Life Expectancy and the "entitlements"

[Honeycombe8]

That billionaire who said we need to get accustomed to getting less Social Security and other entitlements; this getting entitlements for 30 or 40 years after working for 25 is over and we are not to expect it.

Such a load of crap. I would like to see more and more Dems on TV calling this statement out for the lie that it is.

I looked up life expectancy per the U. S. Census. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces/life_expectancy.html

The life expectancy for a female born in 1960 is 73. The life expectancy for a male born in 1960 is 66.

So the AVERAGE WOMAN born in 1960 can expect to get Social Security benefits for 11 years, AT MOST, for partial benefits, and only 6 years in order to get full benefits. For men, it's 4 years for partial benefits....and unfortunately, he'd die before receiving the age of full benefits (67).

The AVERAGE WOMAN born in 1960 can expect to get Medicare assistance for 8 years. The AVERAGE MAN born in 1960 can expect to get 1 or 2 years of Medicare assistance.

There are many people who live far past the life expectancy rates, and many who die earlier, of course. And the later you were born, I'm assuming the longer your life expectancy is.

But this crap about getting benefits for 30 or 40 years after working for 25 years has got to stop. It is an insult to the average working American.

Big Ed is doing a good job of calling thiat billionaire out, but I'd like to see more of our representatives talk about this on those Sunday morning shows.

[still_one]

1. To that billionaire, I am entitled to it because I paid into it you piece of scum, and as you

pointed out those who need it the most their life expectancies are even shorter than most because they usually have lower incomes, and not adequate healthcare.

It is time to take back our country

[BlueMan Votes]

2. I'm definitely getting my money's worth out of it.

I became permanently disabled 16 years ago when i was 35. after 20 years in the workforce. (i changed my birth certificate to get my first job at mcdonalds).

[SunSeeker]

3. My mom recently died at 73 after being on SS for all of 5 years.

A life of poverty, stress and poor healthcare did her in. She started collecting SS at 67. She worked like a dog until then, starting when she was 14. She got to enjoy her miserly little retirement for all of 5 years. Really sad...and infuriating.

[Igel]

5. You're looking at the wrong numbers.

You can't look at life expectancy at birth. That includes a lot of things.

You should look at expectation of life for a given age in a given year.

Compare these two websites:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_21.pdf (p. 2) is a tolerable example of expectation of life, broken down by race and sex and at 5-year intervals.

http://demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html Life expectancy at birth.

So look at your own numbers. A woman born in 1960 had a life expectancy of 73, so you reason that means if you retire at age 65 you have on average 8 years of benefits.

But if you were 45 in 2006 (instead of 46) you were expected to live another 35 years on average, i.e., to age 80. The numbers don't change much between years, so the difference between 45 and 46 isn't worth more than a minor quibble.

That 7 years is the effect of filtering out all the stuff that kills young people. It used to be mostly inflicted by nature--disease and war, for example. Now it's mostly self-inflicted: toxin-related cancers, drug overdoses, gun violence, even war (now that we have a volunteer army), stress and obesity. Mostly they die before they pay in very much, and they almost never draw from Social Security.

Life expectancy at birth is a nice overall indicator of public health because it does include all the crap that isn't old-age related. But for things like Social Security, you really need to look at expectation of life.

[Honeycombe8]

7. Big Ed said the avg person on SS receives benefits for 16 yrs.

Most people start getting SS at age 62, according to Ezra Klein. That makes 78 the avg age of death (male and female combined...presumably men dying earlier, women dying later).

I do not believe that someone 45 yrs old in 2006 would be expected to live to 80, women to 82. Many do, but many do not.

I see your point. The LE at birth has early deaths factored into it. But then so does the actuarial table you refer to...car accidents, slip and falls, etc.

It's all very confusing. But thanks for the clarification. The point is still valid, just more years to get benefits, right?

[Recursion]

6. Life expectancy at birth has nothing to do with how long retirees are kicking around

Increased life expectancy has to do with decreased infant mortality: 65 year olds had 15-20 years to go in 1932, and still have about that much today.

Increased life expectancy actually helps social security, because a greater proportion of babies survive to become workers.

[JaneyVee]

8. Fun to see "pro-life" RWNJs talking about life expectancy. To hell with the old & poor!