Christie vows to raise retirement age to 69

[gipper]

Right now, today, the SS is solvent. It is not in debt it is in surplus. Maybe that won't last forever but I think the reason so many programs, other then retirement, that is a drain on the system, were added is because there is a large nest egg of money and politicians can't stand just having money sit around.

The truth is that SS payment isn't exactly enough for a person to live on now, at least comfortably. So if someone wants to retire at 62 and collect SS they had better have some back up. Or live dirt poor. Add to that the requirement to buy medical insurance until they are 65 and retirement doesn't looks so easy before 65 at least.

You're making the assumption that people have an option. That isn't necessarily true. That sure isn't what we saw in the last decade. Nobody says, well, shucks, I am going to rely on social security. We didn't see that either. We saw rents skyrocket, we saw people forced into retirement, we saw pensions raided at earlier times and then try to blame the people that were to collect.

I am making no assumptions. I think I agree with you that the body does wear out on a time table that I do not see changing all that much. But that still leaves the truth that SS ALONE is not enough to live comfortably.

The body wears out? They will not hire them. They are forced into retirement.

From 2011:
Unemployment has hit baby-boomers especially hard. For those over 55, the jobless rate has doubled since the recession began, to 6.8 percent. In real terms, that's more than 2 million people, many of whom once had good-paying, white-collar jobs.

And the older you are when you lose a job, the harder it is to find a new one, CBS News correspondent Byron Pitts reports.

If effort and optimism were gold, Eric Garner would be a rich man.

"I'm the busiest unemployed guy I know," Garner said. "I mean, I work a 12-hour day. I just want to get paid for it."

For the past year, Garner's full time job has been looking for a job. He's out of bed by 6 a.m., searching the web, emailing resumes by 6:15.

He has 50 different resumes, he says, because he customizes the resume that he sends out for each employer.

Garner was laid off from a financial services firm in 2010. Since then he's had a few bites, a few interviews, but still no offers.

How is it possible that someone who is college educated, working on a masters degree, with 32 years of work experience can't find a job?
For unemployed over 50 jobs especially scarce - CBS News

2014:
Over 50 working against time in America s harsh job market Star Tribune

Agreed.

Why is the baby boom retiring early in huge numbers, when many have little retirement savings? I suspect many gave up trying to find a good paying job. If the economy was humming, would they be retiring?

And yes America has a health problem, with many of us obese. It is tough to get a job when you are 60 and fat, particularly in a weak job market.

Obesity? Really? They were forced into retirement. Forced. Those that are older have, usually, built up vacation days and are paid more. Those were the first to get kicked.

Agreed...the point I made was once unemployed and trying to get re-employed, it becomes very difficult if one is 60 and fat....particularly in a weak job market.

 

[martybegan]

Guess that means Martyended.

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

 

[Disir]

Lift the cap and it really is that simple. There is no excuse.

Greedy, ain't we?

No. Fed up with your bullshit.

All I read in your posts is "Gimme Gimme Gimme"

If you got off your ass and started paying attention to what was going on around you and started working towards solutions prior to the age of retirement besides union killing and reciting memes from Town Hall then you wouldn't see that. As it stands that's all you are prepared to hear.

The solution is to separate pensions from the government and either give them money to people as a 401k or give the unions the pension. That way they have incentive to get the required payments at the time required, and the taxpayers are off the hook to bail them out.

Your solution: fuh fuh fuh, tax other people, fuh fuh fuh.

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

 

[Disir]

Guess that means Martyended.

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

 

[martybegan]

Greedy, ain't we?

No. Fed up with your bullshit.

All I read in your posts is "Gimme Gimme Gimme"

If you got off your ass and started paying attention to what was going on around you and started working towards solutions prior to the age of retirement besides union killing and reciting memes from Town Hall then you wouldn't see that. As it stands that's all you are prepared to hear.

The solution is to separate pensions from the government and either give them money to people as a 401k or give the unions the pension. That way they have incentive to get the required payments at the time required, and the taxpayers are off the hook to bail them out.

Your solution: fuh fuh fuh, tax other people, fuh fuh fuh.

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

 

[martybegan]

Guess that means Martyended.

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

Dumb point, from a dumb poster.

 

[Disir]

No. Fed up with your bullshit.

All I read in your posts is "Gimme Gimme Gimme"

If you got off your ass and started paying attention to what was going on around you and started working towards solutions prior to the age of retirement besides union killing and reciting memes from Town Hall then you wouldn't see that. As it stands that's all you are prepared to hear.

The solution is to separate pensions from the government and either give them money to people as a 401k or give the unions the pension. That way they have incentive to get the required payments at the time required, and the taxpayers are off the hook to bail them out.

Your solution: fuh fuh fuh, tax other people, fuh fuh fuh.

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

Both Democrats and Republicans and that is at the state level.

Again. The world doesn't revolve around you. That's the whole damn pay attention thingy.

