gut;1540149 wrote:Not that I agree with Sleeper, but I do laugh at people who say "I paid for my SS, I'm entitled to my benefits".

No. They paid for their PARENTS' social security and medicare. And to the extent population/workforce shrinks relative to the beneficiaries, then the benefit pool is going to shrink. You're not really entitled to a defined benefit but rather your share of that benefit pool.

The thing you seemingly ignore is that SS was thrust upon us. It's established as the law of the land in Round One of the slow but steady Socialist Revolution started in the 1930's.

This "investment" was not one of personal choice but a clear mandate by the nanny state to force us all to participate in a collective retirement program allegedly designed to insure that each of us have some sort of cash flow for basic sustenance once the semi-free market prematurely kicks our asses out of work because our salaries are too high.

While it is true that the dollars I've been forced by law to pay-in was routed directly to existing retirees, it doesn't negate the fact that it was and is MY money. Apparently we're asking too much to expect the gubmint to stick to its end of the - um - "social contract" by paying us our money back when we retire. I don't give a damn how big or small "the pool" is.

If the money that the gubmint confiscated from me had been routed by my choice to a private retirement plan, would you say that I would be entitled to collect the benefits of that investment contract? Of course you would. Why is SS any different...except for the fact that it is FORCED upon us by law and not a personal choice.

All the more reason we (you included) are entitled to collect at least what we paid in (plus interest at fair market rates) regardless of the "pool size."

it can be argued the under 30 gen didn't elect W. And it was actually a revolt against his spending and policies that led voters across ALL demographics to vote for "hope and change".

...but then you( as a generation) doubled down on Obama in 2012.

And if you are going to give "young and naive" under 30 voters a free pass for the doubling of the debt, then where is my generation's free pass for what happened with SSI in the 80's....and the previous generation's free pass for the changes enacted in the 60's...and the one before that for what they started in the 30's? So, YOU guys get to own the debt explosion and the change from managable to unmanageable..... If we are going to be stupid and go down the road of blaming entire generations.

I highlighted the above part because we can argue about a lot of things....but it solves nothing. The focus should be on solving, not blaming ...and reversing political trends that have created the clusterfu**.

...and believer has it right when he said this was thrust upon us. This money was taken from our paychecks and from our employers payroll accounts under penalty of law and without options... with a promise of certain benefits. Considering that the 'gubmint' supports all kindsof less important/less noble things than providing the elderly and infirm with a minimal income that they promised, it wouln't have been such a problem if we didn't add 7 T to the debt in just 5 years....and seem poised to continue kind of spending. From a personal standpoint, my retirement plan was built to stand without SSI, but it is being eroded and threatened by the policies of those in office.

I'm not pinning anything on any generation.

No one cares about who you pin the collapse of the American economy on. History will pin the collapse on the Baby Boomers and my generation will go down as putting it back on the right track.

The only question you have to ask yourself is how much of a benefit cut are you willing to take in order to save America? I know I'd contribute more because I actually care about this country unlike the greedy selfish boomers. The best part about this is Boomers are delusional to think they are going to get anywhere close to what they are expecting in retirement if nothing is done. There isn't enough money in the pool to pay for all you old fucks to sip Mai Tai's on a beach; there's just about enough to put you all in cattle barns and feed you corn and water every day.

HitsRus;1540239 wrote:...and believer has it right when he said this was thrust upon us. This money was taken from our paychecks and from our employers payroll accounts under penalty of law and without options... with a promise of certain benefits. Considering that the 'gubmint' supports all kindsof less important/less noble things than providing the elderly and infirm with a minimal income that they promised, it wouln't have been such a problem if we didn't add 7 T to the debt in just 5 years....and seem poised to continue kind of spending. From a personal standpoint, my retirement plan was built to stand without SSI, but it is being eroded and threatened by the policies of those in office.

Stop whining.

believer;1540167 wrote:The thing you seemingly ignore is that SS was thrust upon us. It's established as the law of the land in Round One of the slow but steady Socialist Revolution started in the 1930's.

