iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Richard (RJ) Eskow

GET UPDATES FROM Richard (RJ) Eskow

Deficit Hysteria: Washington's War on the Young

Posted: 06/22/11 10:16 AM ET

It's one of modern political life's strange ironies that defending Social Security and Medicare is considered an "old people's issue." Old people are doing just fine with these programs, thank you very much -- at least so far.

Anti-government hawks like Alan Simpson and Pete Peterson also made a deft (if deeply cynical) move by framing these programs as a war between baby boomers vs. Gen X-ers, since some of their cuts would hurt boomers too.

But young people will take the worst of these cuts, since their impact increases over time. When you combine this assault on "entitlements" with other forms of austerity economics, the result is a plan to hand the next generation a nation with crumbling infrastructure, collapsing government services, and bleak economic prospects. It's an all-out assault on the future of the young.

That's no accident. Politicians know that seniors would rise up against any politician who crosses them. And seniors vote. They're also aware that baby boomers are a large and powerful voting bloc, not to be trifled with.

Young people, on the other hand, traditionally find it hard to imagine their own old age. On top of that, they've been barraged with propaganda designed to discourage them from believing these benefits will be there when they retire. That makes it easy for politicians to target them when designing their budget cuts, especially since its easier to hide their long-term impact from those they would hurt the most.

These cost cutting proposals, often described as "brave," target young people because that's easier and safer than taking on more politically powerful groups. Whether we're talking about "entitlement" programs, other spending cuts, or tax giveaways to the wealthy, each proposed austerity measure is a dagger aimed at the financial future of our children.

Raising the Retirement Age: From Twentysomethings to Newborns

The Simpson/Bowles proposal, for example, would increase the full retirement and early retirement ages over a 40 to 65 year timeline, a change that would begin to affect people now in their early to mid-twenties. That's the same generation that's currently facing record youth unemployment.

According to reliable studies, when a person is unemployed or earns less in the early years of their working life it affects their income over their entire lifetime. As a result, many of today's new graduates will pay less into Social Security over the course of their career. That means most of them can already expect to receive less in benefits when they retire, even under the current system.

And we're not talking about small change, either. If the full-retirement age is changed from 66 up to 69, as many people have proposed, that will result in a 20% loss of benefits.

If these changes to the retirement age were implemented today, they'd have the greatest impact on today's newborn babies. So the next time you see an adorable infant in a Snuggi, picture what Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles want to do to it.

The Unfair, the Unnecessary, and the Un-COLA

Cost-of-living (COLA) increases, which have often failed to keep pace with actual out-of-pocket costs, would also be slowed down under many of these proposals. Unlike some other Social Security changes, that would also hit current retirees and baby boomers hard. Within 20 years, the average benefit would be cut by approximately $1000. Since that average benefit is less than $13,000 today (less than $10,000 for women), those are major cuts. And the effect of this rolling cut would be cumulative, becoming greater with each passing year. The younger a person is today, the more their benefit would be cut in their senior years.

But wait, as the late-night TV ads used to say. There's more.

The Simpson/Bowles proposal, which many Democrats and Republicans have called "a good starting point" for discussions, isn't done hammering away at the financial security of young Americans. Although two-thirds of its Social Security "savings" would come from benefit cuts, one-third would come from tax increases. But those tax increases aren't be aimed at wealthy Americans. Instead Simpson and Bowles have proposed raising taxes on middle-class Americans, by eliminating deductions for expenses like home mortgages and health insurance.

The most bizarre thing about this fiscal war on America's young people is that it's completely unnecessary. Lifting the payroll tax cap would make Social Security 100% solvent for the next 75 years. But that's off the table. Republicans are adamantly opposed to any taxes that discommode the wealthy. And the White House embraced a "payroll tax cut" that creates a useful, if minor, stimulus effect -- but at the effect of making the country's most effective and valuable program a target for future benefit-cutters.

MediGone

And we haven't even gotten to Medicare yet. The Republican House passed Paul Ryan's "serious" and "brave" plan, which would eliminate Medicare and then -- in a move worthy of science-fiction writer Philip K. Dick -- replace it with a voucher system that would be called "Medicare." (More here.)

The Republican Party's voucher plan would make Medicare (as opposed to "Medicare" vouchers) unavailable to anyone who becomes eligible after 2021. That means it affects anybody born after 1956, a date that eliminates a large chunk of the Baby Boom. The vouchers will cover less and less of health insurance's real cost with each passing year. That means the younger you are, the worse this plan will be for you.

If the Ryan plan becomes law, 90% of your Social Security retirement income will be eaten up by out-of-pocket health care costs by 2037. And that's a conservative estimate. Without the Medicare system's built-in controls on pricing and utilization, actual health care costs could be even greater.