 

[Disir]

Guess that means Martyended.

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

Dumb point, from a dumb poster.

What's dumb is you not having an argument outside of "well my life is peachy and therefore there is no problem. "

Yep, nothing like unverifiable personal experience. You're so awesome.

 

[martybegan]

All I read in your posts is "Gimme Gimme Gimme"

If you got off your ass and started paying attention to what was going on around you and started working towards solutions prior to the age of retirement besides union killing and reciting memes from Town Hall then you wouldn't see that. As it stands that's all you are prepared to hear.

The solution is to separate pensions from the government and either give them money to people as a 401k or give the unions the pension. That way they have incentive to get the required payments at the time required, and the taxpayers are off the hook to bail them out.

Your solution: fuh fuh fuh, tax other people, fuh fuh fuh.

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

Both Democrats and Republicans and that is at the state level.

Again. The world doesn't revolve around you. That's the whole damn pay attention thingy.

The worst has been done by Dems, and you can't just go with mayors and governors, you have to go with who had control of the legislatures.

Pensions are obsolete due to the increased longevity of people past retirement age, and for public unions the lowering of that age as a negotiating perk. No system can stand having unproductive workers on the payroll (because that's what it is due to underfunding) for 25 to 35 years. If you truthfully estimate the amount of $$ you need to pull from people's compensation to cover this, it would be unfeasible.

 

[martybegan]

Guess that means Martyended.

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

Dumb point, from a dumb poster.

What's dumb is you not having an argument outside of "well my life is peachy and therefore there is no problem. "

Yep, nothing like unverifiable personal experience. You're so awesome.

Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.

 

[Disir]

If you got off your ass and started paying attention to what was going on around you and started working towards solutions prior to the age of retirement besides union killing and reciting memes from Town Hall then you wouldn't see that. As it stands that's all you are prepared to hear.

The solution is to separate pensions from the government and either give them money to people as a 401k or give the unions the pension. That way they have incentive to get the required payments at the time required, and the taxpayers are off the hook to bail them out.

Your solution: fuh fuh fuh, tax other people, fuh fuh fuh.

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

Both Democrats and Republicans and that is at the state level.

Again. The world doesn't revolve around you. That's the whole damn pay attention thingy.

The worst has been done by Dems, and you can't just go with mayors and governors, you have to go with who had control of the legislatures.

Pensions are obsolete due to the increased longevity of people past retirement age, and for public unions the lowering of that age as a negotiating perk. No system can stand having unproductive workers on the payroll (because that's what it is due to underfunding) for 25 to 35 years. If you truthfully estimate the amount of $$ you need to pull from people's compensation to cover this, it would be unfeasible.

Did you just become a partisan hack?

Pensions are obsolete because of the movement to 401Ks. Period. The same jack asses that couldn't wait to get their little mits into the kitty and are desperately trying to privatize social security. Same group, hero.

 

[Disir]

Guess that means Martyended.

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

Dumb point, from a dumb poster.

What's dumb is you not having an argument outside of "well my life is peachy and therefore there is no problem. "

Yep, nothing like unverifiable personal experience. You're so awesome.

Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.

On my part? You know nothing about me.

 

[Skull Pilot]

All this means is that 69 will be the age you can collect social security.

If you want to retire at 62 then save some money and do it.

No one is stopping you

For Christ's sake people stop ******* whining.

 

[hipeter924]

Christie needs to lose some weight, and keep off the hamburgers. He is a drain on the healthcare system. When he can do that, he can enter the discussion with a leg to stand on.

 

[martybegan]

The solution is to separate pensions from the government and either give them money to people as a 401k or give the unions the pension. That way they have incentive to get the required payments at the time required, and the taxpayers are off the hook to bail them out.

Your solution: fuh fuh fuh, tax other people, fuh fuh fuh.

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

Both Democrats and Republicans and that is at the state level.

Again. The world doesn't revolve around you. That's the whole damn pay attention thingy.

The worst has been done by Dems, and you can't just go with mayors and governors, you have to go with who had control of the legislatures.

Pensions are obsolete due to the increased longevity of people past retirement age, and for public unions the lowering of that age as a negotiating perk. No system can stand having unproductive workers on the payroll (because that's what it is due to underfunding) for 25 to 35 years. If you truthfully estimate the amount of $$ you need to pull from people's compensation to cover this, it would be unfeasible.

Did you just become a partisan hack?

Pensions are obsolete because of the movement to 401Ks. Period. The same jack asses that couldn't wait to get their little mits into the kitty and are desperately trying to privatize social security. Same group, hero.

You are having chicken/egg problems. The simple fact is no company can keep an open ended liability like a modern pension and keep its books solvent. To do it they would have to deduct too much from their employees salaries, or boost the compensation to the point that inflationary pressures would come into play with whatever product or service they are offering.

Can 401k matches be more generous? Yes, but the key for the company is they know they have to spend X, and then they are done. There is not the open ended "how long do they live" guess work that makes accounting and planning in pension unmanageable.

