To those born after 1970 - Do you really want to go back to the 1930's lifestyle in your old age?

I just finished looking at this You Tube video:

Author and Historian Neil Howe—Inside E Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgOQBeefg4c

And wondered how many middle aged people and younger really know how those "senior" citizens in the United States lived in the 1930's. Neil Howe of the "4th Turning" fame goes into how retirement became a "new" process that wasn't really around for the middle-class, which was a small minority, before the end of WWII. Most elderly people of that time period, like my grandmother, were put into County Homes and were left there to die after they were considered not able to care for themselves. After her husband died in the early 40's she was put on a stipend from the county and signed over her home to them. She died in 1952 and her home and all her possessions were auctioned off and the profit went to the county. I hope that younger people can grasp what it means not to have a "safety net" in your older age.

I listened to the Thom Hartman You Tube video where he interviewed Neil Howe on the 4th Turning and how those T-Party Congress people in power in Congress now are much younger then they have ever been before. They have no memory of how bad it was for lower income "seniors" in the 1930's and earlier and they only care about their lifestyles. I would urge everyone to explain just how bad it was in those times before the "safety nets" and how not only the elderly but those who were disabled were cast aside and given crumbs to live on until they had to retire to a county home to die. Most here on this board are sympathetic to those in need and realize that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are the only thing between living in poverty and misery and a quality of life that those on the Right so arrogantly demand for themselves. It is up to us to spread the word that it is all living human quality of life and not just the unborn that need to be valued! We are ALL in this boat together and our future quality of life is worth fighting for!

the lack of money for food, shelter, and medicine meant a lot more people died in their late 50s and early 60s.

that we comprehend what it means to our current lifestyle to continue the "safety nets". Without them we would only go back to the "old" ways.

Too many of us and more of us are registered democrats.

against paying taxes for the elderly and those in need that I wanted them to envision a beautiful home and then envision it behind tall gates that they couldn't see out of. Then I asked them to envision getting into a Mercedes or whatever luxury car they ever wanted and driving through those gates into a "slums of Mumbai" scenario of run down shacks, people dressed in rags begging for food. I asked them "Is that the United States you want to live in. Really?" They shut up and couldn't even bring up an argument after that.

THEY WANT TO INHERIT OUR WORLDLY GOODS, AND MAKE IT SNAPPY, GRAMPS.

Unless you are a worker drone to take advantage of and profit from, you are a useless eater and should do your duty and die.

But individually, those who survived to old age generally did so in poverty.

The elderly are the only demographic which has made gains in the last 40 years, and it's entirely to the credit of SS.

they were the ones that had to live out their "golden" years in those County Homes. I agree that SS and Medicare are the reason their is a better quality of life now in those final years.

Life expectancy at age 0 was about 60 but once you made it to about 20 you could expect to live until your late 60s. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html

All the stories I have heard from that era are first hand accounts.

Todays American people could not and would not survive the era of the 1930's.

To me at least, people like FDR & Johnson are two of the greatest men in American history.

ON EDIT: and anyone Democrats or Republicans to take away the works of these two men will go down in American History as some of the worst people.

...folks like Harry DeBoer and Shaun (Jack) Maloney in which they describe not only the mpls Teamsters strikes on 1934, but life in general in the 1930s for working people.

How anyone would consider for even a moment doing away with programs like social security is astounding to me. Those who do so fall into one of three camps - 1. young and stupid, 2. wealthy and hateful, or 3. old and delusional.

because "history" is written down by the "winners". Proof of that is evident when you look at modern day history books. How much is taught currently about the union movement? Schools all over the place are "banning" books that once were the norm, and then there is all the creationist stuff being given equal "representation" in public schools all over the place.

By now, a LOT of people have never been exposed to anyone who had a union job, or had one themselves. They only know about that from what they hear on tv or read about it , and it almost always is reported on unfavorably, with the union members being greedy bastards whose strikes inconvenience the public.

What been prompted for a very long time is the "grand scheme" entrepreneurship..the one where someone gets insanely rich (and YOU can too). The whole "middle" has been gutted from most business landscapes.

Think about it.

Where are they now? Just how common is the true family business of any kind, where a whole family can live a comfortable upper middle class life from that business? and provide good incomes/jobs for the kids as they grow up?

