Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis wants to raise the retirement age to most likely 70? What do you think raising the retirement age to 70?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Your body and health starts to slowly break down in your 50's. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/social-security-medicare-republican-proposal-to-boost-eligibility-age-to-70/

In your 60's you will most likely start to have joint pain, back pain and get sick more easily and often and in your 70's you're probably going to be in and out of the hospital yet some Republicans think raising the retirement age to 70 is a good idea while the life expectancy is 77 years old in the U. S. A if you're lucky to even make it that far especially in good health and not a cripple old man or woman barely hanging on.

Gotta love the party of family values. 😅

https://youtube.com/shorts/VkwE06PjhvU?si=kH8jCpyrelAOa_X1

[WindAtMyBack]

1) I'm getting both SS and Medicare. I know this is far more complicated than most people make it out to be. Medicare especially is EXTREMELY complicated. It's so complicated that even the smartest people who spend hundreds of hours researching it, still end up doing what one of the brokers tells them to do. To give a hint, there are literally hundreds of options available in just my state.

The point is that if you think you understand any of this by what some news outlets or politicians say, you don't.

2) Without knowing what those politicians plan for SS, I can't really comment on it. Is the "full" retirement age going to change and the minimum stay the same? What will happen to the penalty for starting early? You can start before the "full" retirement age, but you can also start later than that. I think the age when you must start is 72, but maybe that already increased.

3) If they raise the age, will the average total benefits also increase? What I mean by that is:

(life expectancy - retirement age) * monthly benefits

People probably don't know it, but no matter what age you start, you will get approximately the same total amount if you live exactly to the life expectancy. For example if the life expectancy is 85. If you live exactly to 85, you will get the same total amount whether you start at 64 or 69. So if you start at 64, it's spread out over more years, so you get less each year. This is not exact, but it gives a rough idea how it works.

4) How are taxes affected? SS is not currently taxable income, unless your total of SS plus other income is over a certain amount. In that case SS becomes taxable at half the amount. "Other income" includes mandatory IRA withdrawals, which is something people don't consider when retirement planning. This can have VERY serious affects on some people.

5) If the retirement age increases, people will work longer. That means they will contribute more. Since your benefits are based on what you contribute, will your benefits increase proportionally?

6) This has been an issue for decades. All the politicians KNEW it was an issue. They should have done something about it a good 40 or more years ago. This is not about Republicans or Democrats. It's not about young people vs old people. This has been a serious political issue spanning at least 4-5 generations of politicians and voters, who ALL knew about the problem.

So why wasn't something done about it? Read the question. Read the answers. The reason is that NO MATER WHAT the politicians do, politically it's a lose-lose situation. Everyone will hate the Republican proposal. Everyone would hate any Democrat Proposal. Everyone would hate not doing anything at all.

No matter what they do, it will be politically disastrous. So they don't do anything at all. Does anyone think these proposals will pass? I sure don't. There will be way too much backlash if they get serious. So it won't pass. Just like every proposal by both Democrats and Republicans over the last several decades did not pass. Even when the same party controlled the administration and both chambers of Congress nothing passed.

There are only two options, both of which can be implemented in different ways. To keep SS solvent, you either increase the tax, or decrease the benefits. If you do either one, both Democrat and Republican rank-and file people will be pissed. The politicians can't win, so they do nothing.

But again, without knowing exactly what they have planned, I can't comment on the specifics of this plan. Because I know things like this are rarely how they appear on the surface.

[monorprise]

You know what isn't complicated, The money required to pay for that income and the diminishing supply of people to actually work for it.

Your lucky enough to have been born in a generation that actually raise enough kids for you to buy what you need with this limited money.

Younger generations are having soo few children that when they get to your age, few if any of them will be able to afford the services of the tiny number of working people.

[WindAtMyBack]

@monorprise
When I was young, I thought there would be no SS when I reached that age. But here I am and it's still around. I don't see that changing. SS will probably run out of money, so it will just come out of the general fund. In a sense, it's been doing that for a long time. It's just how they do the accounting.

Actually, as a percentage of the total population, the population over 65 has continuously declined over the last 50 years. Now, it's about a third of what it was when I entered the work force. So you have more people paying for less people. not the other way around.

[monorprise]

@WindAtMyBack If they had not raced the retirement age of social security along-with other cuts since you were young there wouldn't be any.

