Skip to main content

View Diary: Retire at 55: Guess Who Else Is Suggesting an INCREASE in Social Security Benefits? (90 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What you two are talking about just sounds (0+ / 0-)

    so far from reality.  Can you show me a back of the envelope equation of the math behind a system that says that you can dramatically increase payments for SS and Medicare and that this will magically reduce costs?

    And why do you believe that kicking the 55 year olds out of the work force all of a sudden creates more jobs?

    To me it sounds a lot like that South Park episode which stated a simple 3 point plan to get rich.

    1. Steal panties.
    2. ?????
    3. Profit!

    We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

    by theotherside on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:21:28 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  ?? The more people paying into an insurance pool (0+ / 0-)

      the less the individual premium cost could be (more people paying $$ in to cover claim $$s going out), in a not-for-profit system like Medicare.  

      Expand Medicare to younger, healthier people  brings in more $$ to cover claims from sicker patients, without having to raise the sicker patient's premiums to an unsupportable level.    My point was that an added benefit is that by getting younger people covered there is also a long-term payoff in avoiding debilitating, high-cost events later.   People who are controlling their blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood glucose levels have significantly less risk for heart attacks and strokes that people who don't (a frequent reference for this is the Framingham Heart Study ).  

      From a societal perspective it's cost effective (to use my econ. colleagues' term) to make sure people stay healthy longer, and that doesn't even consider the ethical & moral issues around health care.  Lowering the Medicare eligibility age is one way to do that.  

      Comfort the afflicted. Afflict the comfortable.

      by FindingMyVoice on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:03:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You are making the argument for (0+ / 0-)

        lowering the age of Medicare and/or going to single payer and that is fine.  I understand that and mostly agree with that.  However, the argument that was presented in this thread is that if you take the most experienced people in our workforce, remove them from the labor pool, provide them with SS and Medicare at taxpayer expense, that you will suddenly make the country much better off.

        It sounds like a recipe for disaster to me and there doesn't seem to be much explanation behind why people think that removing the most productive people from the labor pool and increasing taxes on those that remain in the labor pool will make the country better off.  They also don't address how they think that we can work only a little more than 30 years and receive SS and Medicare for only a slightly lower amount of time.  What are the tax rates necessary to support such a system?

        Another way to look at it is:  let's say you are 30.  And your parents are 56.  Some people are saying that that 30 year old can create enough value through their work to be able to support themselves, take care of their kids and pay for all the SS and Medicare benefits for their parents.  (Yes, in reality it doesn't quite work like that but in broad general terms that is what those supporting this idea are saying)  I don't see that system as being sustainable and the people advocating for it are taking it as a given.

        We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

        by theotherside on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:42:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  ok, we're talking about two different things (0+ / 0-)


          Back along the jobs line,  Medicare for all would uncouple health care from employment and potentially free up some percentage of the current workforce to be entreprenureal (sp? sorry) or work part-time, or ? without sacrificing their (and their families) health coverage.  Perhaps the thinking is similar for changing SS - a better SS payout (attained by lifting the cap on income subject to SS tax, perhaps?) would give some people the option to retire or go to part-time work sooner, if they wanted.  

          Under the current system way too many of us are wage slaves to  health insurance coverage from our employers & the distant promise of having enough to survive on without starving when we can't work any longer.  

          We're all in this together, bottom line.

          Comfort the afflicted. Afflict the comfortable.

          by FindingMyVoice on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:32:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  You're absolutely right! (0+ / 0-)

      Nowhere on Earth, has social democracy actually worked. People talk about Scandinavia as a model of social democracy .....but you can't find it on any map!

      In the Fox News Christian Nation, public schools won't teach sex education and evolution; instead they'll have an NRA sponsored Shots for Tots: Gunz in Schoolz program.

      by xynz on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:51:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site