‘No one in the US should be retiring at 65’: Ben Shapiro said Social Security was not designed to provide retirement benefits for 20+ years

[initforme]

Yep, people stayed with the same company for the pension and the health insurance. Now the former is almost non-existent and the latter one can get from other sources.

My daughter is 29 and is with her 5th employer since graduating college. 3 she left for better opportunities and the last one they downsized and offered her a demotion or 3 months severance.

Companies also do not do themselves any favors as they take the workers they have for granted and are not doing much to keep them. Those who switch jobs more frequently make more money, getting as much as 5 times as much in raises than those that stay put.

Want A Pay Raise? Switching Jobs Has Much More Upside Amid Soaring Inflation, Report Finds

The difference was stark: During the second year of the pandemic, a new analysis of government data from the Pew Research Center found, half of workers who changed jobs saw their pay increase 9.7%, while the median worker who stayed in the same job experienced a loss of 1.7%.

www.forbes.com

Companies need to do a better job of rewarding those they have now.

Job hopping was created by employers. Employers no longer want to keep their most productive people. They want the constant turnover and training of new people.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Job hopping was created by employers. Employers no longer want to keep their most productive people. They want the constant turnover and training of new people.

that is just stupid

 

[initforme]

that is just stupid

It's what's happening out there. Young people are hopping from one job to the next. Productive workers are getting up and leaving as the employer sits back and happily waves.

 

[rightwinger]

Job hopping was created by employers. Employers no longer want to keep their most productive people. They want the constant turnover and training of new people.

It is not that they want the turnover but will not keep employees during short term lulls

 

[initforme]

I strongly believe they do want the turnover.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I strongly believe they do want the turnover.

why would they want that? Turnover is expensive

 

[initforme]

No. It's cheaper to pay a newbie and let them go before they get a raise.

 

[JohnDB]

Job hopping was created by employers. Employers no longer want to keep their most productive people. They want the constant turnover and training of new people.

No....
Employers don't want to train anyone anymore. They want complete loyalty out of employees that they underpay and are disposable. Fired by email is becoming more normal.

 

[initforme]

No....
Employers don't want to train anyone anymore. They want complete loyalty out of employees that they underpay and are disposable. Fired by email is becoming more normal.

Hence, employers created the job hopping trend. Perhaps emoyers have created the growing trend of people staying single as well. It's easier to move around without a family or spouse.

 

[Couchpotato]

Any honest discussion, HAS to include a transition plan and how that plan is going to be funded.

So to quote someone...

You have to have the discussion and agreement about what SS is or the answer that question is irrelevant. It would be akin to 2 doctors discussing the treatment of a patient when they cant agree on the diagnosis.

If you want to change Social Security, which I'm not against, how do we fund the transition?

See above.

What does it look like for new workers? What does it look like for middle age workers? What does it look like for older workers? What does it look like for the already retired?

Since current revenues pay current benefits, if money is diverted, how will transition benefits be funded?

WW

 

[Greenbeard]

I don't know where you're getting your info but it's not the CMS report I linked. Certainly nothing regarding per beneficiary costs attributed to the ACA.

I'm getting it from the CMS actuaries: Historical | CMS.

Real (2010 dollars) per enrollee health spending

	2000​	2010​	2022​	Aggregate Growth, 2000-10 ​	Aggregate Growth, 2010-22​
Medicare	$7,307​	$11,152​	$10,939​	53%​	-2%​
Medicaid	$7,392​	$7,364​	$6,652​	0%​	-10%​
Employer-Sponsored Insurance	$2,873​	$4,650​	$4,794​	62%​	3%​

KFF has a tracker with a number of different metrics and they aren't showing any drops like you describe.

KFF likes to just show raw, aggregate nominal dollar values. Certainly you can look at those (even those values very clearly show the slowdown in spending growth).

Sure, total spending on Medicare has grown--but what's significant is that real aggregate growth has been driven entirely by enrollment growth (i.e., people aging into Medicare eligibility) since the ACA passed. Real per beneficiary cost growth has been nonexistent. Whereas in the decade before the ACA passed, aggregate real Medicare per beneficiary cost growth--i.e., growth above and beyond economy-wide inflation--was 53%. And the story for the ~170 million people in private ESI is pretty much the same. (And just so it doesn't pass without saying, the post-ACA period for which CMS has data is 20% longer than the pre-ACA decade I'm using as a comparator--a substantially longer time period and yet much, much lower aggregate cost growth.)

In trying to understand health care costs isn't to just look at nominal values in isolation but to understand them using some kind of yardstick. That's why we talk about the cost curve, generally understood to be health care costs as a share of the economy. That rose from 13.3% of GDP in 2000 to 17.2% of GDP in 2010. In 2022, twelve years after the ACA passed, it stood at... 17.3%. A virtually completely flat cost curve. Unprecedented over any decade-plus period on record.

 

[Couchpotato]

No. It's cheaper to pay a newbie and let them go before they get a raise.

You've obviously never owned a business. That model might work for an exceedingly low level unskilled labor job, but those people likely aren't in line for a company pension anyway.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No. It's cheaper to pay a newbie and let them go before they get a raise.

except for the fact the person you hire will be making more than the one you let go, or they will not come to your company.

 

[WorldWatcher]

How do you pay those who are already retired during and after the transition?

We are stuck with SS

Not necessarily.

We can transition.

But we aren't going to do it with "bumper sticker" slogans. It will take planning and some pain. But the reality is we could come out the other side with a better system.

WW

 

[LeroyDumonde]

Who are the $Billionairs?

The government, which robs the Ponzi scheme every day.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Like it or not, he's right.
It obviously is a huge political football, but going forward this country will be forced to make adjustments to the age for full benefits.
Right now, I would change it from 67 to 69, and every three years going forward, I would increase it by one year until the age of 75. Then, reevaluate every two years and make adjustments if necessary.

‘No one in the US should be retiring at 65’: Ben Shapiro said Social Security was not designed to provide retirement benefits for 20+ years — and those who expect that are ‘crazy’​

MSN

But life expectancy is 76.

So for every person who lives to be 85, another dies at 67. The first eligible age for full benefits.

So either Shapiro is a dishonest weasel, or an ignorant jackass.

(He is both)

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's what's happening out there. Young people are hopping from one job to the next. Productive workers are getting up and leaving as the employer sits back and happily waves.

Nah, that's nonsense. You are completely missing the cost of training new employees.

 

[initforme]

except for the fact the person you hire will be making more than the one you let go, or they will not come to your company.

That's on the company.....

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That's on the company.....

if they want employees.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Nah, that's nonsense. You are completely missing the cost of training new employees.

I am starting to think they have never had a job beyond the level of fry cook at Wendy's