Regardless Social security isn't going to just stop, as long as the goverment collects taxes for it it will pay something out, just what it pays out will become ever more meaningless.

For many years now Social security has been paying out its "lockbox" more than it taken in.

As an institution its already well on its way to being reduced to the state of merely paying what little it collects from an ever dwindling working population. If you live anther 10-20 years you might just see that point.

Regardless that same dwindling population of working people, is also the same population that must somehow produce everything for themselves and all the retired. Which means no matter what you get paid by your various retirement programs including social security.

You are really just bidding against everyone else (including the working population) with that finite money for a share of that ever smaller population's time/work.

Meaning you may find the prices they charge simply to insure they get enough too much for you to have enough as well.

Hence why only people who invested in children really are entitled to retire.

[WhiteSteve]

I love how like 30+ years ago we still did all kinds of shit by hand, the long way. Records, filing, you name it…. some human or humans had to write it down and organize it. Business moved slower because you’d have to snail-mail documents and such. There was no email, no national or international Zoom meetings…. everything done the hard way.

The we computerized everything. All those old tedious tasks are now automatic, we don’t even think about it, we just look up info in some digital database instead of calling down to Carol in The Hall Of Records to go dig it up for you. It’s instantaneous.

So logically, work became easier, money was made easier, and the benevolent business owners said “this is TERRIFIC! Great news! We will now be moving to a three-day, 15 hour work week! Enjoy all this extra freed up time we’ve just been gifted and spend time with your loved ones, rest, and do whatever makes your heart sing!”

Oh wait…. that’s not what happened. Instead, our 40 hour weeks turned to 50, 60, 70, 80. For the same relative money. Only ones making significantly more or the owners, and my apologies to all the Ronald Reagan lovers out there, but it doesn’t trickle down, not in any impactful way, anyway. It mostly gets pocketed.

Now they want to pull this. I’m not even confident my Social Security money will even be there for me, I’m not counting on it. The point of life is not to work, not to contribute to a “thriving economy”, not to generate GDP. They’ve convinced us that it is, but please don’t be fooled. It’s NOT.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Sadly, they built a system that heavily brainwashed people that wealth and success is to acquire nice cars, jewelry and ish we don't need to make one feel successful and people not knowing any better brought into it.

We are suppose to work to live, not live to work.

The system is absolutely disgusting, so no surprise people are isolated from family and friends and shoot up a mall because they have gone crazy.

[WhiteSteve]

💯💯💯

[strateguy632]

to whi, good points and considering inflation and run away inflation that 40 thousands pension can't buy anyway

[Screenwriter]

Well, though it IS easier to get ill because your immune system isn't as hearty as it was in your 20s to 40s, people who've been healthy their entire lives are likely to stay healthy with MAINTENANCE! MAINTENANCE! MAINTENANCE!

It's just like having an old car, which I also have. You bring it in regularly and attend to chronic issues.

I don't have a bad back. I have hay fever, but I've had that my entire life. And I get every innoculation recommended for people my age, get out to the gym to lift weights, do spin, yoga. I've also been working out for the past 50 years.

I walk and bike. I live close to my grocery, pharmacy and a Whole Foods. All are within six blocks. My gym is 11 blocks away. Ten blocks away is my 2nd cousin whom I see regularly, and also a new set of friends who I have coffee with every other day. There's a nail salon two blocks away where I get done every five or six weeks. I get my hair done at a salon 20 blocks away with a guy I've been using for 30 years.

I'm part of the Louisiana Master Naturalists, citizen scientists who disseminate information about our natural environment to schoolchildren and other adults, and just finished the Loyola University Institute for Environmental Communication class.

Healthy older adults are not falling apart or in hospitals. My closest cousin is 77, as is my downtown cousin who lives a few miles away. Neither of them are in and out of hospitals, though one does have back problems. But she and her brother both have the same problem. Runs in the family. But you can't stop any of them either!

My dad lived to 87 in fairly good condition. My mom didn't do as well, but she didn't exercise or take as good care of herself as dad did. Dad, and I have been the Energizer Bunnies of my immediate family, and most of my close cousins are also active hunting, fishing, doers. Though my brother isn't physically active at 71, he is mentally active, putters around his house and has a bible study in his local prison.

I putter too and have to clean out my gutters of the cypress leaves in them today. I'm very careful climbing ladders. And I'm painting the inside of my house. I love painting. Dad hooked me on. Also got his example of having a garden, fixing things yourself and saving money. What I can't do, I hire, and I've always had good workers I've found word-of-mouth.

