General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAnother Washington Post Op Ed attacking Social Security
Robert J. Samuelson
Opinion Writer
We need to stop coddling the elderly
Two analysts at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis have produced an important study that should (but probably wont) alter the climate for Washingtons stalemated budget debate. The study demolishes the widespread notion that older Americans need exceptional protection against spending cuts because theyre poorer and more vulnerable than everyone else. Coupled with the elderlys voting power, this perception has intimidated both parties and put Social Security and Medicare, which dominate federal spending, off-limits to any serious discussion or change.
It has long been obvious that the 65-and-over population doesnt fit the Depression-era stereotype of being uniformly poor, sickly and helpless. Like under-65 Americans, those 65 and over are diverse. Some are poor, sickly and dependent. Many more are financially comfortable (or rich), in reasonably good health and more self-reliant than not. With life expectancy of 19 years at age 65, most face many years of government-subsidized retirement. The stereotype survives because its politically useful. It protects those subsidies. It discourages us from asking: Are they all desirable or deserved? For whom? At what age?
No one wants to be against Grandma, who as portrayed in the media is kindly, often suffering from some condition, usually financially precarious and somehow needy. But projecting this sympathetic portrait onto the entire 65-plus population is an exercise in make-believe and, frequently, political propaganda. The St. Louis Fed study refutes the stereotype. Examining different age groups, it found that since the financial crisis, incomes have risen for the elderly while theyve dropped for the young and middle-aged.
The numbers are instructive. From 2007, the year before the financial crisis, to 2010, median income for the families under 40 dropped 12.4 percent to $39,644. For the middle-aged from 40 to 61, the comparable decline was 11.9 percent to $56,924. Meanwhile, those aged 62 to 69 gained 12.3 percent to $50,825. For Americans 70-plus, the increase was 15.6 percent to $31,512. (All figures adjust for inflation and are in 2010 constant dollars. The median income is the midpoint of incomes and is often considered typical.)
more
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-j-samuelson-we-need-to-stop-coddling-the-elderly/2013/11/03/4063ebc0-430f-11e3-a624-41d661b0bb78_story.html
Hey, Zombie Eyed Granny Starver, How about Raising the Cap?
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)"Two analysts at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis have produced an important study that should (but probably wont) alter the climate for Washingtons stalemated budget debate. The study demolishes the widespread notion that older Americans need exceptional protection against spending cuts because theyre poorer and more vulnerable than everyone else"
Largely becuase of socialsecurity, you dimwit!