Oh, So That's Why DOJ Isn't Going After Pro-Terrorism Agitators
The UN Endorses a Second Terrorist State for Iran
Biden Administration Hurls Israel Under the Bus Again
Israeli Ambassador Shreds the U.N. Charter in Powerful Speech Before Vote to Grant...
New Report Details How Dems Are Planning to Minimize Risk of Pro-Hamas Disruptions...
The Long Haul of Love
Here's Where Speaker Mike Johnson Stands on Abortion
Trump Addresses the Very Real Chance of Him Going to Jail
Yes, Jen Psaki Really Said This About Biden Cutting Off Weapons Supply to...
3,000 Fulton County Ballots Were Scanned Twice During the 2020 Election Recount
Joe Biden's Weapons 'Pause' Will Get More Israeli Soldiers, Civilians Killed
Left-Wing Mayor Hires Drag Queen to Spearhead 'Transgender Initiatives'
NewsNation Border Patrol Ride Along Sees Arrest of Illegal Immigrants in Illustration of...
One State Just Cut Off Funding for Planned Parenthood
Vulnerable Democratic Senators Refuse to Support Commonsense Pro-Life Bill
OPINION

The Children Are Our Future?

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Social Security shows what can happen when government addresses a problem: It ends up causing a different problem.

First, the good news.

Social Security has helped to redefine old age. Just a few decades ago, a hiccup in the scope of human history, most people worked until they died. For those who lived into what we would consider “old age,” doing so generally meant to be poor and dependent.

Advertisement

“Children, friends and relatives have borne and still carry the major cost of supporting the aged,” a federal committee reported in 1935. “Several of the state surveys have disclosed that 30 to 50 percent of people over 65 years of age were being supported in this way.”

For example, when my great-grandfather died in the 1950s, his wife went to live with her daughter’s family, and spent the rest of her life there. That sort of thing seldom needs to happen anymore, even though people are living longer than ever. Average life expectancy at birth soared to 78 in the year 2008, up from 47 in the year 1900.

These days, older people tend to be the wealthiest cohort, and they’re getting richer. “The typical U.S. household headed by a person age 65 or older has a net worth 47 times greater than a household headed by someone under 35,” an Associated Press story reported in 2011. “This wealth gap is now more than double what it was in 2005 and nearly five times the 10-to-1 disparity a quarter-century ago, after adjusting for inflation.”

Meanwhile, things aren’t so rosy at the other end of the age spectrum.

More than 13 percent of Americans aged 20-24 are unemployed. That’s more than 10 million people who aren’t getting started down the path to success. We used to call that “failure to launch” and make comedies about it. Today, our president just assumes that 25-year-olds are helpless. He goes around the country bragging that people can now stay on their parent’s insurance until they’re 26. It’s about the only feature of Obamacare that seems to have arrived on time.

Advertisement

Ah, but at the same time, the White House realizes Obamacare relies on these same young people coughing up money they don’t have. The administration will “need to entice a sufficient number of young and healthy adults into the new insurance marketplaces that open Oct. 1,” note Ezra Klein and Sarah Kliff in The Washington Post. “This, then, is the crux of Obamacare’s challenge: Can the federal government persuade young, healthy people to buy health insurance?”

The White House is, predictably, treating this is if it were a political campaign, complete with in-depth polls, messaging and “micro-targeting.” And perhaps a few good ads and cool presidential speeches will convince people in their 20s to spend hundreds of dollars per month that they can’t afford. Maybe they can just roll it into their student loan debt?

Still, if young people don’t participate, “…the new insurance marketplaces – the absolute core of Obamacare – will be filled with older, sicker people, and premiums will skyrocket. And if that happens, the law will fail,” Klein and Kliff conclude.

Obamacare’s not alone; Social Security also relies on that same pool of young people.

It’s been sold to Americans as an insurance program, so people tend to assume that the money they’re paying in is being saved for them somehow, somewhere. Instead, the money collected today is being spent on today’s retirees. There’s nothing in the “trust fund” except IOUs.

Now that Social Security is paying out more than it takes in each year, it will need a growing supply of younger workers to pay older retirees their benefits. It would help if those younger people could get actual paying jobs.

Advertisement

Things could be worse, and are elsewhere in the Western world. “Why would you have a kid in Portugal?” Mark Steyn wonders. “The country’s youth-unemployment rate is over 40 percent. In Spain, it’s 57 percent and in Greece just shy of 63 percent.” At least Americans are replacing ourselves, so there’s a potential that we’ll have a solid economic future.

But our country’s future depends on getting people back to work. Obamacare was a big step in the wrong direction, having given companies incentives not to hire new employees. Hence, the administration’s constitutionally questionable decision to suspend the employer mandate.

It will have to do more than that to create opportunities for younger Americans. That will require removing Obamacare, reducing regulations and finding ways to slash student debt (such as with inexpensive college degree programs).

Our future depends on young people. Government should get out of the way and give them the ability to build that future.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos