HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Really hate this "if...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:48 AM

Really hate this "if you work at a diner" line on SS

Sherrod Brown (on Morning Joe), hold your tongue. My employers have no intention of keeping me around until I'm 70, and I'd sooner slit my wrists than work for another 17 years.

And, anyways, many of these "desk jobs" involve a lot of travel. Last week, I was at a conference out West where I was on my feet for three days. This week, I'm in the South. Not to mention the mental stress of these head game service jobs with their 24/7 connectivity, corporate fun and games and capricious clients, who are getting dumped on by their own bosses and pass the cruelty and the personal stress on to you.

No, I don't want to do this forever, I wouldn't be allowed to anyway, and I think I have company.

69 replies, 6612 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 69 replies Author Time Post
Reply Really hate this "if you work at a diner" line on SS (Original post)
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 OP
ewagner Dec 2012 #1
liberal N proud Dec 2012 #2
LisaLynne Dec 2012 #3
liberal N proud Dec 2012 #11
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #63
bigbrother05 Dec 2012 #28
dixiegrrrrl Dec 2012 #41
99Forever Dec 2012 #4
liberal N proud Dec 2012 #9
99Forever Dec 2012 #15
Dustlawyer Dec 2012 #21
99Forever Dec 2012 #23
CanonRay Dec 2012 #8
liberal N proud Dec 2012 #13
antigop Dec 2012 #16
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #24
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #27
TahitiNut Dec 2012 #34
dotymed Dec 2012 #5
marble falls Dec 2012 #6
The Wizard Dec 2012 #7
ProSense Dec 2012 #43
Orrex Dec 2012 #10
Overseas Dec 2012 #69
CTyankee Dec 2012 #12
CTyankee Dec 2012 #14
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #18
CTyankee Dec 2012 #19
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #22
CTyankee Dec 2012 #26
_ed_ Dec 2012 #36
CTyankee Dec 2012 #38
AverageJoe90 Dec 2012 #56
CTyankee Dec 2012 #57
LibertyLover Dec 2012 #17
SheilaT Dec 2012 #53
LibertyLover Dec 2012 #59
SheilaT Dec 2012 #65
LibertyLover Dec 2012 #66
union_maid Dec 2012 #20
CTyankee Dec 2012 #39
Nay Dec 2012 #25
peacebird Dec 2012 #29
Overseas Dec 2012 #33
2naSalit Dec 2012 #58
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #30
ProSense Dec 2012 #45
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #46
ProSense Dec 2012 #49
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #51
Overseas Dec 2012 #31
mountain grammy Dec 2012 #32
JPZenger Dec 2012 #35
Orrex Dec 2012 #37
Overseas Dec 2012 #68
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #47
2naSalit Dec 2012 #60
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #62
RebelOne Dec 2012 #40
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #42
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #48
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #55
SoCalDem Dec 2012 #44
scratcho Dec 2012 #50
Recursion Dec 2012 #52
scratcho Dec 2012 #54
2naSalit Dec 2012 #61
scratcho Dec 2012 #67
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #64

Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:53 AM

1. 24/7 Connectivity

It's said to increase your "productivity" or maybe make the company more "competitive" but when you're getting emails from your boss asking you to "check this out" (with an attachment or link) at 11:30 pm it's a little much....

Technology is becoming our master...not our servant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:55 AM

2. Don't know what I will do between 59 and 70

If they raise the eligibility age to 70, I don't know how I will survive until then. I am already concerned about making it to 67!

Companies like to start getting rid of employees around 59 offering buyouts and other tools to get them out the door before they are 60, meanwhile the eligibility age for retirement keeps going up.

Being 60 to 69 is going to be really difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:00 AM

3. You know, that's a really good point.

Where I work, they just went through a buy-out and they're supposed to do it again, but many people just can't take it due to insurance. Maybe the companies should rethink their CEO's stances on raising the Medicare age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:56 AM

11. The CEO's could give a $#!% about those that they cut

It's all about what they will get and what they return to the "STREET"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:19 PM

63. The hard nosed strong CEO, able to make the hard calls. I call them sociopaths. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:40 AM

28. We should align Medicare with SS

Allowing people to buy into Medicare starting at 62 would sync the two systems and support a manageable move to early retirement. This would help to bring Medicare costs down and save individuals on their health costs.

