I was too young to vote for LBJ so don't blame me. Why they did what they did goes beyond the scope of my financial comprehension, but I would assume that the 'trust fund' relies on the United States to generate the revenues necessary to pay it. Hence a healthy, vibrant economy is the key.

HitsRus;657150 wrote:Periods of economic upheaval happen. Comparitively, we've had a long run of relatively good times. Your generation has never known serious recession until now....which means in a figurative sense, you have grown up with a silver spoon in your mouth. Try dealling with inflation of 12- 14% and high unemployment.... then you'll know hard times. I don't think any generation has a magic formula...I'm sure you'll fuck it up too.

I couldn't agree more.

I love it when the 20-something's boo hoo about how they're getting screwed by the boomers and that they just know that SS will not be around after the greedy boomers suck the fund dry. As I recall when I was 20-something the boomers were crying doom & gloom about the demise of SS as well. Nothing new here boys and girls.

You are right about the younger generation spewing venom. This recession is their first real taste of economic realty. In my lifetime I've experienced about a half dozen recessions of varying degrees. The current recession that the leftist media keeps telling us is the worst economic times since the Great Depression is bad to be sure, but it's doesn't compare to the double-dip recessions of the 70's and early 80's where we experienced stagflation, double-digit interest rates, high inflation rates, long lines at the gas stations, as well as near double-digit unemployment. A friggin home mortgage rate was almost 11%. Buying a house was almost out of the question. The only thing that makes the current recession "worse" is the length of time.

The bright side to all of this to the younger workers is they should clearly see the value of putting as much money in savings and investments as they can so they won't have to worry about their retirements and relying on the Feds to provide for their needs. You have 40 to 50 years to get it done. Start NOW.

All I'm saying is this stuff is nothing new and it too shall pass.

Some of us younger people were old enough and savvy enough to remember the late 70's/early 80's recession. It sucked, but there are factors today that make the recovery far less likely to be as quick and painless as the 80's recovery.

1) Our manufacturing base has completely fallen off of the shelf. Where is the recovery going to come from? The POTUS says innovation, but he wouldn't know an innovative idea if it him in the face, he's never worked in a job where innovation was appreciated.

2) We're in debt up to our eyeballs, both from a federal, state and personal level. With respect to the first two either higher taxes or fewer services (and by fewer services I include future entitlement "promises" are destined to happen (likely a combination of both)). It is obvious by now that boomers and current retirees will not stand for reductions in their entitlements. Hell, we gave SS recipients $500 more this past year when it wasn't even due. At least in the 70's/80's one could get an education without having any debt, or very little debt. Unless one is independently wealthy it is impossible now. Young people are starting in life carrying an anchor, and for most of them the anchor will drown them. And it will finally be everyone's problem when the next INCREDIBLY FORESEEABLE crisis happens.

3) It is funny that inflation was mentioned, superinflation would destroy older people with savings, but it might be a blessing in disguise for younger people. For the country as a whole it won't be a good thing, but neither are the sociological problems that will affect ALL of us when our young people are stuck in arrested development - not buying houses, not having children, accepting America's decline, etc.. This is happening now.

4) Young people should be spewing venom, for those under 30 they are facing easily the biggest challenge since the great depression, and a large part of people over 30 that seem unwilling to accept any sacrifice to insure the future of the nation. Hell, I'll be 37 next week and feel very, very blessed that we've had the careers, prosperity, and relatively little debt service that we've enjoyed, when I see people a decade or so younger than us NOT getting married, putting off having children, unable to afford homes, not saving, not working yet still mired in debt. How is this going to end well? It probably won't.

Manhattan Buckeye;657307 wrote:Some of us younger people were old enough and savvy enough to remember the late 70's/early 80's recession. It sucked, but there are factors today that make the recovery far less likely to be as quick and painless as the 80's recovery.

1) Our manufacturing base has completely fallen off of the shelf. Where is the recovery going to come from? The POTUS says innovation, but he wouldn't know an innovative idea if it him in the face, he's never worked in a job where innovation was appreciated.

