it.

[Lasher]

62. So you blow by my point like you don't know how to read.

And again recite your tired old rightwing bullshit. This just makes you look even more like a fool. You've got nothing. Goodbye.

[JHB]

6. We could do what we did the last time we were in anything like this situation....

...and heavily tax high incomes, strengthen worker protection, and do what is needed to bring the financial sector back to being a financial sector and not a casino sector.


That worked out pretty well last time, not so much by "soaking the rich" as by changing the decisions they made to not get soaked.

[Hannah Bell]

9. +100. spare me from the catfood defenders.

[phasma ex machina]

47. Re: "casino sector." It seems more like a shark tank to me.

With a vampire squid in the corner waiting to suck the life out of anything it can get its tentacles on.

[Hannah Bell]

7. what are you on about? no one paid for their parents' SS by borrowing from their kids. false,

[pinboy3niner]

11. Consider the source

We've been down this wingnut road before...

[fasttense]

12. Our Generation????

Exactly which generation are you talking about?

If it is the Baby Boomers, you are 100% totally wrong.

The Baby Boomers were the 1st generation to pay for BOTH their parent's and their own retirements through Social Security. No, borrowing from the next generation for Baby Boomers. They paid for all of it up front.

That's why the Social Security Trust Fund was expanded (a place to put the Baby Boomers money for their retirement). That's why Ronnie Raygun doubled our Social Security income payments (except for the uber wealthy, they got a tax cut) in 1983 through the Greenspan Commission.

You know not of what you speak.

[Fire1]

25. Here! Here!! n/t

[alphafemale]

13. I knew when I was 18 that I would pay into SS nearly all my life and never see a dime of it

I could do math at that age too

[fasttense]

14. That's what the neoCONS and RepubliCONS want you to think.

They want you to think that losing your Social Security is a foregone conclusion. That way, you wont fight for it. That way you wont care if they take it away and spend it on tax cuts for the rich. That way there will be no protests and complaints when a Democratic President through a lame duck congress, signs into law the destruction of one of the few remaining FDR anti-poverty programs.

[pinboy3niner]

15. For this poster, that's the point

Why else spew fallacious RW talking points here?

[alphafemale]

16. The Math doesn't work.

I don't care if I don't get it.

I don't mind paying it.

But I know I'm not going to get it.

I already knew by that age I would be burdened with the Baby Boomers my entire life.

I accept it and expect no benefit.

[pinboy3niner]

19. Why on earth would you believe that RW BS???

Your SS is secure.

Apart from the fact that I happen to be a 'boomer,' I question your conclusion that you'll be "burdened with the Baby Boomers." That's only more RW bullshit, absolutly false.

Even without knowing your age, I can tell you that, under the current system, you'll receive all the SS benefits to which you are entitled--wingnut BS notwithstanding.

[alphafemale]

20. I don't mind paying...without possibility of benefit

really...

just another tax

one that actually helps people

better than bombers

[Bluenorthwest]

48. your entire premise is full of crap

Fully one third of the beneficiaries of SS are under retirement age, disabled people. People become disabled due to accidents, many work related. That could be you tomorrow. Or any day. That benefit and that protection is in place for you right now.
People who think they know the future are almost always wrong, because of the nature of both people and the future.

[alphafemale]

55. oh...you mean I could get LUCKY and be disabled?

and then I'd actually SEE some of that money I've been paying all my life?

uh thing is...

I have friends who SHOULD be getting SSI for disabilities and I know that hardly ever happens.

So sell that BS down the street.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. deleted duplicate

[bluethruandthru]

36. 1000 percent correct

Every time I hear this republican talking point from my friends I tell them the same thing: That's what they want you to believe so you won't fight to save it!

[donquijoterocket]

39. retake your math classes

And clean your glasses while you're at it.Maybe try to have learned a thing or two since you were 18

[alphafemale]

57. You Baby Boomers will get your SSI payments

Don't worry.

[ThomWV]

21. You got that just about as wrong as possible

First off our parents paid for their parents Social Security - yes, its been in effect that long - and we paid for our parents Social Security, and our children will pay for our Social Security, and so on. That has nothing to do with borrowing by any generation for any purpose and in fact the only borrowing that is relevant is the borrowing FROM the Social Security System of money that we and our parents paid in that was in excess of that needed immediately.

[alphafemale]

22. There's not enough people to pay for the Baby Boomers

period

[Lasher]

23. That's foolish, it's simply a matter of priorities

Why is it that we can't afford Social Security but we can afford everyting else?