With predictable med insurance costs, many more folks could consider and afford to retire before 65/66/67. It would also make more jobs available, a win all the way around.

Businesses could even make out, how much cheaper would it be for them to transition to a supplemental policy from a full coverage package.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigbrother05 (Reply #28)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:57 PM

41. Except...

it is the insurance companies driving the age hikes..they want more people to be forced to buy private insurance.
altho insur. companies really should be supporting age 62 early Soc Sec. retirement so that people can AFFORD to buy their insurance until whatever age Medicare kicks in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:06 AM

4. I'm 59...

.. and doubt I'll see 60. For any that haven't been here yet, if you're over 55 and looking for work, good luck. You are gonna need it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:54 AM

9. I will be 54 in March and I am looking

There is a real good possibility that my position will be eliminated in the next couple of months and I am looking. I am afraid that 54 will be too old for most.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:06 AM

15. I truly hope you...

... have good fortune in your search. It's an extremely cold world out here, one I've tired of being a part of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:27 AM

21. You should not have to depend on it, but very often, when you need it most, you catch a break!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:29 AM

23. I'm sorry, but..

.. I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:53 AM

8. Companies won't offer enough buyout at 59

to tide you over until 67 if they raise the retirement, so they'll just outsource your job, instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CanonRay (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:57 AM

13. I know a lot of people who were bought out at 59 and had find other work to survive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CanonRay (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:11 AM

16. +1. Absolutely. I've seen it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:31 AM

24. 59?

Lucky. I don't know anyone in my line of work over 50. We need to lower the age not raise it. It's a death sentence for so many.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:35 AM

27. If you get a buy-out, you are lucky.

Executives may be able to work until they are 70, but most of the rest of us, whether working at a desk or in a restaurant on our feet all days, are either disabled, mentally exhausted or fired long before that.

Raising the retirement age is not an alternative.

I have seen what happens to people who lose their jobs when they are in their late 50s. It's horrible. They are utterly broke by the time they reach 62.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:24 AM

34. Exactly. And there's not a damned thing you can do about it.

Anyone who thinks they have some "special situation" with an employer so they'll enjoy some mythical gold watch retirement ceremony has been living a fiction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:19 AM

5. The really insane thing about these austerity measures

is that SS has absolutely nothing to do with the deficit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021946367

WTF is this all about and where is "2nd term Obama?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:35 AM

6. I'mm 62 and work harder than ever at three part time jobs that pay me what I was earning ....

thirty years ago. I will be taking my SS on my birthday and cutting back to one part time job. 75? If I had to wait, who'd be giving me a job when no one will give a decent job now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:50 AM

7. When people retire it creates jobs

Tax cuts for the wealthy elites just end up in Cayman Islands accounts, never to circulate into the economy. This is Reagan's real legacy. It's all in Ishmael Reed's books, The Terrible Twos and The Terrible Threes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wizard (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:14 PM

43. Yup! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:55 AM

10. All you old timers need to suck it up and work even harder into your 70s.

Not me, though. I'm sure that everything will be sorted out in favor of the workers by the time I hit the then-current SS retirement age of 87, right?

Right?



Um... Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:31 AM

69. Uh huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:57 AM

12. Yep, I didn't get much beyond 65 and then only barely. For one thing, I was being paid the most

I had ever earned in my career because of my longevity and experience. But at a certain point, that is detrimental to the bottom line. You simply cost too much. Then one day they make you start to think you can't tie your own shoes, when all those years you were plugging away and having successes. It all started for me at age 63. All the other women over the age of 60 were feeling it too. By one year after I had left, no woman on staff over the age of 60 was still there...funny how that happens...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:05 AM

14. I also noticed that Joe wasn't on set for that interview. Mika tried to carry water for him, tho,

making funny looks of horror at Sherrod as he was explaining the progressive view and talking about ways to improve Medicare's delivery of service. She seemed not to "get it." I almost expected her to blurt out "What do you mean we don't have to cut benefits?" but she didn't quite get that awful. Bad enough that she was stuck on raising the eligibility age. Sherrod pointed out the hypocrisy of people in their position telling workers they have to suck it up and wait until age 67 for their Medicare benefits to kick in.