What we have now are mini-businesses that are hand-to-mouth , always almost-broke. Most proprietors rent their space and are run ragged by competition from the multi-national big box competitors until they finally fold up and go to work for them.

fascinating interview, thank you

What standard of living can the taxes of two people provide for that one retired person. This in effect has 2 workers supporting a family and an older person, and not like a parent who moves in, but with a separate residence and medical bills which we know gets more expensive in our old age.

Right now we have 3 people funding 1 person so the taxes needed per worker are less. But as the ratio decreases, it becomes more and more onerous for workers.

What kind of job and wages does this worker have that supports so many people?

Social security wasn't meant to provide all of a persons needs. It is supposed to supplement it. People need to understand that their contribution to their own retirement needs to be more or the workers of the future need to understand they will pay an increased percentage of their paycheck and must ratchet their own lifestyle down to do so.

who has seen a decline in wages and benefits over the past thirty years. It has become impossible for many people to even take a day off when sick and your answer is to tell people to save more money?

This country is awash with cash - which is rightly part of the commons - but it is stored neatly away in the coffers of the wealthy. The answer is not austerity for the working class - it is in demanding that the wealthy contribute more to the common good.

Those people need to be supported longer if they retire at 65 or 67 than they did 15-20 years ago.

retirement will those born after 1970 who are middle-class have for their future? Social Security is solvent until 2037: http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html It is time for those born after 1970 to ask themselves how they want to live in their older years. I am saying that without a program like Social Security the United States will go backward.

It's a lot easier for 10 kids to provide support for their 2 parents than one kid.

Demographics are destiny.

Baby Boom = 1946 to 1964.

Some boomers are only 47. I do not expect them to "die off" in 20 years or sooner. Unless they are killed off, which apparently a lot of people would like.

Don't trust anyone over 50
They spend more, buy more gadgets and watch more TV than anyone. But now that Boomers have grown up, no one wants them.
By MAUREEN CALLAHAN

Last Updated: 12:26 AM, January 23, 2011

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/don_trust_anyone_over_2br3MbiP6zbhX4hRGUjyQL#ixzz1TcBN8kbf

...55- to 64-year old demo, the so-called "alpha boomers," that are the most dominant. Consider: alpha boomers are the fastest-growing demographic in the nation. They make up half the population and spend more money on goods and services — nearly $2 trillion — than any other age group.

If the gov had not taken the money out of SS for war and what ever then there would be enough for the boomer's. The problem is that the gov did not save the money and now they want us to do without because they spent it.

If you don't count it we would be raising payroll taxes now.

I think his decimal point is in the wrong place. It's 2.2 trillion.

as early as 2018! So Congress will either need to raise the SS tax or divert some funds from the pension part of SS,thus moving the shortfall of that part sooner than 2037.

...as there were a lot of "fixing the facts" going on with the devil(bush).

it long enough before they die to get their full payout of what they put in. There's much hysteria about projected numbers of Boomers all living to their 90's and there not being enough younger to support them, yet not all these Boomers will live long enough to use up the money and there's still money left from those older who didn't live long enough to collect or died before they could collect.

The Boomer hysteria is just hype.

Moreover spouses who may have never contributed to the fund get paid SS too. It evens out.

under the age of 18. :eyes: Some I'm sure, but not many. There also aren't a lot of folks who have never contributed to SS either.

Retiree
Beneficiary who worked in covered employment long enough to be insured and who is at least 62 years old.
bSpouse of retired worker must either (1) have a child under age 16 or a disabled child in his or her care, or (2) be at least 62 years old; applies also to divorced spouse if the marriage lasted at least 10 years.
cA minor child is one under age 18. A disabled child is a person disabled before the age of 22. A student child is a high school student under age 19. (Prior to 1982, the student-child category also included college students; beginning in 1982, payments to college students were gradually phased out.)

Deceased
a Aged widow(er) must be at least 60 years old. Young widow(er) must have a child under age 16 or a disabled child in his or her care. Disabled widow(er) must meet disability requirements and be at least 50 years old.
bA minor child is one under age 18. A disabled child is a person disabled before the age of 22. A student child is a high school student under age 19. (Prior to 1982, the student-child category also included college students; beginning in 1982, payments to college students were gradually phased out.)
c Parent of deceased worker must have been dependent on worker and be at least 62 years old.

