I second that emotion
Ezra Klein has a great post concerning the raising of the retirement age. I can't tell you how sick I feel when some genius out there starts talking about raising the retirement age. Let me clue all you desk jockeys in on something (this includes myself too)--all you "I'm not retiring at 62, I plan to work for my whole life" people. People who work their ass off everyday in the heat, cold, rain, snow...people who spend their lives working and missing out on family events...people who spend their entire lives working at a job which gives new meaning to the word 'servitude'...ya know those people NEED RETIREMENT!
You know what? I'm sorry, I recant my entire above statement. I'm going to ask my father to get his lazy ass back to work. I mean, he only worked from the time he was in 8th grade, in a series of back-breaking jobs so that we could afford our extravagant middle class lifestyle. I mean, who doesn't want a couple of more years of worrying about getting laid off and being faced with the humiliation of unemployement? And Mom, don't think you are getting off so easy either. So what if you worked your entire adult life, never had time to do the fun things parents get to do like the PTA and soccer games. I mean, who do you people think you are??
This just reminds me of those sanctimonious parents out there these days, with their McMansions and their mini-vans who look down their noses at moms who aren't in the PTA and whose kids aren't in a freaking activity every season of the year. News flash: Not everyone lives like you!
Raising the retirement age throws shit right in the face of the saying 'respect your elders'. You know what, if you want to work, be my guest. Lets institute a law that says you won't get your SS until you retire. But don't force everyone to live the life you want to live. If so, the only justice would be for you to spend 40 years living their life. Lets see how quick you'd want to retire then.
Ok, rant over!
posted by Katinula | 2:13 PM
3 Comments:
I agree, anyone should be able to retire at any age they want.
The question is, when do people deserve to get public monetary support?
I am all for supporting those who are disabled or unable to work. I am all for those who have saved money being able to retire whenever they feel like it.
I do not see the justification for the young having to pay to that the old can have fun though.
So are you against Social Security as a whole? Or against retirement at all for those who can physically work? Honestly, I'm starting to believe some politician should just say "ok, anyone under 20 years of age is going to have a drastically new system".
But I do believe, as a society, that we should not raise the retirement age. I just really believe that there must be a better solution. We already value work over some much more important things that I think as whole, our society suffers.
I am against Social Security as it is presently constituted, yes.
I believe strongly that we, as a society should take care of those who, for whatever reason, are unable to support themselves. This would include disabled people who cannot work, regardless of age. The money for such a program should come from an more or less equitable tax system, income tax for example, rather than the regressive payroll taxation that is currently funded.
Because we are willing to take care of those who cannot support themselves, a reciprocal demand that people prepare themselves for the time when they will be unable to work seems fair. This would include mandatory contributions to a retirement account, as Social Security is widely advertised and believed to be, although it is not. Personal accounts can go a long way toward this goal. Obviously, those who feel that they can, can supliment their mandory savings by voluntary additional savings, allowing them to retire earlier and/or have a more comfortable lifestyle than those who do not.
I don't care at all when a person retires. Retire at 30 if you want. Just don't expect me to support you.
We cannot, under the current system say 'ok, anyone under 20 years of age is going to have a drastically new system' because we are counting on the people who are under 20 now to pay for those of us who are just a bit older, just as we who are working are 'obligated' to pay for those who are retired now because they payed for the generation before them.
FDR purposefully designed the system this way so it could not be altered. I believe that it is inherently immoral to claim that someone 'owes' me something just because I payed for someone else.
An analogy would be expecting the person in line behind me to pay for my meal at McDonalds just because I payed for the meal of the person in front of me. Compounding the problem is that the 'meals' keep getting bigger as we move down the line.
Post a Comment
<< Home