Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Work until you drop dead

So now Britain is following France's lead in raising the retirement age. As this might look great from a bean counters' perspective of "saving the system" in reality it won't. The money saved on this scheme will only be lost in two ways. First there are many professions that actually require physical labor. Labor that puts a strain on ones body. I can personally attest to that. To assume that someone in their late 60s could continue swinging a sledge hammer or wield a 90 lb. jack hammer is just silly. But raising the age of retirement presents a two fold problem. You'll have workers who are unemployable and employers unwilling to hire them. The worker will not be able to attain retirement age and if you've known anyone in these professions they're lucky to make it to their early 60s before becoming worn out or disabled. So while the bean counters think that workers that age would still be adding taxes to the federal coffers to support the system, these workers would in fact be taking from the system. They'd be too young to retire, too old to seek retraining (what employer would want to hire somebody in their 60s and nearing retirement?) and probably starting to develop health problems that come with age. They would become a drag on society and the health care system. I'm seeing a lot of this right now with the retirement age at an average of 66. Pop down to the unemployment office and I'd bet most of the people in line are over 50. And these people are slowly running out of unemployment.

To those who somehow think that the money in the Social Security fund is tax payer dollars I have some news for them. It was my money that was put in there for me when I retire. It's not some "entitlement" program that's doled out by the goodness of Uncle Sam. So just keep your grubby republican hands off it!

So I guess the newest mantra for them is hurry up and die so we don't have to pay your retirement or health care.


Mauigirl said...

All true - it's a ridiculous "solution." And why don't they penalize companies for laying off workers 50+ and forcing them into taking packages or "early retirement" but then not giving them any real way to live until they hit 66. It's not just people in their 60s who can't get jobs; no one really wants to hire someone even in their 50s. They have higher medical bills, expect higher salaries, and may want more vacation than a young ambitious person in their 20s or 30s. To say nothing of the fact that even white collar workers burn out by the time they're that age - how many years can anyone keep doing the same stupid job they've been doing? They might still be willing to work, but many must lose their enthusiasm for what they're doing and that's another reason companies probably wouldn't want to hire them over someone younger. (I speak from experience; at a certain point, you just have seen it all over and over again and who wants to keep doing it forever?) To your point, we all paid into this - it's not charity. We deserve to get what we paid for.

an average patriot said...

You know, I can see their bitch but knowing things are getting worse and will get worse and we went from 65 to 66 and 67 is coming if not here I thought raising it from 60 to 62 was palatable.

Four Dinners said...

As I am 52 I assume I will be taken to the vets soon for euthanasia...well it'll beat working until I'm 96....

Demeur said...

I just got back from the unemployment office. All there were in their 50s. Hey I could push a pencil for a good 20 more years. What's the down side? Paper cuts?

Jim the retirement age was already raised to 66 and 67 depending when you were born. Check your SS statement when it comes. Don't get one you say? Sign up for one on their web site.

Dinners we thought we'd just cart you out to the curb for pick up but we'll keep your liver. It's well preserved.

BBC said...

I can find work, I just don't want to do it, I get by just fine on my little income.

In the future, if we make it there, those monkeys will live to a 140 years or longer. Know what that means?

You'll have to work until you are a 120. That's a long fucking time trying to make others happy just so you can have a fucking paycheck.

PoliShifter said...

I don't really get this mentality in this country that is so anti-pension and anti-Social Security.

As you point out Demeur Social Security is taken out of our damn pay checks. The wealthy don't even pay Social Security on what they make above $105K (or somewhere around that).

Here in Cali the right wingers are attacking pensions funds as the sole problem for our financial mess.

They are running adds putting people down who retire at 55 with a full pension.

I don't get it. These people had agreements and contracts in place 30 years ago and now they want to take it all away.

How many times over the decades have we heard of employees losing their pension because the company went bankrupt or robbed the pension fund.

And without Social Security we'd be in a real mess today. And their solution? Make us work till we're 70?

This is fucking bullshit. We need to take a cue from the French and how they are handling so-called "austerity".

Ranch Chimp said...

Heh, heh, heh, heh, heh ... great posting Demeur ... that IS the reality. Every damn thing folk's are told is you will get your's "later", but give us our's now! :)

Work until you drop dead is a perfect title. I heard the other day political whining out of republican's on Meet the Press I think it was, about SS being washed up and the need to try an alternative to clean it up such as privatization ... how we have used it all up, it's broke, etc, etc ... you now the BS. Well if it wasnt for these goddamn Mother Fucker's up in Washington using it and taking it out for every other goddamn thing beside's what it's intended for ... maybe we would have more in there ... especially the milking Bush/ Cheney had done, as if milking all the surplus wasnt enough. I'd like to give half these Mother Fucker's on Capitalism Hill a goddamn pink slip! I'll shut the fuck up now.

Thanx Guy ....