In response to:

Now It's Time for the Entitlement Cliff

TexasResister64 Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 7:40 AM
Let's remember that the Boomers and the generation immediately preceding them are responsible for the immanent collapse of SS and Medicare because they did NOT have enough children to keep the system solvent. If the fertility rate had stayed at 3.6--where it was in 1963--we would still have a solvent and working program. But it dropped to 1.8 by 1976 and only stabilized for a while at 2.1. So we have to cut Boomer benefits by at least 25% immediately (yes, I am a Boomer who had 3 kids) and bribe the Millennials to have 3.6 kids in order to keep it going. Now what politician has the guts to say that?
Bob34222 Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 12:29 PM
Nice humor! That assumes the work ethic is intact. IT IS NOT!
gwharpo Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 10:58 AM
"Let's remember that the Boomers and the generation immediately preceding them are responsible for the immanent collapse of SS and Medicare............"

If the criminals that have infested the White House and Congress for years had left the money alone there would be over 2.7 TRILLION dollars in it. That is NOT the fault of the "Baby boomers".

BTW: Why is everyone so eager to participate in this dividing up of Americans by race, religion, income, and who knows what's next. Those friggin redheads are the ones we should go after.
Bob34222 Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 12:29 PM
Stanpauley Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 10:19 AM
I disagree. I do not think it wise that people should have more children then they can afford. To do so would only increase the amount of public assistance needed. That will only make the problem worse.
poorgrandchildren.com2 Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 8:21 AM
Let's remember that all Ponzi schemes implode at the point where, for some reason, there are not enough new investors.
Stanpauley Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 10:22 AM
Hmmmm! Sounds like Social Security, which I/we were forced to participate in. Still, I think S.S. was still a good idea in concept due to the fact that many (most?) people cannot or would not save for the future.
Jane175 Wrote: Jan 01, 2013 10:38 AM
And the entire entitlement crown is bringing this about sooner than later

As the clock winds down on 2012, the Fiscal Cliff is all anyone seems capable of discussing. Right now it appears that some sort of narrow deal has just emerged that will include raising tax rates on family income over $450,000 a year, increasing the estate tax rate, extending unemployment benefits for one year, and delaying spending cuts.

But the prospect of higher taxes and the great uncertainty that has surrounded this fiscal fiasco has been acting like sand in the gears of the complex but sputtering U.S. economy. If additional taxes are not matched by real cuts in government...