False Progressivity vs. Real Solutions

Many of these plans include proposals that claim to spare the "neediest" of our young people from benefit cuts in their senior years, while asking more of the "well to do." But most of these proposals are barely skin-deep. Means testing proposals, for example, wind up targeting people with modest lifetime earnings that can be as low as $20,000 per year (from the Concord Coalition). And by conflating social insurance programs like Social Security and Medicare with social welfare programs for the neediest among us, they're undercutting the structure that makes these programs strong.

Social Security can be stabilized easily and cleanly, just by asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. The only way to fix Medicare is by addressing our nation's broken health care system, which means taking on the structural flaws in our for-profit health economy.

But politicians on both sides of the aisle are reluctant to do either of these things. So they're targeting young people instead.

Misleading the Young

Why aren't young people protesting all this? Headlines like this one provide part of the answer: "Debt Commissioners: Baby Boomers Will Crush Social Security, Medicare." In fact, a Google search of the phrase "Will Baby Boomers Bankrupt Social Security and Medicare?" comes up with nearly million hits.

The shrewd foxes and Fox shills who want to destroy these programs have convinced many young people they have no hope of collecting these benefits. That's wrong. There's every reason to expect these benefits to be available when America's young people retire. All it takes is the political will to resist the slashers. But they've been trying to thwart that political will by reframing a matter of economic justice as an intergenerational war between boomers and young people.

If successful, that misdirection could cost America's young people their financial security.

Surrendering the Future

This nation is already neglecting its young people, even though our leaders love to tell us (correctly) that they're our future. Unemployment figures for today's twentysomethings are truly devastating. The Economic Policy Institute reported that "in 2010, the unemployment rate for workers age 16 -- 24 was 18.4% -- the worst on record in the 60 years that this data has been tracked."

The country should be rallying behind this generation by creating jobs for them. Instead we're abandoning them to a lifetime of lowered earnings and lowered expectations, made even worse by record levels of student debt. College and post-graduate debt already exceeds credit card debt in this country and is expected to reach $1 trillion in 2012.

That's a tough way to start your financial life as an adult. Our kids are likely to go through life with crushing debt and reduced earning capacity. And if the Simpson/Bowles/Ryan crowd has their way, they'll also face financial fear and deprivation in their senior years.

Washington should be helping these young people find jobs. Instead, too many policy makers are abandoning them just as their work lives begin. Worse, they're also trying to make sure they're abandoned when their careers end, too. Enough is enough. It's time to call these misguided austerity policies what they really are: a war on America's youth.

 

Follow Richard (RJ) Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow

 
 
  • Comments
  • 407
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
08:03 PM on 06/27/2011
But what about the unsustainable debt? The fact that we're currently paying over $400 billion in INTEREST on our national debt (and trust me when I say that that number will continue to rise) should be cause for alarm. $400 billion dollars that can't be used to address the countless problems in the country. But anyway, leaving today's young people with unsustainable debt is an issue that few posters are acknowledging.
Ana4
neutrino alert, just passing through
02:38 PM on 06/25/2011
~80% of all Americans are suffering from this economic downturn. It is more than unlikely that any particular generation is alone at fault. All generations have been affected. The roots of our present state of affairs began before WWI, in the Victorian Era. See the following (in print) references:

The Tycoons by Charles R. Morris.
Mining Tycoons in the Age of Empire by Raymond Dumett.
The First Tycoon: the Epic Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt.

It only took a few schemers: Vanderbilt, JD Rockefeller, JP Morgan, Jay Gould, Andrew Carnegie, though the latter was perhaps not a sociopath. Rockefeller and Morgan, among others set about undermining the education of the "children of the masses" in the 1950's. Looking to blame one generation? Go back a few.
I've been informed that Brave New Films has documented how the Koch Bros. are behind the "right-wing echo chamber" at work to "scapegoat the BabyBoomers with lies and fear-mongering." I've asked them for more information; proof. Nevertheless, scapegoating is indeed what seems to be happening in order to turn people on each other instead of focusing on the real problem's source.
We're all suffering from the implosion of the "American Dream." We'll all have to simplify our lives, and that's ecologically a good thing; well, 80% of us will. Let's all stop drinking whatever kool-aid anyone is handing out though and refrain from becoming an uneducated mob with pitchforks; something those against true Democracy want.
08:06 PM on 06/27/2011
"It is more than unlikely that any particular generation is alone at fault."