Joe of course is such a snivelling coward he couldn't go up against Sherrod. I caught a glance at his wonderful wife, Connie Schultz, in the green room shot of them before he came on set. At least, Mika mentioned her as Sherrod was leaving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:16 AM

18. Yep. Mika was her typically useless self

"We can't raise the Medicare age!?!?!?"

These people are spoon-fed their lines and they deal in cliches. And they wear down a guy like Sen. Brown, who probably threw that diner line out to prove he could see the point of being miserly at some level, even if he really doesn't believe it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:23 AM

19. Oh, I think Sherrod is seriously against raising the eligibility age for Medicare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:27 AM

22. He is and he made that clear

Then he went wobbly on SS. But I think he was pretending. The problem with a guy like Brown pretending is it makes it easier for a real squishy D to cave.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:32 AM

26. I'll have to check the video of that segment. I got a different sense from what he was saying.

Among the ways we could fix SS is lifting the cap, for instance. He could have meant that, but didn't want to float it at this time. I know that has to be in their arsenal of ideas on the Left...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:46 AM

36. She's just your typical M$NBC corporate whore

Daughter of power and privilege who has never succeeded on her own who now wants to slash entitlements for the poor and elderly. She's the embodiment of a corporate shill.

M$NBC is corporate propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to _ed_ (Reply #36)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:13 PM

38. I wonder if she realizes how badly this plays in Peoria...

they are always talking about how they go out and talk to the people and the people are really, really, really concerned about the deficit.

Come talk to me, Mika. I'll give you an earful about your deficit...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:14 PM

56. Hopefully, at least the other Brzezinski sister gets it, though......=)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #56)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:20 PM

57. Yep. Our very own...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:13 AM

17. I'm screwed if this goes through

Were I work we have mandatory retirement at age 62. Our employees' association is trying to get management to raise it to 65 with a review after three years to raising it to 67, but so far management has resisted. This resistance is based mostly on the pension schemes in place (yes, I have a real pension plan), one being based on receiving a percentage of the average of your last three years' gross salary and the other based on an average of your last three years' net salary. I am under what we call the old plan, meaning my pension is determined on my gross income average. There are a fair number of staff left who fall under that category and management is concerned about pension costs stemming from raising the mandatory retirement age to 65 or 67. And trying to find a job at age 62 is dicey at best in this economy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LibertyLover (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:28 PM

53. A mandatory retirement at age 62?

I'm under the impression that other than for airline pilots, a mandatory retirement age is no longer allowed. A decade or so ago at least some Universities had a mandatory retirement age of 70 for the professors, and I believe that was successfully fought. Perhaps I am totally misinformed on this topic.

Work can more easily be found over age 60 than most people realize. Unfortunately, it probably won't be a career or professional position. It will be entry-level clerical or support staff, or retail. Not wonderful options, to say the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:54 PM

59. I don't work for a US company nor do we follow US rules

I work for a non-governmental organization, organized under Articles of Agreement among its member countries, including the US. We are not incorporated in any state or country. Our headquarters are in the US, but being employed as US citizen is somewhat difficult. I'm lucky that my job, legal assistant, was at the time of my employment 18 years ago, pretty much a US specialty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LibertyLover (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:09 AM

65. Do you work in the U.S.?

I know almost nothing about employment law, but I would hope that U.S. laws could be invoked here.