This "investment" was not one of personal choice but a clear mandate by the nanny state to force us all to participate in a collective retirement program allegedly designed to insure that each of us have some sort of cash flow for basic sustenance once the semi-free market prematurely kicks our asses out of work because our salaries are too high.

While it is true that the dollars I've been forced by law to pay-in was routed directly to existing retirees, it doesn't negate the fact that it was and is MY money. Apparently we're asking too much to expect the gubmint to stick to its end of the - um - "social contract" by paying us our money back when we retire. I don't give a damn how big or small "the pool" is.

If the money that the gubmint confiscated from me had been routed by my choice to a private retirement plan, would you say that I would be entitled to collect the benefits of that investment contract? Of course you would. Why is SS any different...except for the fact that it is FORCED upon us by law and not a personal choice.

All the more reason we (you included) are entitled to collect at least what we paid in (plus interest at fair market rates) regardless of the "pool size."

Whiner. LOL

Also believe is completely clueless about what pool size means. Pool size is simply there aren't enough young workers to pay for older workers and its not even close. The only way to increase pool size is to jack up FICA to an absurd percent or cut benefits. Likely the solution will be both and I can't wait to see boomers QQ all day and every day for the ruins they created.

sleeper;1540260 wrote: and my generation will go down as putting it back on the right track.

No you won't. If your "persona" is in fact what you claim to be, you're the exception, not the norm, in your generation. For the most part, your generation is a bunch of worthless slacker fucks with no ambition.

BR1986FB;1540267 wrote:No you won't. If your "persona" is in fact what you claim to be, you're the exception, not the norm, in your generation. For the most part, your generation is a bunch of worthless slacker fucks with no ambition.

Again, I don't know anyone in my generation that is a worthless slacker with no ambition. Turn off your TV and go meet people in their 20's. Hell come meet my friends and tell them they have no ambition; they will laugh at you while showing you their bank account. As one of my friends would say "How's that for ambition?" LOL

sleeper;1540275 wrote:Again, I don't know anyone in my generation that is a worthless slacker with no ambition. Turn off your TV and go meet people in their 20's. Hell come meet my friends and tell them they have no ambition; they will laugh at you while showing you their bank account. As one of my friends would say "How's that for ambition?" LOL

Don't care about your small sample size. Like I said, "exception, not the norm." Just because your group might be a little different, and yes you're VERY rare for your age group if your "persona" is in fact what you claim, doesn't mean it's normal. I see plenty around me every day to see people your age have no ambition or greed.

BR1986FB;1540281 wrote:Don't care about your small sample size. Like I said, "exception, not the norm." Just because your group might be a little different, and yes you're VERY rare for your age group if your "persona" is in fact what you claim, doesn't mean it's normal. I see plenty around me every day to see people your age have no ambition or greed.

I like you BR, but you're way off on this. Almost every single person in my close group of friends is an extremely hard worker. I know there are slackers out there, but there are also Boomers who have been on welfare for the last 30 years. A couple of them are in my own extended family. There are lazy losers in every age group.

believer;1540167 wrote:Apparently we're asking too much to expect the gubmint to stick to its end of the - um - "social contract" by paying us our money back when we retire. I don't give a damn how big or small "the pool" is.

Well, you got duped again. It's basically just a redistribution sold as "social insurance". Workers money goes into a pool, and beneficiaries are paid out of that pool. More like a pari-mutuel.

You can whine all you want about getting your money back - it's less fair for me to have to pay more for a decreased benefit. YOUR generation has known about SS problems for decades - W was the first election I got to vote in, and the prior generations had already rung-up $6T+ in debt.

Sleeper is exacty correct - they will bump FICA and lower your benefit. Your generation has already helped to steal $17T from our future - I wouldn't expect to be taking more from workers 20 years from now who are still in diapers today. The boomers and there parents have been fucking up a lot longer than the younger generation, and asu such bear a disproportionate burden of that debt.

BR1986FB;1540281 wrote:Don't care about your small sample size. Like I said, "exception, not the norm." Just because your group might be a little different, and yes you're VERY rare for your age group if your "persona" is in fact what you claim, doesn't mean it's normal. I see plenty around me every day to see people your age have no ambition or greed.

