We Need A Strategy For An Aging Society
The Lancet asserts this morning that a baby born today into an affluent home can expect to live to 100.
That's obviously good news, in the sense of helping everyone enjoy the full blessings of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
But at the same time, we had better be thinking harder about our plans for dealing with a geriatric population. Specifically, we can conclude that if people work for 40 years (say, age 25 to 65) and then live on retirement for 35 years (say, age 65 to 100) that'll be expensive. So we had better either a) increase economic growth, or b) delay the onset of work-incapacitation, so that seniors can stay in the workforce longer, past 65. Otherwise, we can be sure that others will have their own plan for dealing with oldsters.
POSTED BY JAMES P. PINKERTON AT 8:53 AM - The Lancet.com
1. An obvious solution is to incentivize older people to work longer by perhaps allowing them to collect partial benefits from Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, as needed, allowing them to work part-time, contribute, and make some needed income without losing some benefits they need, on a case by case basis.
2. Another possibility is to delay the onset of work-incapacitation or retirement from 65 to 70, perhaps at first on a volunteer basis and then changing the official age if not enough seniors choose to stay in the work force voluntarily.
Both these options, however, are only possible in a good economy, otherwise you are taking jobs that could be done by people between the ages of 16 and 65, forcing them onto some type of aid or lowering their standard of living.
3. Another option is to cut “all” senior benefits from ‘the wealthy’, whatever that demarcation line is.
Part of what has brought us to this discussion, is not only the large number of retiring boomers and looking at people living longer in the future. Added to this situation is a combination of a decline in family values, including marriage and having children, and a shift to a “Me” philosophy, thereby reducing repopulating in a responsible way and decreasing the numbers in younger generations to help take care of the elderly. Plus the unrealistic social programs, and creation of a ‘Nanny State’ as well as waste in government that we have created the drain on the system of funds.
Plug in the ideals of American Progressivism, or socialism, being proliferated by the Obama Administration, which had emboldened the far left even more, and we are in big trouble!! Obama ran on a platform promising transparency; cutting spending including going through the government’s budget line by line and cutting waste; and hope and change (for the positive most Americans believed) for “all”, which included seniors. Instead, we have gotten the most secretive and underhanded administration in the history of the United States; an increase in debt and spending that is unprecedented with an additional agenda including a power grab and fundamental remaking of America, redistribution of wealth, and ultimate socialism; and a philosophy peppered with racism and elitism on many levels as well as policies against the elderly, special needs people and anyone who disagrees with Obama and the Obama philosophy and agenda.
Related Resources:
Are the elderly cost effective?
Doctor Shortage Will Worsen Health Bill Impact
Why Sarah Palin is right on the issue of “death panels”
ObamaCare a Death Panel in Itself
Alert! Swine Flu and Other Vaccine Have Immunocontraceptives secretly placed in them! - video
No comments:
Post a Comment