Disabled
a By definition, a disabled-worker beneficiary worked in covered employment long enough to be insured and had been working recently in covered employment prior to disability onset.
b A spouse of disabled worker must either (1) have a child under age 16 or a disabled child in his or her care, or (2) be at least 62 years old; applies also to divorced spouse if the marriage lasted at least 10 years.
c A minor child is one under age 18. A disabled child is a person disabled before the age of 22. A student child is a high school student under age 19. (Prior to 1982, the student-child category also included college students; beginning in 1982, payments to college students were gradually phased out.)

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/OASDIbenies.html

My father spoke of it like it was a real memory of his. It wasn't, but he always said we'd go to the poorhouse if we didn't turn off the lights when we left a room.


http://www.workhouses.org.uk/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEJRJlernW8

Complete with photos of poorhouses. Last ones closed in the 1960s I believe.

Guess we're going back.

Thanks for the memory!

Women today probably wonder why women in the 70's like Betty Ford were so outspokenly in favor of the Roe decision. In part, it was because no woman of that time didn't understand the horror of illegal abortion. The living memory of that era before 1973 is fading. It's not gone, but it's the minority now. The same is true of the memories of what this nation was like before some of these safety nets were put into place.

I hear Tea Party supporters say things one could have attributed to villians in Dickens novels. Yesterday, someone here cited a column in which the writer suggested welfare recepients shouldn't be allowed to vote. Indentured servitude for debtors can't be far behind on the suggestion list.

it happening around us.

there were local business establishments. With corporations owning most businesses, older workers are pushed out the door - for a variety of reasons.

In this particular discussion, Howe avoids discussing the positive contributions of boomers....and the social influences that fostered break-downs between generations. Yes, he describes these as the great wars, etc. but there are many, many other influences - for example, haven't heard him describe where technology fits in. Automobile ownership changed dating and women; likewise the birth control pill was a catalyst for women leaving their home-making roles.

for their SS retirement. And that assumes that the trustfund money will be rightfully paid back in full by 2037.

So what is the answer? The SS system will likely need to borrow from the general fund for about the same amount of years that it "lent" to the general fund. Sounds fair to me but will require a change in the SS law.

We can hope the nation's economy is strong enough to in effect run a surplus or deficit spend for those years, but it also makes good sense to save more now as individuals rather than just hope for the best.

they aren't engaged much in politics apparently.

I am hoping those younger people will consider what their alternatives will be.

What they/we need to do to engage in their/our future is to read and learn about not only the piss poor conditions that retired people had to endure before the New Deal, but also about Ponzi schemes and basic math so they are not fooled into believeing there is no problem with SS.

Knowledge is power.


http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html

the term is Gen X, and we graduated by or before 1995, and are middle age about now.

I was just having the conversation with a college friend yesterday, how we always 'knew' somehow growing up that our lives were the end of an era.
Many of the things we did or enjoyed as teens in the 80s are long gone now. Fear of violence and litigation has changed a LOT about how our kids, Gen Y and the 'Millenials' experience life...

Here's the other thing we realized
when we were in college, we used to talk about how we couldn't wait till we hit our 40s and started seeing our contemporaries moving into power, because Gen Xers would be a different breed than the old white men in power that we all grew up with...we waited for that to happen.
But how interesting that the boomers are not leaving. they are NOT handing over the reins of power to the next generations...
so how are visionaries supposed to come forth and offer change?
absolute power corrupts absolutely, these people have been in power for decades.
If our generation had really stepped into it's power, maybe we'd have a real climate change policy, real change in environmental protections, real balance of wealth and power.

see, as teens we used to have to write essays on how we would stop regan and gorbachev from nuclear war - we have been thinking about how we need to change these stupid, white male ego trips for a long time...we grew up knowing our planet and humanity hung in the balance.

...and we still had hope for fixing it. We just had to bide our time and grow up...
look at the following generations behind us, and they have already lost that hope, they grew up as teens and youth in a post 9/11 world, the collective trauma ruined their ability to think things could change before it even started.
unfortunately, many Gen Xers have opted to just stay in perpetual adolescence, if we can't get involved and make a change, then why bother..?

so I don't know what you mean about WANTING to go back to 1930 life in our old age...it's more of an inevitability. And I am glad I am "young enough" at 40 to be able to change my own ways and adapt...

for example, arne duncan (born 1964) is us secretary of education.

Kevin Warsh (born 1970) was a governor of the federal reserve.

mark zuckerberg (1984) = ceo of facebook

there are plenty of gen xers & even millenials holding the reins of power.

obama (b. 1961) is barely a boomer. He's too young to remember the kennedy assassination, for example.