I'm in a Master Naturalist book club. We read about people who are/were activists and report on big events such as climate change, hurricanes, and interesting historic Native American tribes, naturalist healing, etc.

Keep yourself as well as you can and mentally and physically active. No reason to live a long life if there's no real life you're living!

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

A lot of people aren't blessed with good genes especially health wise no matter what they do to stay healthy as they age.

The reality is our bodies breakdown as we age, and a person in their 60's are noticeably going to have less energy and more health problems to deal with.

[Screenwriter]

You might have less energy, but less does not mean you're dragging your ass. You might have 'more" health problems, but that doesn't mean you're crippled by them!

Most people are generally healthy unless they've abused themselves with alcohol, smoking or drug abuse or obesity. Those are the biggest reasons people break down. Outside abuse.

True, some people have inherited breast cancer genes or early heart death in their families. In my life I've only met one woman with the first and I don't know anyone whose parent died between 45 and 55 from heart disease. Didn't happen in my family either.

Our bodies WEAR down. They don't BREAK. This wearing down is a slow process. and healthy diets and exercise keep your body in as fine fettle as can be attained and maintained.

It's according to what you want to achieve, and how you want to spend your time. I devote weekly hours to a job, exercise, gardening, meal planning, home renovation, maintenance, meeting friends , volunteer work and educational interest.

The life in your life keeps the life in you!

[milyjohn]

Cry me a river about the party of family values. War veterans sleep in the snow, while your party puts up illegals in 5 star hotels. Then you flip a switch and become a conservative when it happens in the Dominican Republic. Rush was right. Moderates are gutless wonders. Either pick a side, or get out of the way. No flip flopping.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Oh sweetie you again. You are very funny to me.

The Democrats are ish too but seriously there's nothing the Democrats and Republicans can do because the system is in place to exploit workers to make great millionaires and billionaires.

The rich and powerful create the system and only a revolution can over turn it while killing greedy scumbags in the process and that's not most likely to happen.

As far DR my country constitution guarantees housing for all and provides free health care and such other programs but my country now is flooded with Haitians eating up our resources from health care, education and the work force since they tend to get expoilted for cheap labor.

[milyjohn]

You just did it again. You flip flopped.

Who is the party of "family values?"

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Neither. It's all a sham to fool people. Can't you see?

[milyjohn]

"Gotta love the party of family values."

You wrote that, not me. What did you mean. Be honest.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Republicans call themselves the party of family values, yet wanting people to work til their 70's especially in a system where the work week often requires 40 plus hours a week is taking significant time away from family.

Time is far greater and valuable than a piece of green paper they give us to stay away a lot of time from our families.

[milyjohn]

And which party is allowing the invasion on the Southern border?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Now, the Democrats but it started with Reagan presidency.

The rich desire cheap labor and poor immigrants don't have a choice but to get to work in a foreign country for whatever pennis they are going to get paid.

[milyjohn]

"Gotta love the party of family values."

Own it.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

I did. I wrote it for a reason.

[milyjohn]

You can't name the party?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Republican party.

[milyjohn]

Are you a Democrat? No, you won't take a side. You just like to blame an entire party on what two people said.

[milyjohn]

You also conveniently left out that this is about social security.
You also conveniently left out that this will only affect people in their 20's.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@milyjohn: I was a registered Democrat and you know that.

I no longer care for neither political party. Both are overall are ish to me. Totally unbalanced.

[ObscuredBeyond]

Globalist scum. They should be abolishing the Federal Reserve, kicking the Synagogue of Satan out of America right along with ISIS and any other form of antichrist BS that got imported from the Middle East, resetting the entire culture, abolishing any alphabet soup agency that has no lawful right to exist, having any member of Congress and every Facebook troll that defends such assaults on the Constitution be put on public trial, and watch as the country its founders intended springs back to life once Jefferson's tree is given some blood to drink!

The retirement age should be 45, not 75! This is horsecrap! You work a decent number of years, you earn your ease as you reach grandparent age, you use it to aid your children in raising your grandchildren, you vanish into the sunset of your life as the Good Lord says it's time.

That's being free. This having to ignore all that and keep grinding until you drop dead at work? That's for the bees. That's slavery. And those who believe we should live that way, don't deserve to live at all!

