Skip to main content

View Diary: "Entitlement Reforms" That Progressives Can Support (113 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks Tom (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Just a question, your stats stated that only 1/3 of Americans are supported solely on SS and Medicare, I was just wondering if that number isn't higher?  I say this because many women and men will not have a second income such as a retirement to provide a second income in addition to social security.

    May I just add:

    Social Security also covers more people than any other type of retirement benefit. The great majority of retired Americans age 65 and older (87%) received Social Security income in 2009, up from 69% in 1962. In contrast, only about half (53%) of older Americans have asset income in retirement, a proportion that is unchanged since 1962. The proportion of retirees receiving private-sector pension income has grown from 9% to 28%. And 14% of seniors have government pension income, up from 9% in 1962. The proportion of older Americans with income from work has fallen from just over a third in 1962 to about a quarter in 2009.
    I think since 2008 there are going to be more people in crisis if we cut social security and medicare instead of building it up to support those who are going to need something to sustain themselves in old age or disability.

    "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolution­ary act. " George Orwell

    by zaka1 on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 03:43:43 PM PST

    •   I think it was two thirds rely on it forw (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      at least half their incomes.  I agree that more will be dependant on it because fewer people have pensions.

      Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

      by TomP on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 07:15:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think especially (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        with all the divorces (I believe it is up around 60% now) that many women whom did not remarried and were underpaid and usually did not receive a pension are especially going to be dependent on SS as income.  It wasn't until about 35 years into my working life that I received an income that wasn't a complete pittance.  

        I know many widows my Mother's age (83) have received their husband's pension and social security (many didn't work outside the home in those days), but there are many more women now who won't have those sources of income.  I'm not saying that men don't have financial problems because since 2008 many older men are now in the same boat as many women are.  There are just too many things that have been done in the past forty years through bad politics that are getting many of us caught in the middle with little resources.

        Social Security should be increased to a livable income and it should come from those that have profitted off of our stagnant wages, poor cost of living increases, and lost pensions.  Oh the top people have taken pensions for themselves, but have not given the same benefit to others.  

        The ecomony today is so completely different than when most of us were earning a median income of about $20,000.00 in the late 1970s which maintained there through out most of our working years.  Trying to sustain oneself on less than $17,000.00 a year because you worked decades earlier, in a different ecomony, is going to increase poverty among the elderly.

        Plus shouldn't all of the money invested have been collecting interest in order to keep up with present day costs?  Or did they really put IOUs in the fund and that is part of the problem?

        "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolution­ary act. " George Orwell

        by zaka1 on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 08:29:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site