Would contacting the NLRB be worthwhile?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #65)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:53 AM

66. Yes, I work in Washington, DC

and no, US laws on employment cannot be invoked. There are several lawsuits in federal court by former employees that have affirmed that. It's a bit tricky to try and explain. The organization I work for is an international organization established under Articles of Agreement among its member countries. We are subject to some US laws - for example our buildings in DC must meet local building codes - but not US employment laws. Our employees' association is using US laws, like the fact that the eligibility age for SS it probably going to rise to 67, to try and get some changes on employment policy, like the mandatory retirement at 62, through the Board of Directors. I'm hoping they are successful. Our president is an American citizen, naturalized, but an American citizen, so he is somewhat sympathetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:24 AM

20. I'm 63 and only able to work because of the job I have

It's not just that it's a desk job. It's that it's at a non for profit. Until 10 years ago I worked for private companies. The luckiest day of my life was when the last one folded its tent and put me out of work. I ended up here. There is simply no way I could provide the kind of reliability that private industy insists upon now. My husband has disabilities, I have had health issues, too, at times. All require visits to specialists with no evening or weekend hours. With this job I get tons of paid time off and would not have to worry about my job if I had to take FMLA time. Some days it's starting to seem harder to work, even now. But then I remember how screwed I'd be anywhere else and it perks me right up. So yes, people have to be able to retire because after a certain age, and it varies by individual circumstances, there is no longer a place for them in the workforce.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to union_maid (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:16 PM

39. I have always worked for nonprofits, but they can be as bad as for profits in terms of getting

rid of older people. They do like people who are on Medicare and at a lower rate of pay because they actually save money on them. That is why I have seen so many retirees from the for profit area get those jobs in the nonprofits...also younger workers whose spouses carry the medical coverage and who want to work for causes...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:32 AM

25. I fully agree about the desk jobs. God knows that many very physical jobs ruin people's

bodies by the time they are in their 50's (carpenter, roofer, etc.) but jobs that are sedentary have their own dangers -- I've lost count of the number of people I know who have serious problems with their hands, wrists, and arms and lower backs from typing or other repetitive movements (on assembly lines, for example) while sitting down. And now we have medical studies documenting the health problems simply from sitting all the time and not moving around much all day. I know that when I went from a moderately active job (walking the floor at a dept store) to a sedentary one in an office, I gained 20 lbs in the blink of an eye. Took years to get it back off, too, and I got diabetes to boot.

As BG noted, many of the desk jobs also require that you be connected 24/7, and also had ongoing mental stress associated with them. I worked for a large corporation and retired after 15 years at age 61; the difference in my employer's attitude toward us, the downsizing, the loading of work onto remaining employees, the insistence on requiring more and more education while downsizing the pay, well, over just those 15 years the difference was totally amazing and disgusting. I had been proud and happy to work where I worked until about the last 5 years. It began to be a nightmare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:45 AM

29. Many companies force people out at 65 - then what? Become a greeter at walmart?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peacebird (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:08 AM

33. Yes, that's the plan. We are pretending millions have not faced age discrimination

when their white collar jobs were off shored and they were suddenly unemployed at 47.

Or when the white collar computer job they retrained for when their first job was outsourced was also outsourced because Business is Business. Profit Rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Overseas (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:51 PM

58. And then there are those of us

who decided to go back to school, or just go to school after years of dead-end jobs, and came out in our forties... and to have the wonderful shift of life after 9/11 which happened weeks after I graduated... never even got the first job for which they'd studied and invested years of effort. All the student loan debt with no way to pay for it when there weren't any jobs that paid anything. I had a nice job lined up and was in the negotiation stage when 9/11 happened and the job dissipated into thin air and all the jobs I could have had prior to that which paid a living wage suddenly paid 40-60% less overnight. So I sold everything and moved to a tourist town so that I could at least keep a shabby roof over my head and not live in a tent. But then I got hurt last summer and the worker's comp is now trying to just shuffle me off to oblivion without a proper diagnosis and even the attorneys are trying to send me over a cliff. SS has already told me to go back to my nonexistent cashier job that was all of 20 hrs a week and was a summer only job.

That's the way it goes, I still have problems with my back and can hardly engage in my normal activities but that doesn't matter, the entire concern is whether or not they are going to give me even the first dime of lost wages and nobody gives a shit if I ever get any health care so I can go back to any job. I'm in my mid fifties, if something doesn't change soon, I guess it'll be a one way trip into the woods, someone will find me next spring. I've already been homeless twice and I'm not interested in doing that again, I don't do vulnerability well.

So beware, if you're over 40, it isn't likely to be "happening" for you with regard to actually being able to support even a meager lifestyle. Doesn't matter what kind of talent, experience or education you may have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:59 AM

30. The entire concept of what a job is in this country needs to be rethought than this

haphazard crap we have today, asshole arrogant CEOs and elites making the calls, and many locked out of work through no fault of their own.

