I suppose this would be as good of place as any to post this…
(My dad is a baby boomer, I just turned 22)
Does anyone think that maybe the defecit in numbers between the Baby Boomers and their offspring needed to support them was kind of brought on my themselves by destroying their children?
It’s very difficult for me to believe that abortion has NOT contributed to the oncoming crisis, to some degree. I’m not sure what the numbers are by now, but my impression is that there have been somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 million abortions in the U.S. since it was Legalized by the S.C.
Now, if abortion on demand was not legal, likely there would not have been nearly so many abortions, as many simply use abortion as “back up birth control”. This is particularly true of the educated classes. Since most couples now have only slightly more than two children, (no one knows how many abortions) there is obviously an attempt to simply limit the numbers of children one has and, if not for abortion, it’s doubtful to me that the birth rate would be a lot higher, because couples would limit births in other ways if they were determined to have only one child or two. But even one more child per couple would make a lot of difference in the work force.
The Social Security mess is only going to get worse, and it’s deemed politically impossible to do anything about it. If (as Bush and Reagan both tried to do) someone makes an attempt to fix it, the other party capitalizes on it politically and kills it. What some do not realize, though, is that there has already been a fairly significant change. The SS benefit moves with the contribution level-not absolutely, but as a function of the maximum income upon which the tax is levied. Back when the amount taxed was low, those who were paying the full amount received the maximum benefit. Now that the maximum income taxed for SS is around $90,000, those who make less than that will not receive the maximum benefit. So, (and baby boomers will find this out to their surprise and sorrow) lots of people who thought they would receive the max because their parents or grandparents did, won’t. The politicians pulled a fast one and never talk about it. They are now talking about raising the amount of income on which the tax is levied, in the interests of “fairness”. It might be fair and it might not be fair to do that, but it will also have the effect of reducing what people get who don’t pay the maximum.
When you get right down to it, though, it seems to me a self-indulgent consumerism is behind the whole thing. People used to save for their retirement; much more than now. People invested in assets more. The prevalence of 401K plans is going to help over the very long term, but most people really don’t own any earning assets at all.
As you are a young fellow, I strongly recommend that you read a book entitled “The Millionaire Next Door”. I can’t remember who wrote it, but it’s interesting, and I’m sure you can find it. The fundamental points in the book are:
-People who become millionaires don’t necessarily make more than others, they spend less. There is no correllation at all between a high income and a high asset level. You cannot tell them from anyone else by looking at them, their houses, cars, clothes or any of the other things we normally associate with wealth. Most people who “look” wealthy are actually high earners who spend everything.
-Most millionaires in the U.S. did not inherit it.
-Most millionaires revinvest their money in their own businesses, which represents most of their wealth.
-Self-made millionaires typically marry for life and do not get divorced.
-Self-made millionaires typically have larger families than others.
-Self-made millionaires are usually serious church-goers.
-The spouses (usually the woman) of self-made millionaires are homemakers much more than the wives of others. However, the spouse is usually involved in the business and/or acquisition of other assets in some way, if only by keeping close watch and contributing by way of advice and careful use of resources.
Now, one can wonder if those people have acquired wealth because of the way they are, or whether they are the way they are in order to acquire wealth. The book leans to the former view. In support of it, they found that self-made millionaires do not really pay much attention to their wealth level. They have objectives, usually business or investment objectives, that produce wealth, but the business or investment objectives are what they are really trying to achieve, and wealth simply flows from the achievement of the objectives.
)