[Anymnillulky]

The benefit we are supposed to be getting is a safety net when we're older. Of course we (anyone who isn't retiring in the next two decades) aren't getting that as things currently stand, which is why SS and Medicare need to be changed to something sustainable.

As for domestic investment and wage growth, the author seems to be confusing cause and effect to come to an unrelated conclusion. Due to globalization we compete on labor and where to invest far more today than 40 years ago. It's only natural that we would domestically invest a lower percentage of income and have more competition when it comes to wages. This is definitely a good thing in aggregate.

Also, I am not convinced that spending is any more/less beneficial to the economy than saving/investing. Whether I put $5 in the bank, $5 into stock of a food processing company, or $5 into a bag of chips shouldn't be much of a difference for the economy. (Relative to the size of the transaction.) I would say if you look just at that one transaction, it would be better for the economy (right now) for me to spend the $5, as we are suffering from a lack of demand for goods and services. We have more capacity and inventories than we put to use right now.

Of course once you follow the money down the rabbit hole, there's little to no difference between the options.

[qwerty1]

Social Security and Medicare are quite obviously designed to transfer wealth to the old. They would be means tested if they were merely safety nets meant to prevent the old from suffering and dying in poverty.

[Aleksis]

The Australian system is a good one. I'd be happy to see America emulate it.

[tadacia]

Does taxing people and dumping the money into a trust fund really destroy savings? If we could just find a way to cut benefits now instead of later (like implementing means testing) I think we'd be fine.

[Dxwlxqvg]

Social Security and Medicare are quite obviously designed to transfer wealth to the old. They would be means tested if they were merely safety nets meant to prevent the old from suffering and dying in poverty.

I have no problem at all with means testing, I care about the people who are literally unable to afford healthcare they need and to support themselves to a reasonable level of existence. Healthcare should be universal because its just cheaper and more efficient all around, but if you have someone with a large income, I don't see any need for the state to provide payments to help support them. Then again Social Security was built on the promise of a payout for a pay in wasn't it? I don't think it'd be fair to change the playing field for existing contributors, but building a new mandatory means tested system seems perfectly reasonable for future generations.

[Abofedrorobox]

I'd at least like to be able to opt out of the government's retirement pyramid schemes. I can handle my savings MUCH better than a bunch of crooked politicians.

[JessePex]

I looked for an interactive social security thing on the internet and found this:
http://www.actuary.org/socialsecurity/game.html

[Averti$ingGuru]

I work on the assumption that I will effectively get no state pension when I retire. The tax on my private pension will be in excess of anything I get from social security.

[Zugaxxsn]

For existing contributors? So you don't want any changes to take effect for at least another 40 years, by which point the social security trust fund will have been devoured by baby boomers?

It might require the state to contribute to balance the shortfall, or alternatively they could bring in the changes earlier, but that would depend whether the American public will accept what is technically a breach of promise. As it would only really effect higher earners, it could perhaps be politically palatable.

[poekfpojoibien]

If they were means tested, it would mean that the young either pay upfront, or pay out of a prospective inheritance*. Either way, the young pay.....

*An inheritance built up by ripping money off the young to begin with.

So without means testing the children of rich people stay rich, but with means testing the children of the rich become slightly less rich.

[ArrereGarhync]

It doesn't matter. They spend the money on imports. If they saved it, they would just invest it overseas.

[radicalvolume]

You should have had more kids (and more productive kids) if you wanted that.

JM

[uncoosesoge]

Should people with government pensions have had more kids? What's the difference?

[HelenTay]

Someone obviously shouldn't contribute to a defined pension fund if they don't expect to get out what they put in.

SS was set up based on you doing earlier than you will, and of you having more children than you did.

JM

[YonkFiorc]

Someone obviously shouldn't contribute to a defined pension fund if they don't expect to get out what they put in.
JM

And when most started it was a reasonable expectation that they would get something out.

We were forced to contribute to SS regardless of our beliefs that we would get anything back.
And when we started paying in, there were no doom and gloomers. It was expect that we would get something back. And let's be real here. Most pension plans work that you get at least 50% of your current salary. And a lot of politicians figured out a way to make 200% or more of their current salaries. Even under the best of circumstances SS isn't going to return 25% of what you made despite paying in as much many did into pension plans.

[cmruloah]

His cohort does however have voting leverage. Which is probably more important.

[zlopikanikanza]

His cohort does however have voting leverage. Which is probably more important.

Hence Tupac's point about greedy Boomers destroying America.

[Quality4Qty]

His ire should be to the politicians that were lining their pockets, not to all of us that kept their promise to the previous generation and made sure they were taken care of in their older age.

[CxofxJFm]

But you didn't do what you needed to do to make sure that you would be provided for in your old age.

Namely having kids who would be productive enough to pay for you.

Both are required.

JM

[ResuNezily]

I wish I would have had the option to have used that money for my own retirement, but helping the previous generation in their old age was a noble goal especially with the promise that we would get similar treatment. .
It's not going to be funding my poker games. I was hoping I would get enough to upgrade to hamburger from dog food. I never expected steak.