The Way Forward: Raise The Retirement Age

g5000

Diamond Member
Nov 26, 2011
123,500
53,666
2,290
This is the second in my The Way Forward series. You can find the first of the series here: The Way Forward: End Tax Expenditures


We see on page 38 of the 1930 US census that 5.5 percent of the US population was over the age of 65 in 1930. 3.2 percent of the population was over 70.

Five years later, the Social Security Act of 1935 was enacted.

Thirty years after that, the Social Security Act of 1965 added government sponsored health insurance (Medicare) to the retirement benefits of our seniors. This is also when Medicaid was created, but that’s a separate subject.

We see on page 6 in the US Census for that period that our national health had increased to the point that the ratio of people over 65 had crept up to 9.5 percent by then.

In today’s Census, we find that the over 65 bunch has exploded to over 13 percent of the population. We have literally more than doubled the senior entitlement load for Social Security since 1935!

Plus, we layered on another extremely expensive entitlement program on top of that load in 1965.



6 percent of our population is now living beyond the age of 75.



Life expectancy in 1935 was 61.7 years. Today, it is 78.7 years.

If you went to work at 18 and retire at 65, then you worked for 47 years.

In 1935, you may not have lived long enough to even collect Social Security. As we saw above, only 6 percent of the population lived long enough to collect even one cent.

Today, you retire after 47 years, and 13 percent are living long enough to collect. And 6 percent are living long enough to collect for at least 13 years.

The idea of continuing this way is beyond ridiculous.


Raising the retirement age to 70 would back the load down to 9 percent of the population, which is almost on par with 1965.

To get to the 6 percent load of 1935, we would have to raise the retirement age to 75.

When Social Security was enacted, you were not intended to live a long life of retirement on Social Security. Medicare and Social Security were intended as a support, not as a way of life.

We are living longer than our ancestors who gave us Social Security and Medicare. We should be working longer than they did. This is just plain common sense.



.
 
It's already started. I can't collect my full benefits until I'm 66. People younger than myself will have to wait until 67. I'm sure making some work until 70 isn't too far in the future.
 
This is the second in my The Way Forward series. You can find the first of the series here: The Way Forward: End Tax Expenditures


We see on page 38 of the 1930 US census that 5.5 percent of the US population was over the age of 65 in 1930. 3.2 percent of the population was over 70.

Five years later, the Social Security Act of 1935 was enacted.

Thirty years after that, the Social Security Act of 1965 added government sponsored health insurance (Medicare) to the retirement benefits of our seniors. This is also when Medicaid was created, but that’s a separate subject.

We see on page 6 in the US Census for that period that our national health had increased to the point that the ratio of people over 65 had crept up to 9.5 percent by then.

In today’s Census, we find that the over 65 bunch has exploded to over 13 percent of the population. We have literally more than doubled the senior entitlement load for Social Security since 1935!

Plus, we layered on another extremely expensive entitlement program on top of that load in 1965.



6 percent of our population is now living beyond the age of 75.



Life expectancy in 1935 was 61.7 years. Today, it is 78.7 years.

If you went to work at 18 and retire at 65, then you worked for 47 years.

In 1935, you may not have lived long enough to even collect Social Security. As we saw above, only 6 percent of the population lived long enough to collect even one cent.

Today, you retire after 47 years, and 13 percent are living long enough to collect. And 6 percent are living long enough to collect for at least 13 years.

The idea of continuing this way is beyond ridiculous.


Raising the retirement age to 70 would back the load down to 9 percent of the population, which is almost on par with 1965.

To get to the 6 percent load of 1935, we would have to raise the retirement age to 75.

When Social Security was enacted, you were not intended to live a long life of retirement on Social Security. Medicare and Social Security were intended as a support, not as a way of life.

We are living longer than our ancestors who gave us Social Security and Medicare. We should be working longer than they did. This is just plain common sense.



.


Life expectancy in 1935 was 61.7 years. Today, it is 78.7 years.

And with Obamacare life expectancy will be at least 90 years.
 
Social Security is not an entitlement program. It is money stolen from me that I will never get back as it is. And you want me to get even less of it. Screw you commie.
 
I'd have little problem if it were based on fully accepting the debt in the Social Security Trust, and using actuarial tables to decide a reasonable retirement age for the future generations to keep the system solvent. What I do object to, is those who reaped the rewards of raiding the fund, and pretending that those promised notes are just pieces of payers. They are actual debts. Why shouldn't those who got the fattest on the idiotic Bush tax cuts have a greater obligation to make sure those debts are paid?
 
It's already started. I can't collect my full benefits until I'm 66. People younger than myself will have to wait until 67. I'm sure making some work until 70 isn't too far in the future.

Yeah, but do you know how long ago that increase to 67 was set?

1983.

I kid you not.

And the legislation was written so the gradual increase to 67 would not start until the year 2000 and would take 22 years to get to 67.

That's right. It won't be until 2022 when the retirement age will be 67 for anyone born after 1960. Congress is taking 39 years to raise the retirement age by 2 years!


Our life expectancy is increasing at a faster pace than that!


The change needs to be done now. Immediately. A single bill to raise the eligibility age to 70 would probably very nearly balance the budget without taking a single other action.

Combined with my plan to eliminate tax expenditures in the first in this series, it would be a very simple matter to be running surpluses that could eliminate our debt.

.
 
