• AmbitiousProcess (they/them)@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    *specifically boomers between years 1946 and 1964, which have actually paid more than they’ll get in benefits.

    The others are still taking more than they contributed. It’s fair to say that some current boomers have paid for their Social Security, but many others have not, and the situation isn’t getting any better.

    To put it simply, there are just fewer workers paying in to the system than there are people taking money out, and that number only grows as people get older. image

    This means only about 80% of existing benefit rates are expected to be paid to people when they retire later, and many of those benefiting from existing rates are already taking more from current generations than they paid in.

    I don’t think we should universally hate boomers just because the economic situation they were in happened to favor them in some ways, after all, I want my grandma to keep being able to afford her retirement care right now before she dies, but it’s also just not true to say that all current boomers have paid for their social security in its entirety.

    Only some of them have, and with the way things are going, it’s not looking like we’ll be any better as we grow older, as rates will have to decline just to prevent draining the entire fund, while people continue to pay the same % of their income into the system.

    • ronl2k@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      boomers between years 1946 and 1964, which have actually paid more than they’ll get in benefits.

      So boomers 79 and younger are fully paying their own way. According to Google, the average US longevity is 78.4 years. I don’t see an unfairness problem. Google also states that only about 4-5% of the U.S. population is 80 and older. You also assume those over 80 have paid nothing toward their pension.

      I don’t think we should universally hate boomers just because the economic situation they were in happened to favor them in some ways

      Again, most boomers pay their own way. And many seniors are living below the poverty line. And speaking of being favored, male boomers were required to risk their lives for their country. Current US males can take that risk optionally. Do you have any idea of how many young men had their lives cut short during WW2 and Vietnam?

      there are just fewer workers paying in to the system than there are people taking money out, and that number only grows as people get older

      Obviously false. Most seniors have already fully paid for their pension. If everybody is paying their own way, what difference does it make whether there are fewer workers? You falsely assume that current workers are paying for current seniors.

      it’s not looking like we’ll be any better as we grow older

      Whatever happens to you, it won’t be because of the boomers who are paying their own way.

    • juliebean@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      1946 to 1964 is exactly the range of birth years traditionally assigned to ‘baby boomers’. anyone older or younger isn’t a boomer at all.