How About Bailing Out Responsible Seniors?

Reader Comments
Back to blog

It is true taxes are higher than they have ever been in american history. But this constant bickering by the young generation x people really blows my mind. If you wonder why this country is in such a mess look no further. First, these youngsters are the product of the hippy free love society of the 60's. Are there childen going to learn responsibility? From these parents. NO! Their parents rolled in the mud at woodstock, spat on returning vietnam vets, yelled peace but every chance they got, caused riots and turmoil everywhere ie KENT STATE. Now today these people are in charge in washington under the label progressives. Dem or Rep you have them on both sides. I feel sorry for generation x people their parents never taught them resposibility they just handed them what they wanted. They have no work ethics or conscience. read up on the bilderburgs,foundation x, club of rome and the illuminati. These groups are hell bent on destroying america along with the federal reserve, which is the world bank stealing trillions and laundering it through wall st. disturbing isn't it.

Jeff of OH 10:13PM January 14, 2011

"Many of them own their homes. But that home may have declined in value from $300,000 to $200,000. They are not knocking on your door. They will not default on a mortgage or walk away from their home. Nevertheless, they have lost $100,000 and this represents a huge financial setback."
This is irrelevant unless the person is planning to sell. Even then the next home is less expensive.
Low interest rates are the problem, not a decline in housing prices.

Adam of AZ 3:29PM April 05, 2010

Aren't we providing help to seniors already? 38% of the federal budget is for entitlements including Social Security and Medicare. Seniors can argue that they paid into the fund but studies show that current retirees receive the amount they paid into SS within 3-5 years. Those under 50 will pay much more into SS than today's seniors ever did and may not see those benefits.
We're 45 years old, bought a modest home, work 3 jobs between the two of us and are struggling to make ends meet due to the loss of a full time job. We drive an old car and didn't take Cash for Clunkers nor did we upgrade our appliances with that bailout. We aren't union employees and won't be able to retire until our 70's. We haven't asked for unemployment, Medicaid, mortgage assistance or any other assistance. After my husband's job loss, we went without health insurance for 3 months because we couldn't afford COBRA and prayed our kids wouldn't get sick during that period. When they did, we paid out of pocket and are still paying off those bills.
We lived and continue to live responsibility too. Why should one age group or demographic get another break while those in our age bracket get nothing? Our parents are traveling to Florida every winter, buying new cards and do not help us financially in any form. Why should seniors receive additional help simply because of their age?
Despite our struggles, we don't support more government intervention for those who aren't in serious poverty because we believe the government is already burdened with too much debt and we don't believe in yet another bailout for any group or industry.
While the idea suggested in this article has merit, the idea that it should be limited to a particular age group reeks of entitlement thinking. Sometimes, life is unfair. The govt should help care for the truly indigent, but we have to stop handing out benefits to every party with political clout and their hands out.

Lisa of KY 3:07PM April 04, 2010

This appears to make uncommonly common sense, although I think purchases should be available ony to those over 55.
I'd like critiques from the more economically astute.

Mike of FL 12:12PM April 04, 2010