2) We're in debt up to our eyeballs, both from a federal, state and personal level. With respect to the first two either higher taxes or fewer services (and by fewer services I include future entitlement "promises" are destined to happen (likely a combination of both)). It is obvious by now that boomers and current retirees will not stand for reductions in their entitlements. Hell, we gave SS recipients $500 more this past year when it wasn't even due. At least in the 70's/80's one could get an education without having any debt, or very little debt. Unless one is independently wealthy it is impossible now. Young people are starting in life carrying an anchor, and for most of them the anchor will drown them. And it will finally be everyone's problem when the next INCREDIBLY FORESEEABLE crisis happens.

3) It is funny that inflation was mentioned, superinflation would destroy older people with savings, but it might be a blessing in disguise for younger people. For the country as a whole it won't be a good thing, but neither are the sociological problems that will affect ALL of us when our young people are stuck in arrested development - not buying houses, not having children, accepting America's decline, etc.. This is happening now.

4) Young people should be spewing venom, for those under 30 they are facing easily the biggest challenge since the great depression, and a large part of people over 30 that seem unwilling to accept any sacrifice to insure the future of the nation. Hell, I'll be 37 next week and feel very, very blessed that we've had the careers, prosperity, and relatively little debt service that we've enjoyed, when I see people a decade or so younger than us NOT getting married, putting off having children, unable to afford homes, not saving, not working yet still mired in debt. How is this going to end well? It probably won't.

I more or less agree with what you've said, but despite all the doom & gloom I still believe in the American spirit...the ability to rise up and get it done. We've survived many, many crises over the years and this is no different.

Well, it is not going to end well if the government continues to be fiscally irresponsible.


News flash....young people have always spewed venom.
News flash#2...young people aren't getting married and putting off kids because of changes in social norms, not economics.

As a 'boomer' in his mid 50's, I didn't buy my first house until I was 31. It was a small 'starter' house. I paid 12.125% interst rate on my mortgage.

HitsRus;657319 wrote:As a 'boomer' in his mid 50's, I didn't buy my first house until I was 31. It was a small 'starter' house. I paid 12.125% interst rate on my mortgage.

Hhmmm....sounds like you were very fiscally responsible. Sounds like you didn't take on that high rate mortgage until you felt you could afford it and pay it back. We saved up some and got an interest-free loan from my parents so we could afford our first house. Paid them back ahead of schedule, too!

My point is that this isn't being taught with any effectiveness either in our gubmint schools nor in any social mores. We're taught that we deserve housing. We are somehow entitled to housing (per Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac). Through some minds, some are told that they deserve homes through social justice. Housing is thought by many to be an entitlement, and not something to show personal responsibility. To me, the deeper question, other than QE3/gubmint bailouts/saving AIG, is how do we restore the savings and investment ethic that you obviously showed to millions of Americans instead of the "me me me" entitlement mindset?

Sorry, Manhattan: I went to school in the early/mid 70s and couldn't do it without acquiring debt that took me 10 years to pay off (I paid it off early), and that was even with having a partial scholarship and working during school and full-time during the summers.

So I think you're wrong on that one.

There were a lot of folks just like me, who had to scrape and work part-time, and then borrow each year, just to get through school; and not some high priced private school that so many feel they have to attend these days. I'm talking about a basic, state college education at one of the lower priced schools of the era.

BGFalcons82;657327 wrote:...how do we restore the savings and investment ethic that you obviously showed to millions of Americans instead of the "me me me" entitlement mindset?

Let's start by teaching our kids basic common-sense personal finance and personal responsibility in our schools as opposed to worthless bullshit like kumbuya multiculturalism, proper condom application, the virtues of alternative lifestyles, saving our trees, etc.

Naw that would require a foundation in math and traditional American history.

Writerbuckeye;657332 wrote:There were a lot of folks just like me, who had to scrape and work part-time, and then borrow each year, just to get through school; and not some high priced private school that so many feel they have to attend these days. I'm talking about a basic, state college education at one of the lower priced schools of the era.

That was me as well. My parents certainly couldn't afford to send me to school so I opted to serve some active duty time in the military to qualify for the GI Bill. That only put a dent in it so I worked summer jobs, re-enlisted in the Air National Guard for their tuition assistance program, volunteered for more weeks of military service during the summer, and took out some modest student loans. It wasn't easy but I did it.

Not bad for a greedy self-centered all about me not willing to make any sacrifices for the greater good Boomer.

Writerbuckeye;657332 wrote:There were a lot of folks just like me, who had to scrape and work part-time, and then borrow each year, just to get through school; and not some high priced private school that so many feel they have to attend these days. I'm talking about a basic, state college education at one of the lower priced schools of the era.

