Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (90587)	5/24/2012 8:26:40 PM
From: bart13	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219890

What you said was: The net result is that presently, younger people will have to pay for a huge generation of old baby boomers, who never did anything for them. What I said was: Only if you place zero value on parenting and the costs of raising children, etc., which last time I checked was over $200k from birth to 18 years old. And that does not include higher education costs. ... and it remains 100% true. Your other points about ratios and sustainability are true, and they were true in the early 80s too - and taxes rose to kick the can down the road. We very likely won't be as lucky this time, and every generation (I'm almost a geezer) will be screwed - and many many will also likely lose their lives etc. before the pendulum starts to swing the other way. It must play out, whether I like it or not. Even Greenspan knew what's ahead: "We can guarantee cash benefits as far out and at whatever size you like, but we cannot guarantee their purchasing power." -- Alan Greenspan, appearing before the Senate Banking Committee on February 15, 2005, in response to Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island on the topic of funding Social Security.