 

[martybegan]

Your point? Oh, you think because I didn't reply in 30 seconds, that I left the discussion. This is a MESSAGE BOARD, not a chat discussion. You don't get to claim victory because someone doesn't reply in 5 minutes or 5 hours.

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

Dumb point, from a dumb poster.

What's dumb is you not having an argument outside of "well my life is peachy and therefore there is no problem. "

Yep, nothing like unverifiable personal experience. You're so awesome.

Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.

On my part? You know nothing about me.

You are whining like someone expecting the government and the rest of us to bail them out at retirement age, or someone who goes after people with more than them just due to envy.

 

[Disir]

The solution is to make sure that the money doesn't move to begin with. The solution is not to privatize the pensions funds. The solution is not 401Ks. In fact,
Father of modern 401 k says it fails many Americans Marketplace.org
Why 401 k savers don t have enough to retire

My solution was for you to get your ass in the game before the recession but that sure as hell didn't happen. Fap on that.

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

Both Democrats and Republicans and that is at the state level.

Again. The world doesn't revolve around you. That's the whole damn pay attention thingy.

The worst has been done by Dems, and you can't just go with mayors and governors, you have to go with who had control of the legislatures.

Pensions are obsolete due to the increased longevity of people past retirement age, and for public unions the lowering of that age as a negotiating perk. No system can stand having unproductive workers on the payroll (because that's what it is due to underfunding) for 25 to 35 years. If you truthfully estimate the amount of $$ you need to pull from people's compensation to cover this, it would be unfeasible.

Did you just become a partisan hack?

Pensions are obsolete because of the movement to 401Ks. Period. The same jack asses that couldn't wait to get their little mits into the kitty and are desperately trying to privatize social security. Same group, hero.

You are having chicken/egg problems. The simple fact is no company can keep an open ended liability like a modern pension and keep its books solvent. To do it they would have to deduct too much from their employees salaries, or boost the compensation to the point that inflationary pressures would come into play with whatever product or service they are offering.

Can 401k matches be more generous? Yes, but the key for the company is they know they have to spend X, and then they are done. There is not the open ended "how long do they live" guess work that makes accounting and planning in pension unmanageable.

The fact is that wages have been stagnant for 30 years and the same group of people has said, Oh no. they were never meant to replace the pension when that is damn sure what they did.

There was no unmanageable part of the pensions. There was the absolute you have money over there and I can't touch it. Let me at it.

 

[Redfish]

The SS retirement age is already going up. People are living longer, it only makes sense

 

[martybegan]

Working fine for me so far. I manage it well, and I got into it very early, and made sure I always maxed out the company match.

And who did most of the moving in public pensions? and of the big cities, which party controlled the governments at the time?

Both Democrats and Republicans and that is at the state level.

Again. The world doesn't revolve around you. That's the whole damn pay attention thingy.

The worst has been done by Dems, and you can't just go with mayors and governors, you have to go with who had control of the legislatures.

Pensions are obsolete due to the increased longevity of people past retirement age, and for public unions the lowering of that age as a negotiating perk. No system can stand having unproductive workers on the payroll (because that's what it is due to underfunding) for 25 to 35 years. If you truthfully estimate the amount of $$ you need to pull from people's compensation to cover this, it would be unfeasible.

Did you just become a partisan hack?

Pensions are obsolete because of the movement to 401Ks. Period. The same jack asses that couldn't wait to get their little mits into the kitty and are desperately trying to privatize social security. Same group, hero.

You are having chicken/egg problems. The simple fact is no company can keep an open ended liability like a modern pension and keep its books solvent. To do it they would have to deduct too much from their employees salaries, or boost the compensation to the point that inflationary pressures would come into play with whatever product or service they are offering.

Can 401k matches be more generous? Yes, but the key for the company is they know they have to spend X, and then they are done. There is not the open ended "how long do they live" guess work that makes accounting and planning in pension unmanageable.

The fact is that wages have been stagnant for 30 years and the same group of people has said, Oh no. they were never meant to replace the pension when that is damn sure what they did.

There was no unmanageable part of the pensions. There was the absolute you have money over there and I can't touch it. Let me at it.

Your last statement makes zero sense.

Pensions are unmanageable, especially after being mismanaged for decades.

 

[Disir]

My point? I just didn't think marty began and martyended sounded perfect.

Dumb point, from a dumb poster.

What's dumb is you not having an argument outside of "well my life is peachy and therefore there is no problem. "

Yep, nothing like unverifiable personal experience. You're so awesome.

Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.

On my part? You know nothing about me.

You are whining like someone expecting the government and the rest of us to bail them out at retirement age, or someone who goes after people with more than them just due to envy.

Bullshit. You want to have your cake and to eat it to and then rely on the good old stand by of your own little personal experience to avoid critical thinking.
Well, that and blame it on a political party.