PDA

View Full Version : What Handouts To Cut by Walter E. Williams




bobbyw24
08-11-2010, 05:23 AM
Because of failure to heed the limitations of the U.S. Constitution, which has produced runaway federal spending, our nation sits on the precipice of disaster. Former Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming and Erskine Bowles, White House chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, co-chairmen of President Obama's debt and deficit commission, in a Washington Post article "Obama's Debt Commission Warns of Fiscal 'Cancer'" (July 12, 2010) said that "(A)t present, federal revenue is fully consumed by three programs: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The rest of the federal government, including fighting two wars, homeland security, education, art, culture, you name it, veterans -- the whole rest of the discretionary budget is being financed by China and other countries."

The commission added the current budget trend is a disaster "that will destroy the country from within" unless checked by tough action in Washington. The tough action required is spending cuts in programs, including the so-called nondiscretionary, eating most of the federal revenues.

According to the Census, around 80 percent of Americans 65 and older own their own homes compared to 43 percent under 35. Twenty-three million households, or 37 percent of all homeowners, own their homes free and clear, and most of these are seniors aged 65 and older. According to the Federal Reserve Board's 2007 "Survey of Consumer Finances," the median net worth of people 65 and over is $232,000, those under 35 years have a net worth of $12,000 and for those 35-44, it's $87,000.

For good reason, older people have accumulated more wealth than younger people; the primary reason is that they've had more time to do it. There is no logical case that can be made for using the tax system to force Americans with less wealth to subsidize those with more wealth. But it's not clear who is subsidizing whom. Consider an elderly widow, say 70 years old, with a modest retirement income of $18,000 living in a $300,000 house that's fully paid for. She might receive local property tax forgiveness, medical and prescription drug subsidies and other federal, state and local subsidies based upon her age and income.


More

http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2010/08/11/what_handouts_to_cut

Slutter McGee
08-11-2010, 08:31 AM
I actually hadn't thought about it quite like that. Handouts to the elderly are a protection of inheritance.

Good article.

Slutter McGee

Todd
08-11-2010, 09:17 AM
Why is it so many smart people like Williams avoid defense and Foreign aid when seriously talking small government?

djdellisanti4
08-11-2010, 09:45 AM
Why is it so many smart people like Williams avoid defense and Foreign aid when seriously talking small government?

I'm pretty sure Williams has always been a critic of the war, even though he may not always talk about it.

Zippyjuan
08-11-2010, 11:59 AM
So screw grannie and force her to sell the house she has lived in and feels comfortable in- and move where? In with her children? Will you take in your parents when they are retired? Warehoused into an old folks home? A "modest income of $18,000 a year" doesn't go very far when you have to pay $700 a month or so for your own health insurance. That is nearly half you money. Before taxes.

Some other numbers: http://www.fool.com/personal-finance/retirement/2007/04/19/where-all-the-retirees-are-above-average.aspx

Unfortunately, it appears that the answer is: Worse than you think. Only 21% of respondents to the survey (and only one-quarter of baby boomers) believe they are "very prepared" for retirement. Compare this to the 38% who expect their retirement to be "financially difficult." That's more than one-third!

Even scarier: Six percent of respondents aren't saving anything for retirement at all. Thirty-four percent say they're saving, "but not seriously." And perhaps the most frightening number in the study: 29% of baby boomers -- whose retirement en masse is imminent -- say they aren't saving seriously for their post-employment years at all


What to do?
We all know the retirement picture is changing. The days of lifetime pensions are ending, and Social Security's demise may not be far behind. Even if it does survive, it will almost certainly not be enough to rely on as a single source of income. If you want financial stability in your twilight years, it's up to you to get there.

So what does it take? Some quick numbers: Let's say you're retiring in 30 years, and you want to live off the equivalent of $50,000 a year in today's dollars. By then, that $50,000 will need to be $150,000 thanks to inflation, and if that amount is 4% of your savings (the guideline espoused by the Fool's Rule Your Retirement service), your total retirement kitty will have to total $3.75 million.

Needless to say, "saving for retirement, but not seriously" is not the way to amass $3.75 million.

Krugerrand
08-11-2010, 12:06 PM
So screw grannie and force her to sell the house she has lived in and feels comfortable in- and move where? In with her children? Will you take in your parents when they are retired? Warehoused into an old folks home? A "modest income of $18,000 a year" doesn't go very far when you have to pay $700 a month or so for your own health insurance. That is nearly half you money. Before taxes.

Some other numbers: http://www.fool.com/personal-finance/retirement/2007/04/19/where-all-the-retirees-are-above-average.aspx

You missed this:

When subsidies are provided for this lady, whom are we truly benefiting? It's not the lady but her heirs. Conceivably, the lady could make a deal with a financial institution to pay her property taxes, allow her to live in the house for the rest of her life and give her a lump sum cash settlement so that she can live without the handouts. Upon her death, the house becomes the property of the financial institution, not her heirs. Giving the widow handouts allows her to bequeath to her heirs her assets, a $300,000 house. If her children want to inherit the house, they, rather than taxpayers, ought to take care of their mother.

It's basically a reverse mortgage.

Slutter McGee
08-11-2010, 12:56 PM
So screw grannie and force her to sell the house she has lived in and feels comfortable in- and move where? In with her children? Will you take in your parents when they are retired? Warehoused into an old folks home? A "modest income of $18,000 a year" doesn't go very far when you have to pay $700 a month or so for your own health insurance. That is nearly half you money. Before taxes.

Some other numbers: http://www.fool.com/personal-finance/retirement/2007/04/19/where-all-the-retirees-are-above-average.aspx

Somebody didn't actually read the whole article. Or didn't comprehend it.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

oyarde
08-11-2010, 01:12 PM
Why is it so many smart people like Williams avoid defense and Foreign aid when seriously talking small government?

We can get to that after Medicare.

Kregisen
08-11-2010, 02:39 PM
I love Walter E. Williams....his articles on minimum wage and free trade are superb.