[Levin]

So as you pointed out a few weeks ago, work really is slavery. It robs us of our creative energy, and then the only time we have look forward to is our retirement, by which time we're knackered and half dead anyway. and now they want to rob our retirement from us, too. It is already 68 for people of my age. But you can guarantee that will be somewhere in my 70s, if I'm allowed to retire at all by that time. And judging by the demographic crisis about to hit, I'll be lucky to retire in my 80s. So the old fucks have pillaged the system; destroyed and raped the planet with their idiotic and misguided notions on economy, which is actually based on greed; and left little crumbs for the younger generations.

So I've always said, that anyone that votes for a law, has to abide by it. So if you vote in a law to retire at 70, then you have to retire at that age. And anybody who votes in or supports a war, must put on your tin hat and go on the front lines. We might see policy changes quite sharpishly...

[monorprise]

I think people should have children if they want to retire.
You can print all the money in the world, it will not change the supply of people's work required to support you in retirement if too you don't provide for the same people to work.

In Western countries we have recreated a tragedy of the commons fable in investing the 'common market' for a future while too many of us neglected to do any of the actual work of providing for that same common market in the form of people.

Future dollars are worthless without children to become the people who work for them.

[matchrestore]

Yes, life expectancy is longer than when the current retirement age was put into place. That doesn't mean that our bodies are going to be in any shape to keep working for longer. Modern medicine has gotten a lot better at treating ailments that used to frequently cause death in old age. That doesn't mean you aren't still old.

My retirement savings goal is to be able to retire at 61, knowing that I'll probably work past 61, but at least there's a pad in there. Pushing Social Security later might put a slight kink in that plan, but since the majority of our retirement income is planned to be coming from my Roth IRA, Simple IRA, and my wife's Pension and 403b, delaying Social Security doesn't affect us as much as some workers who haven't been able to save for retirement as much independently.

[Lionman95]

Like what options are left besides that. The problem could be that the social pyramid is upside down with more old people than young people. The other option is either increasing economic debt or using a triage on who gets a rent and who doesn´t since he or she has gotten enough when they worked.
Having time to enjoy a rent is a privilege of a highly developed society and speaking of family values in a country with a divorce rate somewhere between 30-50% is a statement of its own. It´s a questions of economics and I don´t see any other options.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

With the tax money (billions) the U. S. A gave Ukraine alone within a year could have been givin to fund social security for the next 100 years easily.

[Lionman95]

I don´t know how much the US gives the Ukraine. But I don´t think it would fund the social security system for 100 years. But yes if US gives up the role of being the world´s police it would be easier I didn´t think about that to be honest.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

The U. S. have givin Ukraine around 75 to 80 billion of American tax dollars in financial aid to help some foreign nation.

80 billion dollars could fund social security for those who need it the most for a lot of decades ahead easily.

[Redstang88]

Not very good at math are you? 80 billion wouldn’t even fund the US ss for a month

[Lionman95]

But aside from that would the Democrats be willing to give up giving money to foreign nations? I´m not sure about that.

[SixFootSexy]

If they were smart, they'd make sure every business that made 150K or less didn't pay a dime in taxes. That would make small businesses EXPLODE with productivity. Then those that were very successful would have to hire more employees and start paying taxes. None of this, don't retire till you're dead crap.

I know as a millennial I won't get a half the benefits I've paid into for years. When I need social security or medicare they'll either be insolvent or impotent. It's sad, really.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Most small business owners will just pocket the extra cash.

[SixFootSexy]

Totally, but I'd be much happier with it in their pocket than a billionaire's or the government

[BCA6010]

The retirement age of 60 was set when you were lucky to make it that far, and usually only lasted another 5 years or less. The alternative to not continually raising the retirement age is to basically kill social security because it's completely unsustainable. Everyone knows that's political suicide despite the fact refusing to address it is just kicking the can down the road, yet they're all convinced that even a good reform would be popularly rejected.

[monorprise]

@BCA6010
That's what they say and its true to some extent, but the real problem is demographics. No matter how much money everyone puts away for retirement, all real retirement services will never be any greater than the supply of working people to can provide.

In other words your competing with everyone else of your generation for a share of that ever dwindling supply of work that can be bought from the ever dwindling supply of worker.

Your true retirement is as such your children not your bank account. For at the end of the day your familiar bond with them alone is what supports you.