That was me as well. My parents certainly couldn't afford to send me to school so I opted to serve some active duty time in the military to qualify for the GI Bill. That only put a dent in it so I worked summer jobs, re-enlisted in the Air National Guard for their tuition assistance program, volunteered for more weeks of military service during the summer, and took out some modest student loans. It wasn't easy but I did it.

Not bad for a greedy self-centered all about me not willing to make any sacrifices for the greater good Boomer.

"News flash#2...young people aren't getting married and putting off kids because of changes in social norms, not economics."

Completely disagree - we have more than a few younger co-workers putting off children because they are too much in debt and are too concerned about their job situations. It is horribly naive to not notice this.

I didn't mean to personally offend anyone, but if I sound pissed off, it is because I am. I really believe people in their 50's and 60's cannot relate to the struggles young people have today as well as those of us in their 30's and 40's because they are too far removed from that age. We see the bleak outlook for virtually all of our younger friends and I'd like to think I can put myself in their shoes.

If I was born in 1984 instead of 1974, worked just as hard and did everything that was expected from me and made similar decisions, instead of being in the situation where we (again, blessedly) are - I could likely be in full panic attack mode with $150-$200,000 in debt, poor job prospects, virtually no professional experience. The idea of getting married and having kids? Really? People in their 20's are lucky to move in with their parents and make enough for loan payments.

I'm just trying to explain why young people are (or should be) a bit upset that they are expected to do more with less because older generations are unwilling to sacrifice.

Manhattan Buckeye;657397 wrote:I'm just trying to explain why young people are (or should be) a bit upset that they are expected to do more with less because .

See post above.

Manhattan Buckeye;657397 wrote:I'm just trying to explain why young people are (or should be) a bit upset that they are expected to do more with less because older generations are unwilling to sacrifice.

Same shit every generation whines about. I can appreciate the frustration but with all due respect...stop the "older generations aren't willing to sacrifice" bullshit. Most of my friends are Boomers obviously and I can tell you without a doubt that each and everyone of us has had to sacrifice something in our lives at one time or another. The situations facing the younger generations is nothing new; nothing unique.

20 years from now the new "younger generations" will accuse your older generation of "not caring." Just sayin'....

"stop the "older generations aren't willing to sacrifice" bullshit."

I'll stop when you sacrifice. And it isn't bullshit. I plan on being alive in 2037, I'd like to see the U.S. maintain its status as an economic power.

I'm fully willing to give up ALL of our SS benefits if we don't have to pay into it ever again. The amounts we paid are sunken costs IMO. Just get rid of it, let the boomers get theirs and let them go away.

What are you willing to do?

Manhattan Buckeye;657440 wrote:"stop the "older generations aren't willing to sacrifice" bullshit."

I'll stop when you sacrifice. And it isn't bullshit. I plan on being alive in 2037, I'd like to see the U.S. maintain its status as an economic power.

I'm fully willing to give up ALL of our SS benefits if we don't have to pay into it ever again. The amounts we paid are sunken costs IMO. Just get rid of it, let the boomers get theirs and let them go away.

What are you willing to do?

MB you are right on in all of your posts. Keep up the good work.

believer;657408 wrote:Same shit every generation whines about. I can appreciate the frustration but with all due respect...stop the "older generations aren't willing to sacrifice" bullshit. Most of my friends are Boomers obviously and I can tell you without a doubt that each and everyone of us has had to sacrifice something in our lives at one time or another. The situations facing the younger generations is nothing new; nothing unique.

20 years from now the new "younger generations" will accuse your older generation of "not caring." Just sayin'....

This is one of the rare times I side with both believer and writerbuckeye. As I am in my late 50's, I had to sacrifice while raising my family. I endured all of those recessions believer spoke of and it wasn't fun. One thing I realized during the mid-80's, however, was that if I was willing to work and sacrifice I could get through just about anything. I managed to do just that and now I have a comfortable retirement. It really pains me to hear younger people when they say we are unwilling to sacrifice.

