Solving Social Security Inbalance

When Social Security was started by FDR, few people lived to 65, and there were 40 workers donating for every one. Now it is 3-1 and the average age of deathhas increased to the late 70's. A new panel wants to raise the age to 70 to correct this inbalance.

Think we have to do this? Or should the coming generations get the same deal as the current retirees?

Twist: Due to diabetes and other obesity health issues, there is some speculation that the current working generations won't live as long as their parents and may start dying before 65 or 70. So the current workers might wind up supporting their elders but they themselves will die before they can collect.

SS109 wrote: Twist: Due to diabetes and other obesity health issues, there is some speculation that the current working generations won't live as long as their parents and may start dying before 65 or 70. So the current workers might wind up supporting their elders but they themselves will die before they can collect.

If they're gonna be dying due to obesity and diabetes (often caused by obesity and bad diet), I feel no sympathy for them not being able to collect.

Save social security by taking advantage of the masses' lack of self control....


I like it!