Robert Samuelson in the pages of the Washington Post makes the argument that the new lines shouldn’t be drawn along those of class — rich and poor — but rather, of Baby Boomers vs. the rest of us:
Indeed, half the nation’s wealth is owned by people 55 and older (a third of the adult population), report Eugene Steuerle and Stephanie Rennane of the Urban Institute. The old feel more secure. The National Opinion Research Center regularly surveys Americans about their financial “satisfaction.” In 2010, 82 percent of those 65 and over said they were “satisfied” or “more or less” satisfied. For those under 65, the comparable figure was 66 percent.
Older Americans also fared better in the recession, a 2009 Pew survey found. Among those 18 to 49, 68 percent reported that they “cut back spending” in the past year; for those 65-plus, that was 36 percent.
Social Security and Medicare explain much of this well-being. For millions of older Americans, they are essential; among the poorest two-fifths, Social Security provides 83 percent of their income. But among the richest fifth, its share is only 18 percent.
Those statistics come from your friendly, helpful federal government.
Samuelson makes the case that, instead of pitting rich vs. poor, it is time for those 55+ to start owning up to their disproportionate share of America’s wealth and quit expecting more:
People do not lose their obligations to the larger society by turning 65. We need to refocus these programs on their original purposes. Social Security was intended to prevent poverty, not finance recipients’ extra cable channels. Medicare provides peace of mind as well as health insurance; wealthier recipients can afford to pay more for their peace of mind. Burden-sharing needs to include the elderly. This is the crux of the budget problem.
Now obviously, there is a bit of class warfare going on here that’s being cloaked in a hostility to seniors that one can instantly sense and reject. After all, those Baby Boomers have accumulated wealth, pensions, retirement funds, investments, and other resources — and they spend it on… well, their grandkids.
On the flip side of the coin, the federal government’s commitments to the massive entitlement system we’ve created out of thin air is the problem, and Samuelson hits the nail on the head with regards to what’s at stake.
So the question is this: which politician is willing to tell 76 millions Americans they can’t have.
…and which politician would survive the wrath of 76 million voting Americans who want what government “promised” them in their old age?
Get the picture?
Frederic Bastiat was right with regards to property and plunder:
The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense…. [M]en will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly. And under these conditions, neither religion nor morality can stop it.
When, then, does plunder stop? It stops when it becomes more painful and more dangerous than labor. (emphasis added)
“Socialism sucks… until it works for you” is a mantra hammered home every time it is mentioned (thank you, Aldo the Apache).
In this instance, how do you tell 76 million Baby Boomers that they are strangling our economic prosperity? And survive?
The answer — I’m afraid — is going to take a lot more courage than simply cutting spending. Once the pendulum starts rocking from left to right, it becomes a battering ram. Take away the Social Security of 76 million Americans, and if it’s done poorly and half-assed, it will rock back and take more than what’s being given today.
Conservatives need to start thinking five or six moves ahead on the chessboard. This concept of “age warfare” isn’t the answer anymore than class warfare was. Conservatives need to live up to the best of their virtues — stability super omnes — and find ways to cage this Leviathan state.
Merely wounding the Leviathan only encourages an angry response, one that could take more than what is being taken. Rocking the pendulum only serves the interests of those who thrive on crisis. It’s time to pull the curtains down on radicals and get back to basic, Jeffersonian principles.
Cage the Leviathan, put it in its box, cut spending, and let the market grow beyond the socialism we have today. Doing anything less — or anything more — sets us up for radical, deep changes that may not work out in favor of the American republic.
(h/t The Conservative Wahoo)