Last edited:
Social Security is not an entitlement program. It is money stolen from me that I will never get back as it is. And you want me to get even less of it. Screw you commie.

The problem isn't that people will be getting less, but that they're already getting unsustainably MORE. Why do you think you'll never get it back? Planning on dying early? Would help out the system,though, not enough people dying is part of the problem. :cool:
 
Or we could just not retire. I intend to work for a very long time. I like working. I just dont necessarily like my job all the time lol
 
Life expectancy in 1935 was 61.7 years. Today, it is 78.7 years.

And with Obamacare life expectancy will be at least 90 years.

That's a pretty fair assessment, and is reflective of the changes made under Reagan to keep the system solvent for us boomers. The problem isn't solvency in the near term, it's that Republicans don't want to pay the bills they accrued.
 
It's already started. I can't collect my full benefits until I'm 66. People younger than myself will have to wait until 67. I'm sure making some work until 70 isn't too far in the future.

Yeah, but do you know how long ago that increase to 67 was set?

1983.

I kid you not.

And the legislation was written so the gradual increase to 67 would not start until the year 2000 and would take 22 years to get to 67.

That's right. It won't be until 2022 when the retirement age will be 67 for anyone born after 1960. Congress is taking 39 years to raise the retirement age by 2 years!

Our life expectancy is increasing at a faster pace than that!

The change needs to be done now. Immediately. A single bill to raise the eligibility age to 70 would probably very nearly balance the budget without taking a single other action.

Combined with my plan to eliminate tax expenditures in the first in this series, it would be a very simple matter to be running surpluses that could eliminate our debt.

I agree, it needs to be stepped up a bit. I wasn't saying there wasn't anything wrong with it, just that it has already started.
 
Social Security is not an entitlement program. It is money stolen from me that I will never get back as it is. And you want me to get even less of it. Screw you commie.

Yes, it's insurance, not an entitlement.

And yes, the premiums are forced on us.

Medicare and SS are going to bankrupt all of us. The premiums and returns on investment are not covering the outlays.

There are two solutions.

One is your way. Eliminate them. That is NOT going to happen. We have to be realistic.

The realistic solution is to raise the eligibility age to at least 70.


.
 
Last edited:
Social Security is not an entitlement program. It is money stolen from me that I will never get back as it is. And you want me to get even less of it. Screw you commie.

Yes, it's insurance, not an entitlement.

And yes, the premiums are forced on us.

Medicare and SS are going to bankrupt all of us. The premiums are not covering the outlays.

There are two solutions.

One is your way. Eliminate them. That is NOT going to happen. We have to be realistic.

The realistic solution is to raise the eligibility age to at least 70.


.
perhaps starting payoff at 70 wouldn't be ideal, but maybe we could have a tiered system where full benefits aren't paid until then.
 
Social Security is not an entitlement program. It is money stolen from me that I will never get back as it is. And you want me to get even less of it. Screw you commie.

Yes, it's insurance, not an entitlement.

And yes, the premiums are forced on us.

Medicare and SS are going to bankrupt all of us. The premiums are not covering the outlays.

There are two solutions.

One is your way. Eliminate them. That is NOT going to happen. We have to be realistic.

The realistic solution is to raise the eligibility age to at least 70.

perhaps starting payoff at 70 wouldn't be ideal, but maybe we could have a tiered system where full benefits aren't paid until then.

Right now I think you can still get a partial at 62. That should start going up and be raised to 65 with full coming at 70.
 
It's either that or increase the size of the taxpaying workforce. Amnasty?
 
I retired at 43. 70% pension to kick in at 55.

IRAs are healthy.

Self employed and profitable with no debt.

I can wait until 67 for SS.

Got any job openings? :D

I know right? i didn't mean to sound so arrogant. Of course nothing is guaranteed going forward.

The OP has a valid point. I just get a little sad that people need to work longer rather than enjoy life. There is so much more to living than making money.
 
Well hell, just make people work until their too old to enjoy any Social Security...and while you're at it they can take all the jobs from the youngens because THEY HAVE to work until they drop dead..

what a joke Social Securtiy has become, leave it to THE GUBERMENT to screw that up..can't wait for your ObamaCare to kick in...whoohoo they say we will live to 100 because of it...might take a year to see a doctor so you might make it..
 
Last edited:
I retired at 43. 70% pension to kick in at 55.

IRAs are healthy.

Self employed and profitable with no debt.

I can wait until 67 for SS.

Why wait, I ran the numbers and it would take 13 years to make back what I'd give up in the four years of waiting. Hell I may not live that long.
 
Social Security is not an entitlement program. It is money stolen from me that I will never get back as it is. And you want me to get even less of it. Screw you commie.

Yes, it's insurance, not an entitlement.

And yes, the premiums are forced on us.

Medicare and SS are going to bankrupt all of us. The premiums are not covering the outlays.

There are two solutions.

One is your way. Eliminate them. That is NOT going to happen. We have to be realistic.

The realistic solution is to raise the eligibility age to at least 70.


.
perhaps starting payoff at 70 wouldn't be ideal, but maybe we could have a tiered system where full benefits aren't paid until then.

That is what we have now. We say the "retirement age is 65", but you can actually receive reduced Social Security benefits prior to 65.

The tier would just be moved upward so the full benefit kicks in at 70.

.
 

Forum List

Back
Top