How many people beneath the age of 40 do you know? I guarantee I know more than you and I don't see it as the exception. I do know unemployed 20 somethings but they are absolutely miserable BECAUSE they have ambitions that they are having a hard time achieving.

And people say "Well go get a job!" yet many of them DO have jobs that barely pay anything and when you are sitting on $50k+ of student loan debt a part time job at WalMart isn't going to cut it. I just had a friend take a job in DC as an UNPAID INTERN for 3 months at her own expense and just found a job; making $33k a year(which in DC is absolutely nothing and is below the poverty line). Boomers are absolutely delusional in how the real world works anymore and they are due for a rude awakening when they find out their SS checks are not they what they expected.

HitsRus;1540239 wrote:...and believer has it right when he said this was thrust upon us. This money was taken from our paychecks and from our employers payroll accounts under penalty of law and without options... with a promise of certain benefits.

Yet you sat on your thumbs while they raided the SS surplus. I believe it's always been an "estimated benefit". Because of inflation, you'll receive more than you put in, but your ROI is going to be lousy. Who's fault is that, ultimately? You can't go blaming and looking to future generations to bail you out for failing to mind the store.

I wouldn't expect to be taking more from workers 20 years from now who are still in diapers today.

Oh those selfish entitled babies who never have to work for anything don't matter anyway. I'm getting mine.

/Boomer'd

You're not off track at all BR...statistics overwhelmingly prove the 19 - 37 crowd to be largest drain on social resources. Sure there are still millions of them who are doing as well as Sleepy claims he and his tycoon buddies are doing, but the stats don't lie gen x & y'ers...your helpless majority is bringing us all down.

Tiernan;1540306 wrote:You're not off track at all BR...statistics overwhelmingly prove the 19 - 37 crowd to be largest drain on social resources. Sure there are still millions of them who are doing as well as Sleepy claims he and his tycoon buddies are doing, but the stats don't lie gen x & y'ers...your helpless majority is bringing us all down.

I'd like to see these statistics.

Bureau of Labor Statistics...ill let you find it yourself.

Tiernan;1540329 wrote:Bureau of Labor Statistics...ill let you find it yourself.

The damage done by the housing bubble (gee, another disaster that the 30+ group really owns) has caused a lot of people to have to delay retirement, which ultimately means entry level workers haven't advanced to create jobs for recent grads.

We can debate share/responsibility of the current 20-30 group on the present state of affairs, but when you are talking about people's SS and Medicare over the next 30 years you're proposing more generational theft from people not even born yet.

Tiernan;1540329 wrote:Bureau of Labor Statistics...ill let you find it yourself.

BLS doesn't track welfare aid. You brought up the statistics, please cite them.

Also Tiernan is starting to sound like my moronic boomer clients. I had a client who was so pissed off at me for using a set of inflation indices that were different than his own. I pulled mine from the BLS website; guess where he pulled his from? He took inflation values from a textbook and extrapolated a 2% inflation rate until present day. And guess which set we ended up using? His own BULLSHIT indexes. The guy is completely incompetent and probably went home to his wife and told her "This smart ass braniac whiner generation, well I showed him!".

Boomers are the worst.

sleeper;1540363 wrote:He took inflation values from a textbook and extrapolated a 2% inflation rate until present day. And guess which set we ended up using? His own BULLSHIT indexes.

LOL...I'm guessing 2% produced the result he wanted and your values didn't. It's an old trick you'll learn.

gut;1540377 wrote:LOL...I'm guessing 2% produced the result he wanted and your values didn't. It's an old trick you'll learn.

This is exactly it.

So the old boomer pulled one over on you huh Sleepy? Experience always trumps youthful enthusiasm.

Tiernan;1540417 wrote:So the old boomer pulled one over on you huh Sleepy? Experience always trumps youthful enthusiasm.

He's paying me a crap load of money to advise him on some of his projects. I should repeat that, a man 30+ years older than me is paying me money to advise HIM.

This isn't a contest. The client gets what he wants every time, regardless of how stupid the client is.