| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Romney suggests cutting retirement benefits for younger Americans |
| 2022-04-02 |
| [Guardian] Former presidential candidate Mitt Romney has addressed the vexing question of how the US copes with its ageing population, suggesting that retirement benefits may have to be cut for younger Americans. In comments to the Senate budget committee on Wednesday, the Republican senator from Utah said that the spiraling costs of retirement programs had to be tackled to bring national debt under control. Romney raised the politically controversial idea of cutting benefits, but only for younger generations before they reach retirement age. "For younger people coming along, we got to be able to find a way to balance these programs or we’re gonna find ourselves in a heap of trouble," he said. He added that he was not in favour of raising taxes as a way of balancing the books, but was open to adjusting "long-term benefits not for current retirees". Romney’s remarks, first reported by Business Insider, open a can of worms often avoided by members of Congress given its intense political sensitivities. The programs in question include two of the most popular benefits in the country — social security and Medicare, which make up more than 40% of government spending. The backdrop to the issue is America’s ageing population. By 2034 projections suggest there will be 77 million Americans aged 65 and older — more than the projected 76.5 million under 18s. That means that for the first time in US history older people will outnumber children. That same year, 2034, the trust fund for social security is expected to run out, leaving the US government struggling to make full benefit payments. That looming deadline is a reflection of the intense and rising pressure on social security and Medicare given long-term funding shortfalls. Conservatives have consistently tried to chip away at the programs. Most recently, House Republicans proposed raising the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 69 and social security from 67 to 69. But in his Build Back Better plan, Joe Biden sought to protect and even extend the programs, adding hearing coverage to Medicare. The bill passed the House but was stalled in the US Senate. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #14 they already have them. That's still a part of welfare. Do you realize how many people inand after 2008 applied for disability with nothing wrong with them. If they got it they essentially retired. Not to mention the lifelong welfare kings and queens who stay on it for life. |
| Posted by: Chris 2022-04-02 13:18 |
| #13 ^ How long do you think it will be before the gummint decides people on the dole need taxpayer funded retirement plans too? |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2022-04-02 11:27 |
| #12 Iowa GOP: Benefit cuts needed to spur people to take jobs |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2022-04-02 11:20 |
#11  /\ Me as well. Can I help it if I have lived this long ?Abortions, BC pills, opioids, fentanyl, suicides, COVID jabs, and the Northern migration of severely reduced life expectancy migrants will eventually solve the problem. No one outside the beltway should live more than 45-50 years. Bill & Melinda and other Central Planners will see to it. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2022-04-02 10:26 |
| #10 I feel privileged the Biden and the Democrats will allow my retirement benefits after working 45 years. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2022-04-02 10:23 |
| #9 I feel privileged the government will allow my retirement benefits after working 45 years. |
| Posted by: The Walking Unvaxed 2022-04-02 10:14 |
| #8 Just the sort of attention we need heading into the midterms. |
| Posted by: Angstrom 2022-04-02 09:50 |
| #7 REf: Comments #5 & 6. Is the VAX killing or harming people? Within our greater family circle. The TaÃno / Caribbean Indian family members seem to have had more VAX adverse reactions than the WASP members? |
| Posted by: NN2N1 2022-04-02 09:16 |
| #6 ..iirc they got like 6 more months in the system. They didn't kill enough of us with the bug. I suppose the experimental vaccine will take care of that. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2022-04-02 08:50 |
| #5 Covid was supposed to address this issue, right? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2022-04-02 08:39 |
| #4 Open Letter to Romney. Lead by example... 1st Reduce / Eliminate Congressional retirement benefits . Quoting part of the informative article. " Congressional members are eligible for their own unique pension plans under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), though there are other retirement benefits available, ranging from Social Security and the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). Currently, members of Congress are eligible for a pension dependent on the member's age at retirement, length of service, and salary. The pension value can be up to 80% of the member's final salary. Since 2009 Congressional pay has been $174,000 per year, which, at an 80% rate, equates to a lifelong pension benefit of $139,200. All benefits are taxpayer-funded. ... Because members of Congress earn far more than the average American citizen, their initial Social Security benefits average just under $26,000 per year compared to $17,652 for the average retired worker in 2019." |
| Posted by: NN2N1 2022-04-02 08:28 |
| #3 ^ I've identified as a juvenile delinquent for decades. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2022-04-02 08:18 |
| #2 Democrat solution: What if we did away with age itself, like sex? |
| Posted by: Dron66046 2022-04-02 07:48 |
| #1 That means that for the first time in US history older people will outnumber children. So long-time payers will outnumber recipients and there is still not enough money to go around? Surely the declining recipients must be to blame. The failure of government leadership and policies cannot be held to account. Young people (anyone under 62 years of age) must be punished. The logic of yet another extravagantly wealthy, self-absorbed mad man. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2022-04-02 07:04 |