Deficit doesn't require higher eligibility ages

  • Article
  • Updated: November 16, 2012 - 6:14 PM

Raising them for Social Security and Medicare would be misguided and cruel.

  • 46
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
luzhishenNov. 16, 12 6:54 PM

Let Medicare bargain over drug prices. Let the Independent Payment Advisory Board, created as part of Obamacare to help Medicare control costs, do its job instead of crying "death panels." Great point. The Free-marketers cry over a modest tax increase but think it's God's plan to have us pay triple what a Canadian pays for the exact same pill.

25
5
thatisright1Nov. 16, 12 8:36 PM

This is drivel. How about an option to opt out of social security if you've paid in for at least 10 years.

5
23
garagewineNov. 16, 12 9:55 PM

It's not misguided -- both programs are running perpetual deficits that cannot be paid out of current revenue streams without raising the eligibility age. And it's not cruel -- it's a simple recognition that people are living longer than ever and will draw more in benefits over their course of their retirement than previous generations.

6
24
garagewineNov. 16, 1210:08 PM

"The answer is to do what every other advanced country does, and make a serious effort to rein in health care costs. Let Medicare bargain over drug prices."---Stiffing drug manufacturers doesn't represent real savings. It is simply a transfer of income from one group to another (which he deems more socially acceptable or deserving). Paul knows this, but is willing to openly lie about it.

4
21
hobie2Nov. 16, 1210:30 PM

What business is Social Security of the taxpayers? Tax dollars didn't fund Social Security - the wage earners and employers paid for it with FICA, insurance payments which all go to Social Security (see what the "I" in FICA stands for). Not one income tax dollar or port tax or excise tax dollar went to Social Security - except for interest on the money the taxpayers borrowed from the wage earners. Congress has enough problems keeping our wallet in its pants - the taxpayers can keep their greedy hands off of the wage earners' money.

17
3
barefootpaulNov. 16, 1210:45 PM

Raising retirement age is certainly not the only method to stabilise "entitlement" programs. Medicare coverage could be offered as an option to at least some of those who don't currently qualify with premiums adjusted to assure solvency of the program for those who do. Social Security could be fixed just by raising the income cap. Krugman makes good points about why raising retirement age is a lousy idea - and especially stupid during times of high unemployment.

17
3
margeanncullenNov. 17, 1212:47 AM

I am 56 years old and work hard always have and I hurt. I take aspirin and stretch and exercise but 10 years from now I doubt I can work fulltime. I have emperical data from many, many elders and our body does get tired. Who will employee the 67 year olds? Age discrimination is rampant now it will only get worse. I guess we can throw our old folks under the bus that seems to be the conservative answer and I don't just mean Republicans either because yes there are conservative non-republicans.

20
2
comment229Nov. 17, 12 4:53 AM

My first dollar contributed to social security happened in 1967. Since that time, I have worked two jobs most of my life. Yes, I provided for my retirement, but social security was part of that thinking. I will wait and see what is proposed as far as when and who they decided to undercut, and then make a decision as to what I will do, along with a hell of a lot of people in my age group called the baby boomers, who have contributed heavily to this all our lives, only to see a threat to it now. It isn't right.

19
1
texas_technomanNov. 17, 12 5:21 AM

Raising the eligibility age is not the solution. On Social Security, eliminate the salary cap for contribution and put all public service employees (including elected officials) in the the program....problem solved. On medicare, negotiate prices and eliminate fraud, raise the contribution level and put elected officials into the program, problem solved!

10
4
elmore1Nov. 17, 12 6:36 AM

texas_technoman, I agree, if I have to work until I am 67 I see no reason why govt workers should be able to retire at 55. Let's also get the elected officials on the same programs as the rest of us. President Obama should champion this idea and push it through. We might get more attention to rising health care costs that way.

10
4

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT