GOP Senators May Make 69 Retirement Age

[swag]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/14/AR2005061401257.html

WASHINGTON -- Key Senate Republicans are considering gradually raising the Social Security retirement age as high as 69 over several years as they struggle to jump-start legislation that President Bush has placed atop his second-term agenda, officials said Tuesday.

Under current law, the retirement age for full Social Security benefits is 65 1/2 and is scheduled to reach 67 for those born in 1960 or later.

Gary Amelio, executive director of the Federal Thrift Retirement Savings Board testifies before the Senate Banking subcommittee on Securities and Investment during a hearing on the role of financial markets in Social Security Reform in Washington, Tuesday, June 14,
The possible increase to 69 over two decades or more was among the suggestions that Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, presented to fellow Republicans on the panel last week as part of an attempt to give the program greater financial solvency, the officials said.

Grassley also suggested steps to hold down benefits for upper-wage earners of the future, these officials have said previously. They spoke only on condition of anonymity, saying the discussions were confidential.

The disclosures surfaced as Bush campaigned in Pennsylvania for changes in Social Security, including creation of voluntary personal accounts for younger workers _ a step that would be accompanied by a reduction in the promised government benefit

. . . more

[Paul Dlugokencky]

1. will it apply to them?

http://www.cafepress.com/kickindemocrats

[swag]

4. That's an interesting question, because just about an hour ago

I read an article in the latest Pensions and Investments that talked about how Senators, on average, did something 80% of professional portfolio managers fail to do: they invest in ways that beat the stock market by more thatn 12% annually. How do they do that? Well, you and I would call it "inside information."

But that's another thread.

[LiberalFighter]

6. Possibly by methods mentioned in Perfectly Legal??

[swag]

8. I haven't read "Perfectly Legal" yet,

but it sounds like we're on the same wave-length here.

[LiberalFighter]

14. Basically the super wealthy manipulate the laws to their benefit

to the point that they don't pay any taxes or many don't even bother filing tax returns

[Joebert]

25. A guy I work with, who can't possibly make more than $60k

says that your tax rate should go DOWN as you become more wealthy.

"Why should people pay more taxes for the same infrastructure than everybody else, just because they have some money?"

I explained that by removing taxes on investments, and such, that the super wealthy can avoid taxes altogether, since they won't have income to report from a job.

My friend was fine with this. "Why should people have to pay for other people not to work? Or property taxes for other people's kids?"

So, in an unrelated note, I am looking for a new place to move with slightly more progressive minds.

[LiberalFighter]

38. I guess he likes paying more taxes than the more wealthy

[daleo]

47. I wonder if he will feel that way when he is 68

And still slaving away for a paycheck, which will probably be much less than $60K by then. I am guessing he is still quite young, as it is common to have the delusion you will still get rich until about age 40.

[Joebert]

49. He is so bright in almost every other way

But he's comepletely lost on what's going on these days.

I think he'll be fine with zillionaires having whatever they want, and no taxes.


Common conversation:

They don't use highways, or schools, they have houses all over the world, why should they pay SS taxes over 90k if they'll never get the benefit over 90k?

If they're a zillionaire, they'll never draw SS.

Yes they will, they might end up poor, you never know.

Um, nobody making that kind of money will ever be poor. The laws make sure of it, they are fully protected. Ask Ken Lay.

Anybody can lose their money, he might need that SS.

Ok, whatever, how about those Cubbies...

[daleo]

50. Many people can't see their own interests.

Or they just give up caring. Its a common malady, even among intelligent people.

[Joebert]

52. He's so distracted with other stuff, he doesn't care. You're right.

I worry for him, my dad, and others who just don't want to hear/see this.

I keep thinking I've got the issue to knock it out of the ballpark and get them to listen, and it has no effect.

All I can say, is as I prepare for a potentially crap future, I just need to make sure I have the room for more than just me.

[mitchum]

54. Would his last name be "Lackey" or "Lickspittle?"

he certainly sounds like one

[Joebert]

57. Nope, but Distracted by Shiny Things would be his Native American name.

[mitchum]

64. LOL!!!

[slaveplanet]

67. next he says something like that

tell him he's a mushroom

fed BS and lives in the dark...

[mbperrin]

84. Mmmmm....the wealthy USE more infrastructure, so they

SHOULD pay more.

Examples: What wears the roads out faster, a poor walker without a car or a bike rider without a car or a wealthy Hummer driver?

Who uses federal, state, and local funded airports with the attendant federal air traffic controllers more, the wealthy or some welfare recipient?

How much firefighting equipment is engaged in a fire at a 10,000 square foot home vs a 20 year old mobile home?

(Oh, and for those who claim food stamps and HUD housing benefits as infrastructure, look at their paths: food stamps buy food today; they are spent at grocery stores, who pay jobbers and wholesalers, who pay packers and processors, who pay farmers. Farmers are 90% and more large corporations, who use that income to buy more assets. HUD housing checks can only be used for rent, not a purchase of a home, so the check goes to the landlord, who pays HIS mortgage with them, and when that's paid, to acquire more property assets. So even these so-called entitlement programs wind up in the wealthy's corner as hard assets.)

It's simple - those who get more need to pay more. The richer you are, the more infrastructure you have and use, so you should have to pay more.

[swag]

40. okay, here's the other thread (prolly won't last long)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1549342&mesg_id=1549342

U.S. senators' stock portfolios outperformed index

[Straight Shooter]

42. Doesn't matter if it applies to them and their cushy jobs.

My job is "hard work," just like a lot of other people who are pushing themselves to the limit. I'm very worried if I'll be able to continue until 60, much less 67, and 69 is almost 70 years old, for crying out loud.

How dare they. They want us to drop dead before we ever collect a damn dime.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

71. No, because they've given themselves an excellent retirement program....

...that is completely different from Social Security. They also have a health and medical program that would be completely unattainable by the average American.

[mbperrin]

86. Nope, they can retire at 50 or so, if they've got 20 years

in.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=20

"...lawmakers tend to be able to retire earlier with benefits than other federal workers (as early as age 50)."

[MichiganVote]

2. Time to cut their benefits people

[GoddessOfGuinness]

5. I agree!

They never have a problem appropriating their own damn payraises; and I'm pretty pissed about it! :grr:

[Daphne08]

24. Yep, they already make too much money as it is. Let them pay

for their own health insurance like my husband and I do! :mad:

[sallyseven]

31. I never cease to be amused at how

people, who should know better, don't realize that senators and Congress People pay their portion of their health ins. Just like everyone else. Since 1983 they pay into SS. the thrift savings is taken out of their pay, they make 150,000 a year and have to have 2 homes. Can the bs.

[ovidsen]

36. If I made 150K/yr

I could afford 2 homes, health insurance and a private retirement plan.

If I made 75k/yr I could manage 1 home, health, retirement.

Heck, if I made 35k/yr maybe I could afford all three.

I don't, and I can't.

[mitchum]

58. No, they don't HAVE to have two homes...

these public SERVANTS can bunk together while padding their resumes on the public dime. In fact, in this age of telecommunications, they could actually legislate while living IN the districts which they represent. I think that would make these two-bit Caesers a bit more responsive to their constituents.

[Joebert]

60. Who was the rep that slept on a couch in his office for his term?

Or was it a publicity stunt.

His line was, I don't live here, I live back home. I work here, but the commute sucks.

Something along those lines?

[mitchum]

62. Mark Sanford (now governor of SC) and it was a stunt from that dirtbag

[Joebert]

63. If it had been true, it would have been something.

I knew it was too good to be true.

I mean, if somebody was foolish enough to let me into office, I'd do it.

I lived in (well, near) DC. I think it's probably safer in the office. :-)

[Daphne08]

66. Can the bs?

:eyes:

Until tonight, all of the replies I've received at DU have been thoughtful, polite and insightful.

Peace.

[mbperrin]

82. Their plan is a great deal better than that.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=20


Information on Congressional Retirement Benefits

Members of Congress began paying into Social Security in 1983, as part of a government-wide pension overhaul. This is a requirement, and Members may not opt out of it. They then have the option of participating in one of two pension plans, depending upon when they were elected (most of them do). If elected before 1984, they participate in the Civil Service Retirement System; if elected 1984 and after, they participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System. These two plans are also offered to rank and file federal employees, EXCEPT that the Congressional plan's benefit is calculated on a more generous formula than that offered to most other government workers. The "accrual rate" is much higher, and lawmakers tend to be able to retire earlier with benefits than other federal workers (as early as age 50).

Also, Members of Congress may participate in the government-wide Thrift Savings Plan, which works like a federally-managed 401 (k) salary reduction plan. FERS participants are entitled to a government match of up to five percent of salary; CSRS participants may set aside part of their own salary, but they do not receive the match.

In both cases, Members of Congress do contribute to their pension plans, although the rates are somewhat complicated by the fact that since 1983, lawmakers have been required to pay into Social Security. Members elected before 1984 must pay 8 percent of their salaries into the pension plan, but may elect a "Social Security offset" provision that allows them to split the pay-in (6.2 percent for Social Security and 1.8 percent for the pension.) The result is that upon retirement, Members receive a pension that is reduced by the amount of Social Security that is attributable to Congressional service. Members elected in 1984 and thereafter pay 1.3 percent towards the pension and 6.2 percent to Social Security. This only compensates for about 1/5 of the typical lifetime benefit. We cover the rest as taxpayers.

With service of 20-25 years, a Member of Congress could retire with up to 80 percent of his or her final salary replaced. Of course, the only cap on how fast their benefits rise is the rate of increase in CPI. For this reason, Congressional pensions can and frequently do exceed a Member's final salary, but only after a few years in retirement, when COLAs begin to kick in. For example, a Member of Congress who could collect $5 million or more, if he or she retires in his/her fifties, lives until his/her eighties, and elects to leave a part of the pension benefit to a spouse, who then live 10 or more years longer. This could include George Mitchell, especially after his post-Congressional government service. With Cost of Living Adjustments, total payments over a lifetime can reach these levels (though the more typical payout is likely to be between $1 million and $2 million).

In the final analysis, Congressional pension benefits are 2-3 times more generous than what a similarly-salaried executive could expect to receive upon retiring from the private sector.

Double or triple what EXECUTIVES could expect in the private sector...yes, those congress-critters suffer....

[mbperrin]

83. Pay's a bit better than that, too.

http://www.house.gov/daily/salaries.htm

Salaries

Legislative, Executive, Judicial

*as of January 2005






109/1




President ...............................................


$400,000




Vice President ........................................


$208,100




Speaker of the House .............................


$208,100




House Majority & Minority Leaders ..........


$180,100




House / Senate Members & Delegates ....


$162,100




Chief Justice, Supreme Court ..................


$208,100




Associate Justices, Supreme Court ..........


$199,200

[HockeyMom]

3. My Way or the Highway

will have a hissy fit. No PRIVATE ACCOUNTS?

[Skip Intro]

7. "Let's make 'em work longer." "Done, pass me one of them Cubans."

Pigs they are.

[mitchum]

59. And may they meet the fate of pigs

[bluestateguy]

9. That sounds real fair

Real fair to someone who spends their entire adult life as a construction worker, a police officer, a fire fighter or a factory worker.

[swag]

11. I guess they're trying to make Bush's 3% + inflation margin loan on

private accounts sound more palatable, for the sake of their contributors at Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, and the rest of the crooked houses.

"Take our shitty and quite probably negative returns on your private accounts, or we'll work you until you're dead."

Fucking pigs. There are a number of better ways to attain solvency well beyond the mythical 2042, but these jam-rag fucking spunk-bubbles fear their campaign contributors.

[bunny planet]

37. I know it's not funny but I did LOL at

'jam-rag f*cking spunk-bubbles.'
:-)

[reality based]

10. Anything to protect tax cuts for the rich I suppose

Another campaign in their war on the middle class.

[swag]

13. That's right, and our Deficit Champion has more tax-cuts in the works

that are expected to pass this same Congress with flying colors.

"We're Republicans: We Came Here To Fuck You Over!"

[LiberalFighter]

12. Federal Thrift Retirement Savings Board directs their 401k plan

This is what gw*dipshit tries to pass off to be similar to Social Security. It is not!! This is the option that federal employees have that employees in the private sector have with their 401k plans.

http://www.tsp.gov/

[bullimiami]

15. 1960 and later...wow for once Im happy to be born in 59

now if i can just live long enough to enjoy it.

[Cobalt Violet]

28. Don't celebrate too soon. They'll get to us too.

I'll be on my feet all day cutting hair until I'm 90.

[tkmorris]

89. 1965 here. Bloody bastards. nt

[all.of.me]

16. ugh. this is SO not a surprise!

assholes. keep working, keep working, keep working. and what are they doing? working? no.

[struggle4progress]

17. Let's eliminate Congressional pensions. eom

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

43. No shit

Where else can you get a pension for working so few years?

[damntexdem]

18. Hell, raise it to 96.

Then there won't be any fiscal problem.

They could even raise the benefits.

And they can as easily ignore the terrible toll in human lives -- they're already practiced at that.

[Ilsa]

19. But i bet they don't have a problem with companies that lay off

their older employees. I have friends that have lost their jobs at age 58, 59. Hard as hell to get another decent job. They do better in getting interviews if the resume leaves off some information so they don't look too experience and older.

One of my friends is working for about 55% of what he was making before getting laid off. As strong as he is, I don't think employers will keep him until age 69 when they can get a newbie for significantly less.

[Rainscents]

20. They want to make sure people are dead before they can collect SS.

[DemBones DemBones]

26. So true. Bloodsuckers, all of 'em. nt

[Rex]

21. Work longer you slave!

It's not good enough that you give most of your life to us! Uber-rich Republicans need a fifth summer home in Europe! How dare you make them suffer! I say raise the age to 80 and if you make it to that age we give you a free pass to Disneyland! Hoora!

[roguevalley]

22. every LAST ONE OF THEM needs to be VOTED OUT! ALL OF THEM!

[amazona]

23. those fucking thieves

I try to avoid strong language in my posts but the people who do the hard dirty work of the world will not live long enough to retire if this passes. 69? I don't think any man on either side of my partner's family has ever lived to be 69, and he has a blue collar job. This is theft, pure and simple.

[susanna]

45. I'm with you, amazona.

I'm white collar (for the moment). That said, I have no illusions that I will EVER be able to retire. Nor does my husband. They find ways to make you "unnecessary" just before your supposed "retiree" benefits come due. Fucking thieves is spot on.

[saigon68]

68. They would jump in a pond and Fuck Fish

If their corporate, special interest backers told them to do it.

They are scum.

[Massachusetts]

69. Can't disagree with that...Excellent!

[XemaSab]

27. This won't work

the Christians are never going to support ANY legislation that involves the 69.

[daa]

29. Let's see my job went to India at 53

3 years later no jobs and I am to work until I am 70. Where the fuck is that?

[Joebert]

30. I've always wondered if we're not all going to become tour guides

The USA, through its policy of exporting jobs, is setting us up to become a tourist attraction.

We have some of the most diverse landscapes within our country, from the Pacific Northwest, to the Grand Canyon, to Yellowstone, to Florida, to the Eastern Seaboard.

I know the workers in India, Pakistan, Romania, China, etc, are not going to be the ones coming over.

It will be the executives and politicians that stop here and there, while on vacation.


I actually am in a weird spot, since my company decided to outsource the crap out of everything, hacking hundreds of jobs, they still want the quality to be as good as it can be. I work with several outsourcers as a trainer/resource so that the customers don't have to deal with people that don't know anything about the product they support.

I'm one of the only ones left. And my time will come when my products aren't popular, the outsourcers get good enough, or the company decides that we can deal with less quality.

Fun.

[amazona]

85. our park guides are unpaid volunteers!

I don't think the tour guide idea will work. Many if not most older people working in our National Parks, Refuges, etc. as guides, ticket takers, even some of the landscapers and gift store clerks (!) are volunteers who are working there in exchange for an RV pad or another non-monetary consideration. They seem to be happy, and I've considered it for myself when I'm much older and no longer need any income, but it can't replace having a J-O-B. Many zoo workers, museum docents, etc. are also unpaid volunteers.

I recently learned that John O'Neill, our successor to Audubon as a painter and discoverer of new birds, worked unpaid for the last 20 years for the LSU Museum of Natural History. So we have lost him to Texas. Another young man, who has discovered 3 new species in Peru, is still working unpaid. And these are the scientists/artists! Forget the guides and docents being paid.

I don't know where we are going, but people who have to fill the gap after they're laid off at 50 or 55 can't just go to volunteer work unless they have always been very highly compensated -- not the case for us "just folks," heck, it isn't even always the case for the most creative and original.

I'm scared. There's a reason why bank robbery by the older-50 crew, once an unusual crime, is on the rise.

P.S. Since you may be laid off eventually, you need to get on a waiting list NOW for paid positions at national parks, etc. It could be years if you ever got a paying position at all. Please don't count on this as a fall-back without serious investigation.

[bread_and_roses]

32. How refreshing: "Democrats are unified in their opposition." !

And, smart of them to point out the effect on rural areas.

Now, if they could be persuaded to be bold, they could counter-propose a higher rate of taxation on upper incomes, no income cap on SS contributions, and/or other progressive means to LOWER the retirement age. It is already too high, especially for those who do manual work - which includes any work in which one has to stand all day, like retail.

[Patty Diana]

33. Unemplymment 30%, Poverty 40%, Uninsured 100 Million__

welcome to Third World American Compliments of those greedy, fascist, GOP corporate whores

[Joebert]

35. Forgive my naivete

Where'd you get 30% unemployment?

I'm not saying we're not on the way there, just curious.

How long until people unemployed for X months are forced into the military to help the unemployment rates, and dwindling recruits?

[DenaliDemocrat]

34. Bastards!!!!

Every american citizen needs to know that they cannot retire until age 65 so the ultra rich can keep the current cap on Social Security taxes.

[kineneb]

39. Makes no sense...who hires 60 year olds?

Is the tooth fairy going to end age discrimination so all those 60+ people can get or keep their jobs? There are not enough jobs to go around now, what happens with all those extra "unemployed" seniors are in the job market?

Inquiring mind wishes to know...

[swag]

41. Calm down, everybody. Alan Greenspan says we just need h.s. educations.

Say, "Bitch, be cool!"

[kskiska]

44. Retirement used to mean time to travel – enjoy life

By the time you're 69, it's doubtful you'd have the health or energy to live the good life you've earned. I guess there's nothing to look forward to but the old rocking chair on the porch.

[Deja Q]

46. That number is a joke, right?

[Endangered Specie]

48. So appropriate tochoose the number 69...

the GOP intents to SCREW you.

[fortyfeetunder]

51. I thought the fundies banned the number 69....

guess when it comes to our money, it doesn't matter....

[Roland99]

53. Why not make it 80?

[mitchum]

55. Over my dying body

[Biased Liberal Media]

56. That is f***ing disgusting /nft

[mitchum]

61. Kinda makes me wish that the USAF had not shot down that 4th plane...

which was "heading toward the Capitol"

[Sgent]

65. FYI

The life expenctency when Social Security originally passed was 65. So technically no one was supposed to get benefits.

That being said, at some point the disability claims will increase to the point that the age is meaningless (or nearly so), at least for blue collar works.

[Massachusetts]

70. Look on the BRIGHT side of retiring at 69

How much money do you need when you'll just be pushing your walker in circles all day chasing pigeons in the park?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

72. Oh, right! The Golden Years! That's what my 85-yr-old Dad says....

...VERY sarcastically every time we talk.

[Conservativesux]

73. Senators Consider Boosting Retirement Age

Senators Consider Boosting Retirement Age

By DAVID ESPO

AP Special Correspondent

Wed Jun 15, 2005

WASHINGTON - Work till you're 69 before getting full Social Security benefits?

That's one possibility — for Americans who retire two decades or more into the future — as Republicans on a key Senate committee review suggestions for improving the program's solvency.

No decisions have been made yet, and it could be fall before the politically volatile Social Security issue reaches the floor of either the House or Senate, if then.

At the same time, an increase in the retirement age is one of the suggestions that Sen. Charles Grassley (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, outlined last week for fellow Republicans on the panel, according to several officials. Officials said Grassley's suggestion for raising the retirement age would be phased in, possibly over two decades or more, depending on future demographic trends.

The Iowa Republican has also suggested steps to hold down benefits for future upper-income retirees. The officials who described his presentation did so on condition of anonymity, saying the discussions were confidential.

More:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050615/ap_on_go_co/social_security

[oscar111]

74. work till you drop - part of GOP Utopia. Mexico is their model for USA.

ok, i dont know if Mexico has its own ss plan. But the general mood of mexico is GOP utopia.

One Billionaire, 3O million hungry.

Actually mex has several billionaires, but you get the idea.

Till FDR, i gather there was no retirement for ordianry folks.

None.

Middle ages, no doctors either, for the ordianry villagers like you, peasant.
Folk healers only. Like today's Health Food Store clerk. About as close as many get to a dr.

NYC 18OO, no cops.. unless you could afford to pay a fee each time you called them.

No cops, doctors, or retirement. GOP utopia for us.

see my sig for Milton Friedman's even more bizzare vision. A Nobel prizewinner? Shame on Alfred Nobel's ghost. Friedman is a hero to the RW. Supreme taxcutter guru.
U. of Chicago's great shame. Milton, the "shame of Chicago".

[Gman]

78. Actually, I was thinking more like Bolivia or maybe Sudan

would be more like what they really want.

[onehandle]

75. Do it! On Party Lines!

Before November 2006. The Senate would be ours.

[oscar111]

76. dont count on it. Bush ended Overtime just before election, and still

it was close enough to steal the election.

racism and hate radio keep them strong.

[ikojo]

79. Do not for a minute assume Democrats would not

support Bush on raising the retirement age. After all most of them are not subject to economic forces because they are millionaires. Tierney in the NYT had an editorial piece that said if the elderly only worked longer then there would be lower taxes on everyone.

I personally look forward to retirement when my time is mine, my own. Why should I, just because I was born into a working class family, be expected to work until I die?

If the Dems support this and people continue to support the Dems then we will get the society we deserve.


The Old and the Rested
If the elderly were willing to work longer, there would be lower taxes on everyone ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/14/opinion/14tierney.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fJohn%20Tierney

Americans now feel entitled to spend nearly a third of their adult lives in retirement. Their jobs are less physically demanding than their parents' were, but they're retiring younger and typically start collecting Social Security by age 62. Most could keep working - fewer than 10 percent of people 65 to 75 are in poor health - but, like Bartleby the Scrivener, they prefer not to.

snip

If the elderly were willing to work longer, there would be lower taxes on everyone and fewer struggling young families. There would be more national wealth and tax revenue available to help the needy, including people no longer able to work as well as the many elderly below the poverty line because they get so little Social Security.

Getting that kind of system seems politically hopeless at the moment here, but it already exists in Chile. Its pension system has a stronger safety net for the older poor than America's (relative to each country's wages) and more incentives for people to work, because Chileans' contributions go directly into their own private accounts instead of a common pool like Social Security.

[cleofus1]

77. i already have to wait till i'm 70

in order to get full benefits...i regularly recieve statements from social securtity letting me know how much i've contributed over the years and letting me know how much my check will be depending on when i retire...i will only recieve full benefits if i wait until i'm 70...i'm 47 right now...hell i'll be lucky if i make it to 65....damn bastards...

[theophilus]

80. Senators Consider Delaying Benefits......That is what this really is

simply put. The majority of people still work after "retirement". That is not the issue. The evil greedocrats want to delay benefits. Hopefully until after you are dead. No paperwork that way.

In Europe the retirement age for many is about fifty five. We should be lowering ours, too. Not raising it. When are all of these "God Bless America" types going to realize what a tragic joke this country is becoming. Sure our economy is "booming" compared to Europe. "Booming" if you are in the top ten (three?) percent of the wealth class. Europe actually spends a lot of money taking care of its citizens. What a wild idea! Our economy could stand a permanent slowdown if the basic needs of our citizens were being met. Oh, in the long run, the "market" will take care of our needs. In the long run, we'll all be dead!

[cthrumatrix]

81. why isn't his a front page discussion ????? WTF is the media polls?

[oscar111]

87. Tierney in NYT dismantled , by oscar

what a fool.

1. the chile ss system has been a disaster, i read. And he likes it?

2. "americans feel entitled to spend a third of their lives idle retired" .. parapharased.

Indeed so. The whole idea of automation is to make people free of work. Idle is the fine word for it.
Automation has been increasing full tilt , and at the same time, we are being tricked into working longer.
Someday robots will do ALL the work.
Utopia will be possible... but....

UNDER THE GOP:
Science makes progress, and our lives get worse.

Automation frees us from work, and we work longer.

[Algomas]

88. This is part of their sick agenda...

Work the proles to death. A death that will arrive earlier every year because of the intentional poisoning of the environment and food supply. They dont want to support expensive, over the hill labor. Better to kill the slaves in their traces to keep them from cashing in on Social Security.
The Golden Years are strictly for the 'haves and the have mores'.

[GHOSTDANCER]

90. When the average American lives to be 78.

Oooooo I'll be looking forward to reaping those bennies for those precious 9 years. And we may as well just fuqin sign these checks over to the pharmacutical companies that will be raping us in those golden years. Slimmy fuqin bastards!!!!