^^^^agree 100% with believer. MB, I'm usually on board with you, but not this time. Every generation has a unique situation, but it almost always involves some sort of sacrifice especially when you are young. I'm not sure why the "Y's" think that they don't have to do that. After getting my professional degree, I lived at home for a year and a hlaf before moving out and getting married at 27. We rented for four years, getting our first house a year after our first was born. I was working 55 hours a week trying to build my business, making the same amount as my employee(s). For my parent's generation, they dealt with the Great Depression and WWII...we dealt with Viet Nam and the stagflation of the 70's. Why should ANY generation think they should get a free pass?...that life is just going to be all roses?
As far as having kids, I don't know anybody whoever thought they were financially 'ready'...you just dealt with it. Young people are putting off kids...because they can.
And guess what, Manhatten Buckeye....in another 10-15 years you might be taking care of your parents as well as your kids, as I'm sure a lot of boomers can attest to. Gen "Y" can shoulder the burden like generations ahead of them have, or they can sit around blaming everyone and feeling sorry for themselves. This generation, like all the others, has the ability and the wherewithal to survive this economic downturn.

stlouiedipalma;657458 wrote:This is one of the rare times I side with both believer and writerbuckeye. As I am in my late 50's, I had to sacrifice while raising my family. I endured all of those recessions believer spoke of and it wasn't fun. One thing I realized during the mid-80's, however, was that if I was willing to work and sacrifice I could get through just about anything. I managed to do just that and now I have a comfortable retirement. It really pains me to hear younger people when they say we are unwilling to sacrifice.

Exactly. Every generation sacrifices in one manner or another. The 20 and 30-somethings think their situation is somehow unique or particularly more egregious than any previous generation has ever faced before. There aren't many folks out there who endured the Great Depression and World War II. But if you ever have an opportunity, ask them if the 20 or 30-somethings of today have it particularly bad.

The boomer generation is a byproduct of the sacrifices made by the Greatest Generation. They reaped the rewards afforded them by the generation that endured economic hardships and defeated fascism. But they were also the generation that inflicted Social Security on future generations.

Plenty of boomers sacrificed.

Like I said earlier I served this great nation for 9 years of my life so I could afford a college education. I've drawn a paycheck and have paid into SS by federal mandate for nearly 4 decades. Now the 20 and 30-somethings - the kids who drove damned nice shiny cars to high school thanks to the generosity of their selfish boomer parents, the kids who grew up on the luxuries of things like the Internet & cell phones (inventions provided to them by the boomers by the way), and the kids who think the world owes them a living - have the audacity to tell me I'm the one who needs to sacrifice.

No offense, MB, but you'll excuse me if I ask your generation to kiss my generation's ass.

Manhattan Buckeye;657440 wrote:"stop the "older generations aren't willing to sacrifice" bullshit."

I'll stop when you sacrifice. And it isn't bullshit. I plan on being alive in 2037, I'd like to see the U.S. maintain its status as an economic power.

I'm fully willing to give up ALL of our SS benefits if we don't have to pay into it ever again. The amounts we paid are sunken costs IMO. Just get rid of it, let the boomers get theirs and let them go away.

What are you willing to do?

I'd be curious wjhat you and others who want to do away with SS would do as an alternative? As a conservative Republican, I'm all for personmal responsibility, but in reality, what percentage of the population do you feel is actually capable of being financially savvy and disciplined enough to save for a secure retirement without the force of government/government oversight?

"And guess what, Manhatten Buckeye....in another 10-15 years you might be taking care of your parents as well as your kids"

Not likely to happen, my father is a retired Ohio public servant union member with a $70,000/year pension and better insurance that many of us younger people will likely never have. No debt. Owns the house fee simple. Owns the cars with no debt. He was never rich but always comfortable and he did work hard for it. That said, as much as I love him (and he is a Republican) he is absolutely clueless what our young people face today. Again, he's a Republican that bitches about the public debt, but doesn't realize that he's a part of the problem. Those promises he got, they might as well have promised him a luxury condo in Tahiti. You can't get blood out of a rock, and we're getting close to being a rock.

-edit

"Gen "Y" can shoulder the burden like generations ahead of them have,"

No, they can't. That is how dire the situation is. We're in an economic dark hole. I'm going to ask the question again which you "older Republicans" haven't answered.

Do you care about your children and grandchildren?

Manhattan Buckeye;657717 wrote:Do you care about your children and grandchildren?

