Log in

View Full Version : American CEOs want to raise retirement age to 70......... V



Ponce
20th January 2013, 11:19 AM
I am glad that I was able to convince my X to start getting her SS at 62 instead of waiting till she was 65..... three more years and she might have to wait five more years........and even then she has to wait and extra month for her first check, intead of January she will have to wait till Febuary............she was born in Dic.
==================================================


A group of CEOs is attempting to push the official US retirement age to 70, thereby making fewer Americans eligible to receive benefits such as Social Security and Medicare.
The Business Roundtable (BRT), a group of influential CEOs, on Wednesday unveiled its plan to partially privatize the health insurance program for older Americans and gradually reduce the benefits they currently receive by cutting entitlements. The plan calls for smaller annual Social Security increases, as well as reduced benefits for wealthy retirees.
“America can preserve the health and retirement safety net and rein in long-term spending growth by modernizing Medicare and Social Security in a way that addresses America’s new fiscal and demographic realities,” Gary Loveman, chairman, president and chief executive of Caesars Entertainment, told CBS News. Loveman is head of the Business Roundtable, which came up with the plan. The millionaire businessman hopes to convince Congress to enact the new measures in an attempt to cut US spending.
The BRT believes the eligibility age for both Medicare and Social Security should increase to 70. Some legislators have already proposed raising it to 67, but congressional Democrats have fought hard to prevent such an increase. Retirees can currently get reduced Social Security benefits starting at age 62, full Social Security benefits at age 66, and Medicare at age 65.
While the proposed changes would impact the younger generations, anyone who is currently over 55 would not be affected by those measures and could continue to receive their government benefits, regardless of the outcome of the decision.
The BRT believes that raising the age would help reduce the deficit. Its members also believe that the changes would cause traditional Medicare programs to compete with private insurance plans – something that Rep. Paul Ryan, chair of the House Budget Committee, has long advocated for.
But while raising the eligibility age would save the federal government money, it would also cause Americans’ expenses to increase dramatically, which would particularly devastate low-income individuals dependent on government assistance. CNNMoney reports that medical expenses would increase by $11.4 billion, even though federal spending would only drop by $5.7 billion.
“Raising the age doesn’t address the larger concern of reducing health care spending overall,” said Juliette Cubanski, associate director of Kaiser’s Program on Medicare Policy. “It just shifts costs from the federal government to other payers in the system.”
As Democrats and Republicans attempt to come up with a budget plan to avoid causing the country to fall into default, Medicare reform continues to be heavily debated. Although President Obama said he would support minor changes to Medicare, he would not support a plan as radical as that proposed by the BRT.
Increasing the eligibility age to 68 would put 435,000 seniors at risk of being uninsured – a number that would be higher if the eligibility age was set at 70.
“These ideas were soundly rejected in the last election only a few months ago,” said Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

http://rt.com/usa/news/age-medicare-social-security-299/

Twisted Titan
20th January 2013, 11:41 AM
65 was chosen because that was the age people rarely lived to

Time they need to readjust the formula

Neuro
20th January 2013, 02:50 PM
65 was chosen because that was the age people rarely lived to

Time they need to readjust the formula
To 55?

Serpo
20th January 2013, 02:58 PM
Screw these CEOs, who do they think they are are what right have they in poking their noses into this.

Cap pay out rates for CEOs instead

......talk about vomit material.



Why retire at all ,just die at the coal face working for the man.

I believe fully in early retirement ................

Ponce
20th January 2013, 03:04 PM
In that case they are in trouble with me, I have already collected 4-5 of what I put into it......by the time that I die at 132 years old there will be nothing left.

V

Glass
20th January 2013, 03:13 PM
Australia's retirement age went to 70 a couple years back and no body noticed. It was a strange thing in my opinion, that no one noticed or maybe no one cared.

Serpo
20th January 2013, 03:16 PM
Australia's retirement age went to 70 a couple years back and no body noticed. It was a strange thing in my opinion, that no one noticed or maybe no one cared.


67...............http://www.superguide.com.au/how-super-works/age-pension-age-set-to-increase-to-67

madfranks
20th January 2013, 03:29 PM
Social security, as we all know, can't survive much longer in it's current form. They will do all sorts of means testing, this included, to figure out what people will take and what they won't. The fact remains they will cut a little here, a little there, a thousand cuts to try and make it solvent.

Glass
20th January 2013, 03:35 PM
67...............http://www.superguide.com.au/how-super-works/age-pension-age-set-to-increase-to-67

They are incentivising un-retirement by giving people a "bonus" for working until 70. The Govt pays some X dollars, can't recall what amount, if you stay working. I think it's $15,000. You get a portion each year that you don't register for the pension. You can have the discounts and the medicines benefits regardless once you turn 65. So I think it's a combination of smoke and mirrors.

Ponce
20th January 2013, 04:43 PM
One of this days they will tax SS...watch and see...........and also, if you have to pay tax on what you buy instead of paying federal tax then that will be another way of taking from SS.......unless......they come out with a SS credit tax that all that comes from there is non taxable.

V

Serpo
20th January 2013, 04:52 PM
In OZ we are taxed on what we buy ,what we earn, and now what we breath ....carbon tax

PlatinumBlonde
20th January 2013, 05:33 PM
What's the big deal?

70 is the new 50...

BrewTech
20th January 2013, 05:39 PM
In OZ we are taxed on what we buy ,what we earn, and now what we breath ....carbon tax

In my area we are taxed on intelligence...

My tax rate is, thankfully, quite low.

Ponce
20th January 2013, 06:09 PM
You got it Tech.......only when the government think that you are and idiot will you pay no tax......as a matter of fact, they pay me a refund check every year and I don't even pay tax........wowwwwww I am a real dummy.

V