Thursday, July 10, 2008

McCain Adviser: Raise Retirement Age To 70

It's coming.

According to Phil Gramm, senior economic adviser to John McCain, the retirement age will have to be raised.

Gramm told the Washington Times that a bipartisan deal might include raising the retirement age to 70 over 30 years, indexing the benefits of wealthier retirees to inflation rather than the more generous wage rate, and creating a private account program for younger workers.

This means that if you are 40 and under, you will be working as much as 5 years longer than your parents did.


  1. After McCain’s amnesty goes through, you will have to work till 80 to help pay for the welfare to be given to the new 20-40 million legalized illegals and their 30-60 million relatives coming after via chain migration.

  2. "Work 'em 'til they @#%ing DROP!" THAT'S how to fix the economy!!!!"

  3. 70? damn. If thats the way it has to be, then it must be. Right?

  4. He will be as great a leader as our 'Decider' - let us huddle together in prayer to thank our God we have such people willing to represent our hopes and dreams. We should jail those who dissent and imprison those who question the freedom we are fighting for today in the Middle east!!

  5. McCain would be worst for leader than that Village idiot we have now.

  6. Let's face it. The feds are looting SS anyway. There won't be anything left shortly. Whatever is will be greatly depreciated. Their goal is a ponzi scheme. All take-no payout. Really kind of simple

  7. If the money in the SS fund had been left untouched there would be plenty for all.

    The baby boomers like me who have worked since they were 16 will NEVER see a dime of that money.


  9. McSame will run this country like Mrs. Gramm ran Enron.

  10. REVOLUTION is the Solution!!!
    But keep sending Israel BILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS you !^##Y@# IDIOTS!!!

  11. dam i was ready and happy that i had 1 year left shit 5 more ill be dead.

  12. Phil Gramm? Phil Gramm? Who is Phil Gramm?

    Oh yeah, that worthless crook. Him and his worthless crooked wife an insider at Enron who defrauded the shareholders and walked.

    Phil Gramm who created the "Enron Loophole' , and who broke down the firewalls between securities and banks, which has lead to the current excesses.

    Phil Gramm lately of Solomon Bros.

    More of that "let them eat Cake.'

    Antoinette didn't actually say it. But Phil Gramm did.

    Don't you get tired sometime of this constant parade of crooks and thieves?

  13. When Social Security was started the retirement age was within a year or so of life expectancy. So yes, if you want to fund it the way it is now (or anything close) you have to increase the retirement age. Unless you think health care system will get worse and life expectancy goes down.

    It also makes sense to reduce the payouts to those that are rich (it is either than or increase the already huge taxes on everyones first $100,000 or so of earnings).

  14. @curious cat

    A lifetime of payments for one year of benefits? When I'm in a wheelchair, carrying around oxygen.

    You are outta your @#%ing mind!

  15. Does that include all government employees and elected officials as well? You can solve alot of our problems by doing away with government unions, reducing their salaries and benefits and making them all wait until they are 70 years old to collect their retirement benefits. I think that's very fair. If they want to quit, I'm sure there are lots of people that are available now and there will be more in the future who would be willing to take those government jobs. Prison guards in CA for example earn up to $100,000 per year. CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING NOW TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM!!!!!

  16. Ah yes,
    In the infamous words of you
    know who "here we go again".
    There are so many republican talking points in the comments that they need to be talked.
    1. illegal immigration doesn't have much if anything to do with Social securities situation.

    2. Whether or not they repair Social security, it will be there, but with lower payouts, according to Social Security themselves.

    3. The rich have always received Social security, they just haven't paid into it after they reached a certain amount (over $100000 now).

    4. The results of we are seeing are years of strategy in the republican party. They and yes the democrats too "borrow" from Social security to make themselves look good at the time (balanced budgets) over the years. The common theme as it is today and with at least the last 3 republican administrations is "buy now and force cuts in EVERYTHING except military spending to pay later." In the mean time their friends and allies who hold our debt get incredibly and guaranteedly (sic) rich even further and "we" the middle class get the shaft.

    Although it hasn't been commented on, the privatized accounts that the republicans also want and the results you could see abound today. If I had placed $5000 in an account 2 years ago with the present stock market it would be worth what $500 or $1000 tops now.I would at worst case scenario rather have reduced Social security payments than negative growth and there isn't ANYONE who can say the stock market will always grow. Just look at the disclaimers EVERY fund puts out with their packet of info stating those EXACT words.

  17. Not everyone at 70 is running around being part of 'the new 60'. In fact I'd point out many at 70 are in assisted care of some kind and or dealing with serious health issues. Since when did 'retirement' mean waiting the last couple years to die. But that's hardly new news on the right's belief that we should all work until we're ready to die.