[alphafemale]

50. I just think many people my age (40ish) never expect to see money back.

Although, I think people 10 to 15 years older than my age bracket DO expect it.

I WISH the national priority was NOT having a bigger military than the rest of the world COMBINED.

But it is.

War makes the people who own the media money.

[Fire1]

27. Then you had better find the money from somewhere or

give us our money back.

[alphafemale]

51. ohh...kay

You'll probably get your money. I said I don't expect mine.

I'd guess you're a Boomer.

You get YOUR money.

[ThomWV]

29. That is simply not true - there are enough people working to pay for the system easily

Why is it that people forget that over 90% of those who wish to work have a job and in fact most of those jobs are better paying than the jobs lost by the 10% who are no longer employed.

[alphafemale]

52. With current expected lifespans someone can be retired for 30 or more years

With the baby boom bubble there could be just as many retired people (and children) as workers.

But baby boomers will get theirs.

There just won't be anything left after that.

[Lasher]

67. You just pull everything out of your ass, don't you?

The average person retiring today at age 66 (the current Social Security retirement age) will live another 17.7 years. Age 66 + "retired for 30 or more years" = 96 years old. Or more.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9072815&mesg_id=9078065

You should sue your math teacher.

[Lasher]

38. Show me the math that doesn't work.

I've learned to do math too and I don't see it that way at all.

[alphafemale]

53. There will be too many retired people versus working people

Once the boomers start retiring that is.

[Lasher]

58. That's not math.

You said math. Show it to me.

[alphafemale]

59. 1/2 of paycheck to pay for 25 years of retirement for boomers + no chance of seeing money again =

Well...you tell me.

[Lasher]

65. OK, fair enough. I'll tell you.

1/2 of paycheck

The Social Security tax (FICA) is 6.2% of earned income up to $106,800. That's not half of your paycheck. In addition you pay 1.45% to Medicare, 1.2% of your first $7,000 for unemployment compensation, and 0.1% of your first $7,000 for retraining displaced workers. Together this is the total payroll tax. It is still not half your paycheck.

For those with incomes in the top 20%, the average rate for all federal taxes is 26.8%. If you include state and local taxes, their rate is 34.5%. Those in the next 20% (quintile) pay 19.3% and 31.3%, respectively. The middle quintile pays 15.2%/28.2%. The next one down pays 11.6%/23.2%, and the bottom quintile pays 5.4%/13.0%.

Any way you slice it, it is patently false to say you are paying half your paycheck in taxes. It is a matter of wild speculation to say that you will at any time in the future be paying half your income to support Social Security.

to pay for 25 years of retirement for boomers

In 2005 the average person in the US at age 65 could expect to live another 18.7 years. That's not 25 years. And the retirement age is now 66. For those born in 1960 and later it's 67. 18.7 - 1 = 17.7 years.

+ no chance of seeing money again =

Equals you need to get a new math teacher.

[retread]

69. There you go again with all those numbers and facts. I'll bet they're like water off a duck's back.

[JHB]

60. Math is numbers. Show some.

Such as:

First, the economic arguments, which are based on some fundamental demographic "facts." The U.S. population is aging. Birth rates aren't what they were during the Baby Boom, and the people born during those years (1946–64) will start joining the ranks of the official elderly starting in 2011. Today, about 12% of the U.S. population is 65 and over; the Trustees of the Social Security system, who make the official projections, see that rising to 18% in 2025, 21% in 2050, and 23% 2080. Sounds dire: since the pension benefits of today's retirees are paid by today's taxpaying workers, then the increasing ratio of old to young will put a burden on the retirement system—any retirement system, private as well as public, though that detail is rarely mentioned.

But how serious a problem is this? Nowhere near as serious on the second glance as the first. As with many of the projections, the Trustees' are considerably gloomier than those produced by other entities. The Census Bureau, for example, projects the 65-and-over share of the population to be less than 22% in 2080. That may not sound like much, but if the Census Bureau is right and the Trustees are wrong, that adjustment alone could reduce the system's projected deficit 75 years from now from 2.1% of GDP to 1.6%.

And looking only at the elderly share of the population is a very selective analysis. A broader analysis would ask how many nonworkers is each member of the paid workforce projected to support. In 2080, the Trustees project that there will be 1.01 nonworkers for every paid worker, up from 0.90 today (see nearby chart). But the 2080 figure is still way below 1955's 1.68, when there were many more kids running around, and many fewer women in paid employment than today. Even if you don't buy the nonsense about the New Economy's productivity revolution, it's hard to imagine why the U.S. economy of 2080 would have a rough time coping with the same nonworker/worker ratio that it did in the mid-1980s.