[IslaTheWitch]

I don't think I will get any pension anyway... so I don't really care. I build my retirement on my own conditions.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Problem is it effects other people especially those that simply don't make enough of a salary to put into savings.

[AviatorTom]

Some of the people I work with are in their 70s. Today, people live longer, and work longer, than when Social Security was founded almost 100 years ago. If raising the retirement age to 70 keeps Social Security funded, I'm all for it. Many people today have their own retirement accounts anyway, 401K, IRA.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Just because we are living longer doesn't mean you should slave longer especially for 8 plus hours a day.

The bodies of people aren't the same and don't function the same in their 60's compared to when it was much younger.

We can drag your behind to do back breaking work for 8 hours a day at your age til you turn 70 and see how you like then.

[bayoubob]

So? 53 years was the life expectancy 100 years ago, allegedly. That means back then you should retire at 30. As time goes on, life expectancy goes up. Just how long do we want to make it? When you are born into this world, you need diapers to shit and piss. If you live beyond 80, you are going to shit and piss again in your diapers. Why should anyone work until they soil themselves for the first time since birth?

[wolfcat87]

Most people don't have enough to retire at 65 anyways. If they make good choices then this won't matter, and if they make bad choices then this won't matter... The only people really hurt by this are people who planned to completely rely on social security.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

This country doesn't pay poor people enough money to have a adequate savings.

[wolfcat87]

They do. People just have to be smarter.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

No they don't. My grandma working as a clean lady got paid little for 2 decades and had to pay for a mortgage among other stuff.

She totally depends on social security and me helping her out now.

[wolfcat87]

A school janitor retired with like 3 million.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

I understand. I heard that story how that guy through investment became rich but that's an anomaly not the norm as many people go also broke through investments gone wrong.

And my grandma was already a old lady when she came to the U. S. and didn't speak English and had to take care of me and my brothers and cook, clean etc.

[BoopBoopBeep]

It should happen, but it should be phased in. Don't tell people who are 67, surprise...3 more years! Maybe add a month for every year under retirement age so it's phased in. For a 18 year old just starting off 65, 68, 70 makes little difference... for that 62 year old it does.

[disgustingweebtrash]

Pensions are essentially a pyramid scheme. Ideally we would turn to looking after our old in their old age over a pension system. But with the culture of kicking your children out at 18 it's no wonder the youth are quick to stick their grandparents into homes.

[RasmusAiken]

I'm in favor of a dynamic age of retirement based on the ambient economy and prevailing demographics. There are times when a huge workforce is vital (war time economy) and at other times there is no opportunity for younger workers to advance because of a fossilized workforce that can't retire. Those that wish to retire young could do so for a $$$ fee.

[strateguy632]

raise it is already 72?

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-reminds-those-over-age-72-to-start-withdrawals-from-iras-and-retirement-plans-to-avoid-penalties

[matchrestore]

72 is the oldest you can start withdrawing from your private retirement plans- not the earliest you can pull from SSI

[Iron_Man]

That’s a horrible idea. They’re rich themselves so they don’t care but for people that live paycheck to paycheck it’s a horrible idea. All the health problems out there horrible, horrible idea

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Right. Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis can retire tomorrow and they will live a very comfortable life til they die since a pension check will be coming in every month from the high government position they hold or held plus free best government health care.

[Iron_Man]

Right

[DarkWinterNights]

They have to. They keep siphoning money out of social security. And with a declining population and workforce, there are less people paying into it than pulling out of it. I fully anticipate there not being anything left of it by the time I’m 60, much less 70.

[exitseven]

Biden has already raised the retirement age to 80/ His policies have damaged the economy so much that everyone's retirement accounts have gone down the drain and the cost of everything has at least doubled since he has been in office. Who can afford to retire?

[Redstang88]

Im not counting on the measly handouts the government provides, that is IF the liberals haven’t completely destroyed the economy and there’s anything left to hand out. Taking care of my own retirement

[Anonymous]

That age just refers to retirement supported by the government. Where were these people in planning their retirements and savings over the past 50 years? What high-tech jobs are 70 year olds born in the 1950s going to be able to do?

[fantasticass]

I think it's a great idea. I'm 62 years old, in fantastic shape mentally and physically. It's a nice option to have. I'm in better shape than most 30 year olds, so be careful what you say about us " old folks". ✌️🇨🇦

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

You don't represent the majority.