I put most of the blame on the Baby Boomers (with a bit of the blame going to the Greatest Generation) for the many bad policies that have been enacted over the past few decades. They had the power and they ran us into the ground.
Ana4
neutrino alert, just passing through
09:46 PM on 06/27/2011
Reagan, McCain, Murdoch and Koch Sr. are GI generation; Clinton's and probably Koch Jr's are "Boomers," Most of the recent crop of greedy MBA's and Trump clones are X-ers. There's plenty of blame to go around. What we do now to curb the corruption is what counts.
Ana4
neutrino alert, just passing through
09:48 PM on 06/27/2011
And the Supreme Court activist judges?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
babyspittle
Fox Fake News kills brain cells
01:30 AM on 06/25/2011
the young might be more susceptible to tactics like that, but the young did NOT vote the republicans in last election - that was the old medicated folks who think fox is news.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
procrustes13
01:53 PM on 06/24/2011
My teenage years coincided with the beginning of the Great Canadian Slump and I still curse the right wing neoliberal politicians who committed this heinous crime.
10:00 AM on 06/24/2011
Rome didn't fall in a day.
Linda from Deerfield
Paying attention
01:49 AM on 06/24/2011
It is the height of hypocrisy for the tea party to claim that the way to keep the crushing burden of the nation's debt from our children and grandchildren is to simultaneously refuse to pay and to deliver the burden onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.

I willingly paid my higher taxes during the Clinton years -- I was doing it for my brother and my brother's kids, and for children yet unborn. Anyone who cannot understand our continued rage at the Bush record needs to think about that.

I would also like to point out that it is not just Medicare but the whole trajectory of the cost of health care in this country that has been so terribly skewed -- relentlessly outpacing inflation year in and year out -- that it is the entire economy that will be consumed by health care in about 3 more decades. That is the real emergency. Do the math.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blueken
Finger Picking blues man
04:05 PM on 06/23/2011
I just can't believe the misery and suffering that our political leaders are wlling to see inflicted on the American people in the name of keeping taxes at the lowest level since 1960. You know what, we should all pay our fair share, rich and poor alike. Let the "temporary Bush tax cuts" expire for everyone. What part of "temporary" don't they inderstand. It's only one word, how hard can it be to understand one word?
photo
Alethea
Have the courage to use reason.
02:30 PM on 06/23/2011
And this is why I hate Ayn Randians who have enshrined selfishness as a virtue. But this time it's the selfishness of the old letting the door of prosperity close behind them as they die off.

Thanks a bunch you j#rkoffs. How am I going to explain this to my newborn daughter when she gets older? "Sorry honey, but Grandma and Grandpa's generation were too stingy to make sure you and your friends get a good education and opportunities. They figured that it was ok for older generations to pay for their benefits, but they couldn’t bring themselves to do the same for you. After all, that would be giving in to your sense of “entitlement.” So here's your McDonald's hat, now get going to your minimum wage career."

Yeah that will go over real well. It doesn't sit well with me either.
Ana4
neutrino alert, just passing through
02:52 PM on 06/25/2011
Before buying into the propaganda and mis-direction that the Koch Bros. have paid for, remember that ~80% of the country is suffering. That's 80% of every generation. Remember also that the source of this return to wealth inequality began with 19th and early 20th Century policies put in place by a few "barons." See: The Tycoons, by Charles R. Morris.
We've all been drinking the American Dream kool-aid, we just didn't know who was serving it. Read my post above, if they'll print it.
07:33 PM on 06/27/2011
"Before buying into the propaganda and mis-direct­ion that the Koch Bros. have paid for, remember that ~80% of the country is suffering. That's 80% of every generation­."

Sorry, but 80% of the country doesn't naturally translate into 80% of every generation. If 95% of people under the median age suffer while 65% of people over the median age suffer, then that still amounts to 80% of the country. Also, I'm not saying that things are peachy at the moment, but I think that saying that only the top 20% of people aren't suffering is a bit much.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vincent Boyle
Turning Wine Into Funk!
12:58 PM on 06/23/2011
Just for fun, I googled "cost of war on terror" (3 trillion dollars) and "economic damage from 2008 collapse (10.2 trillion vanished). Two thoughts: 1. Wall Street's criminal behavior cost the economy 300% more than Osama. 2. The entire deficit is represented by these two figures. I am not an economist, but I have to wonder why are the repubs worried about a self-supporting program and not how the governments lack of oversight and planning led to the 2008 collapse and a massive overeaction to 9/11.
10:59 AM on 06/28/2011
The cost of the war on terror is a little over 1 trillion not 3 trillion (that is since 9/11 which is about 10 years). The cost of Medicare/Medicaid on the other hand is about 0.8 trillion while Social Security accounted for another 0.7 trillion in a SINGLE year. Let us face it the old gezzers and the poor are running us dry.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-20/politics/war.costs_1_war-costs-terror-attacks-costs-of-military-operations?_s=PM:POLITICS
10:13 AM on 06/23/2011
This entire article is nothing more than socialist propaganda. Tax the top 10% to pay for everything the bottom 60% wants. It is the fast track to rewarding failure and mediocrity.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kittyburger
Schrodinger's micro-bio may or may not be empty.
10:36 AM on 06/23/2011
You know what we call the bottom 60%? A majority. Running the country for the benefit of a tiny minority is what's gotten us into this mess.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vincent Boyle
Turning Wine Into Funk!
01:15 PM on 06/23/2011
Good for you! To read an entire arguement that explains the political rhetoric used by republicans to divide among generational lines and then simply dismiss it as "socialist propoganda" is a neat trick. BTW, a socialist is a person who recognizes that we are social beings. The health and welfare of the individual is directly related to, and entirely inseparable, from the health and welfare of the society to which it belongs. In other words you live in a society, so act like it!
02:56 PM on 06/23/2011
Holy crap, that is really your take away?

BTW, a person who is a socialist has nothing to do with societal views, it has to do with the seizing of property from private hands and putting it into the hands of the community at large.

I also disagree with the fact that the health and welfare of an individual is directly related to the society they are in, there are a ton of examples contrary to your theory.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PrometheanSalvation
Bringing fire to cleanse the land.
09:58 AM on 06/23/2011
Unless the boomers bottle the beast they unleashed, it will devour their children.

When the empire crumbles, no place will be safe for the hoarders.

People are sensing the coming onslaught, and for the past few years have been leaving the country in record numbers.

It's ancient Rome all over again.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Hotspot
Righties, you can't eat or drink money.
09:29 AM on 06/23/2011
from a post down thread . . .

" those who actually support the government financially­. we should have a new amendment. voting rights require actually paying taxes"

Here you go . . . fellow Americans . . . VOTER RIGHTS are next . . . if the GOP ever obtains a majority again, the above statement has repeated over and over again by the CONservatives and is next on their check list. Notice how the teaCONS love the Constitution until it get in their way of supporting the rich.
photo
humanbeing-rick
Born in the USA 1947
08:46 AM on 06/23/2011
Excellent article! Thank you for this refreshing bit of wisdom and intelligence! So true!
It is a cruel political ploy the right-wingers are using, in casting disinformation and trying to divide our generations. The right-wingers seek to destroy social safety nets, business regulations, and aid to the poor - as they always have done. They are just getting trickier. Beware of their tricks younger generations!
"young people will take the worst of these cuts, since their impact increases over time"
And it will be too late to change it back then, after the virtuous elders are gone.
photo
unionave
Old Codger
08:44 AM on 06/23/2011
Somehow many Americans have gotten in to the mindset of Grandma and the next generations are to be used for us to feed today's corporations . That is exactly what all these cuts in social programs amount to . Congress paved the road for all of these conditions to happen and will not undo what has been done .

Congress has became very wealthy while shifting the greater part of the American wealth to the wealthy and no longer represent the people . It's more of a hatred of the people .

Exporting America's means to earn a living can not be viewed as anything else but hatred . Making laws to allow corporate gouging of the American people can only be viewed as hatred of the American people . Creating millions of unemployed Americans without proper health care is something done only to an enemy .

And as election day approaches these same members of Congress will ask us to vote for them while blaming someone else for what Congress did .
photo
Star2000dancer
Pay it forward, the movie..
05:26 PM on 06/23/2011
Fanned comment. How can so few aware?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:48 AM on 06/23/2011
i assume leaving the next generation with a debt too large to pay for is not an assault on them. we currently have about 50% of the people supporting the other 50%. how is that fair. and add in the illegals who use free schooling and ER visits which are funded by the paying 50% and you have a huge assault on the working stiffs. by that i mean those who actually support the government financially. we should have a new amendmant. voting rights require actually paying taxes
08:24 AM on 06/23/2011
By those standards, would I be able to stop funding the retirees who have long outlived what they paid into social security and medicare? When those benefits are destroyed before I can use them, can I sue the estates of the people who received my support to get my money back? The illegal immigrants are an easy target, but the big fat entitlements that eat up my taxes are going to old people, people with 'disabilities' based on poor lifestyle choices, people who have a much higher standard of living than I do but were just born at the right time.

It's too late for me, but middle-aged Americans need to prepare themselves for a much-deserved backlash from young people who see how their elders have spent and squandered, leaving the treasury and environment depleted.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
babyspittle
Fox Fake News kills brain cells
10:41 AM on 06/25/2011
The middle class often PAYS A HIGHER PERCENTAGE of their income than the richest, who pay typically 17% as they make most of income through investments, not wages.