Absolutely. My kids have a far better standard of living and more material comforts than I enjoyed at their age. And I'm quite certain you, our kids, and our grand kids will weather this new round of storms. Again I have zero faith in our DC leadership but I have every confidence in the will of the American people.

You are way too premature in tossing in the towel.

HitsRus;657639 wrote:I'd be curious wjhat you and others who want to do away with SS would do as an alternative? As a conservative Republican, I'm all for personmal responsibility, but in reality, what percentage of the population do you feel is actually capable of being financially savvy and disciplined enough to save for a secure retirement without the force of government/government oversight?

Not a very high percentage with today's consumer-driven, buy now-pay later, spend beyond one's means materialistic mindset that's for certain.

Manhattan Buckeye;657717 wrote:"And guess what, Manhatten Buckeye....in another 10-15 years you might be taking care of your parents as well as your kids"

Not likely to happen, my father is a retired Ohio public servant union member with a $70,000/year pension and better insurance that many of us younger people will likely never have. No debt. Owns the house fee simple. Owns the cars with no debt. He was never rich but always comfortable and he did work hard for it. That said, as much as I love him (and he is a Republican) he is absolutely clueless what our young people face today. Again, he's a Republican that bitches about the public debt, but doesn't realize that he's a part of the problem. Those promises he got, they might as well have promised him a luxury condo in Tahiti. You can't get blood out of a rock, and we're getting close to being a rock.

-edit

"Gen "Y" can shoulder the burden like generations ahead of them have,"

No, they can't. That is how dire the situation is. We're in an economic dark hole. I'm going to ask the question again which you "older Republicans" haven't answered.

Do you care about your children and grandchildren?

I wasn't blessed with children but I have helped take care of two nieces and a nephew -- none of whom has ever wanted for a damn thing, thanks to the sacrifices of their parents and myself.

No offense but I find your question almost whining in tone, a bit insulting, and hyperbolic to a degree. As already said, I think you're pushing the panic button too quickly, and I say that with my eyes wide open about how debt is threatening this country.

Well, I think one generation or another better be hitting the panic button. It's being tapped right now, but not jumped up and down on, and that's just about right. I happen to be a Gen-X'er, so I can understand and actually agree with points being made by the Boomers and the Gen-X'ers and the Y's.

But, I don't think it is wise at all to think that things will just work themselves out.

Look MB...I don't buy that you've known the economic hard times of the 70's....Born in '74, by the time you were 10 years old the recovery was well on it's way. Hence, your perception that this is a hole we cannot get out of is unnecessarily pessimistic. I agree 100% that government spending gone wild jeopardizes the financial health of future generations. The economic downturn has shaken the foundations of Social Security, and (as I said before) is the penultimate arguement of why any additional entitlement programs must be soundly defeated. But Social Security is NOT the problem and it can be fixed so that yours and future generations can have a safety net in their old age. The problem is porkulus...and the threat of looming additional entitlements and programs. Sure I'm worried about future generations.....but I'm not the problem. Maybe gen X and Y could start being a little more conservative in their approach to getting into debt. Maybe they could buy a 42 inch flat screen instead of going into debt to buy the 65 inch with all the latest HD and gizmos. Maybe they could buy a $125,000 house and put 20% down instead of 5% on a $350,000 house. Wow...what a concept. Personal economic responsibility.

But, I don't think it is wise at all to think that things will just work themselves out.

That is probably an understatement. But it doesn't mean that it's hopeless either....only that there is work to be done. I have to admit that I resent Gen "Y' calling me the problem. The Pres. and his minions were swept into power with huge support from the "Y''s. That he is spending away your future is not my generation's fault.

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-11-04/politics/exit.polls_1_exit-polls-obama-camp-john-mccain?_s=PMOLITICS

It's clear to me HitsRus that you have no idea how dire the situation is. Porkulus is the problem? Not even close. Shutting off all earmarks would shave approximately 1% off the federal budget. 1%! The big three entitlement programs SS/Medicaid/Medicare are THE problem. You want to talk about Gen Y's entitlements and how good they have it? Pot meet Kettle.

70.7 trillion BTW. Remember that number. That is the present value of all future entitlements promised by just those 3 programs. By 2050, at current projections, the government will only be able to afford to pay for interest on the national debt and some SS&MM. Sure the great depression was bad, the stagflation of the 70's was bad, but nothing is EVEN CLOSE to the economic destruction of the USA.