Speaking of that productivity revolution, it's nowhere in the projections. Over the very long term, output per worker in the U.S. has grown around 2% a year. Some reputable economists project that the infotech has kicked us up to a higher rate of 2.5% a year, though that seems like a stretch. (Some boosterish business pundits are even pushing an implausible 4% rate.) Lost in their gloomy world, the Social Security Trustees are projecting a 1.6% rate of annual productivity growth through 2080—20% below the long term average. Those differences might not sound like much, but they really compound over time. At 1.6% a year, productivity in 2080 would be almost 230% of today's levels; at 2.0%, over 340%; at 2.5%, almost 540%. Obviously, the bigger the number, the better the economy will be able to afford its retirees—but the Trustees chose a very small one.

http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/SocialSecurityRevisited.html

[JVS]

41. I think there might be enough people, but we can't do it with the kinds of wages being paid now.

And the kind of unemployment we have.

[alphafemale]

54. Half of the paycheck may have to go to SSI I'm guessing

And that is just to see the baby boomers through.

Kiss that money goodbye

[retread]

28. HaHaHa! You again! No need to be a beckerhead or a dittohead, just have to read your posts on DU.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

56. I didn't think anything could top the *Ground Zero Mosque* posts.

This just may have done it.

[Little Star]

30. RW Bullshit!!!! Unrec

[Monique1]

31. This is really sad!

People work all their lives paying into SS now it is being resented. I'm a senior, yes I do collect SS but now the young wants to throw the seniors under the bus. I'm getting the message that seniors are a burden to society. When health care insurance was an issue Grayson said the repukes just want us to die, I get the same message today regarding seniors.

If the young want SS - than fight for it, stop the complaining and fight for it.

The Chamber of Commerce in my state wants to take over my pension plan - another mess. They want to put it in the stock market, now how brilliant is that? How many lost money because of the different plans who invest in the stock market?

I did look forward to my retirement believing that I would enjoy life after working over 40 years and giving to society but no longer is that joy there anymore.

Just thoughts from a retiree. Flame me if you want.

[hayu_lol]

37. The 'kiddies' around here, like dfk, keep bringing this...

topic up. How the seniors are stealing their money and throwing them deeply in debt. I don't really care what generation dfk is, he/she forgets that we old codgers gladly paid through the nose for generations of public education...including dfk's education...without worrying about where the money was going. We paid for roads that your parents used to go to the hospital where you were born...paid for all the social programs that helped you develop into the fine upstanding cheapskate you are.

Sorry chum, no sympathy from this great grandfather for people of your ilk. I do draw SS and feel qualified for it...paid into SS for 60 working years.

I really feel dfk, that you need to seriously rethink your position on this matter.

[MineralMan]

33. Gosh! You should expand that and send it around the internet

as a forwarded email. The Freepers will send it to everyone on the planet. They love that shit.

[northernlights]

34. um, would you care to provide some facts to support this?

We did NOT pay for our parents or grandparents social security by "borrowing from our kids."

W, however, did pay for 2 TRILLION DOLLAR WARS by hiding their cost behind Social Security.

[SargeUNN]

40. are you aware that Social Security was paid for by these folks?

DAH

[Forkboy]

42. Is there any issue that you don't ape the RW position on?

[SargeUNN]

45. This should prove DU allows the stupid to have their say too

Obviously this person is uninformed, selfish, and proud of their lack of knowledge, but let's do recognize even this stupidity has been allowed here at DU. Some have said DU doesn't allow other opinions, but this thread totally shows it does.

[Bluerthanblue]

46. and my children are here because generations before this one

gave unselfishly to the children of the future.

My sons will support those in society who need their support, without hope of repayment. Living in a society- living in community involves shared responsibilities.

We need to stop championing selfishness.

It shouldn't be "AMErica, it should be the U.S. of America.

Life is all about borrowing from the future. We've gotten way off course.

from the Talmud comes this wisdom:

"An old man was planting a fig tree, when a Roman general happened to pass by. The general says to the man, "Don't you realize it will take twenty years before that tree will grow enough to give fruit, and you will be long dead by then?" The old man responded, "When I was a small child, I could eat fruit because those who came before me had planted trees. Am I not obliged to do the same for the next generation?"