The chief goal of capitalism is to minimize cost, maximize profits, climb over the next guy, hoard $$$$$ and screw anyone as best you can. It's a fucked up obsolete egregious system whose time has passed.

It's an insane model. Grow, grow, grow in a finite space, make $$$$$ number one priority over people, maximize worker productivity, outsource to the cheapest labor, park your money offshore, self first and country last ... lie, cheat and often produce crappy products and services. I can't believe any can possibly wonder why the economy in this country and the labor force is so fucked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #30)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:29 PM

45. Exactly!

Think about some of the assholes in Congress. There are some who work and service their constituents, but many of them spend their time in self-serving endeavors.

It always baffles me when people hold up the athlete who never missed a game or members of Congress who vote on every bill or a CEO who works 80 hrs a week as models of work ethic.

Really? The season is a few months. Congress? See Tom DeLay and John Boehner.

CEOs? Remember Tony Hayward's sailing break?

Talk about the millions of people who works continuously for 47 to 50 years for minimum wage worrying constantly about surviving in retirement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #45)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:48 PM

46. And I really have no idea how change is going to come about. Most people want fairness, not

a free ride, but I have no idea how this is going to come about.

Most change I've seen in my lifetime has come about because of catastrophes, not strategic planning for what's good for everyone.

I just can not imagine the majority of congressmen and like critters enacting legislation that deducts from their wealth and cornered advantage in working over the rest of us. ... especially now with the gov./corp./lobbyist revolving doors.

It's a rigged system we have now, and bordered on in the past.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #46)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:10 PM

49. Change the definition

of the work week: four days or 30 hours. Allow work sharing, there are people whose lifestyles fit such an arrangement. Lower the retirement age. Pay a living wage. Strengthen benefits, including health, sick and vacation policies.

Such changes would not only address inequality and improve the quality of life, but also drastically reduce unemployment.

A Thanksgiving Reminder That America Alone Doesn’t Guarantee Time Off For Vacations Or Holidays
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021867711

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #49)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:22 PM

51. Definitely, and excellent post of yours you referenced!!! The things you mentioned would

work quite well.

I can't lay my finger on the right terminology right now ... but there is a notion that doing more of the same old stuff and factoring in austerity is the solution.

We have a peculiar mindset concerning what money is about in this country. It should be used primarily to facilitate transactions rather than having to barter. ... but there is hoarding ... and the notion is that can only be accomplished by squeezing more out of the rest of the citizenry.

In short, we have a persecutory monetary system that often works to punish people rather that to reward them and to enhance the entire nation. Wealth in this nation is often used as a form of punishment against others.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:04 AM

31. Love Sherrod Brown. He's just trying to wake up the CEO types and Congress people.

Those who are trying to push the Koch brothers point about raising the age because golly gee, we all live longer now and the money will run out.

They are pretending the $2.3 trillion SSI surplus won't cover us all so the ONLY CHOICE is to extend the age.

So even in their ideal world without age discrimination, the people in factory jobs or working in construction or standing in a restaurant all day are going to get more injuries and inhale more toxic fumes and be worn out long before they qualify for SSI.

The Koch Brothers' echo chamber says We All Live Longer because they're using averages. Like you me and Bill Gates are all billionaires.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:06 AM

32. If you want to retire at 62, make sure your spouse is younger

and can keep you in health insurance for 3 years. Another case for marriage equality! Of course, the real answer is single payer, medicare part E for everyone!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:39 AM

35. Let's not forget early retirement offers, and then health insurance disappeared

A number of people were offered early retirement with promises of health insurance coverage. Then the company decided it didn't want to pay their health insurance any more. Or, the company declared bankruptcy and got out of their pension obligations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JPZenger (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:39 AM

37. Obviously that was the fault of the retirees

They should have been saving all along, just in case their employers decided to screw them.

It's inexcusable, and the fact that the conversation even has to happen is disgusting. The companies are deciding retroactively to cut workers' pay--in some cases decades worth--with no more accountability than cutting a larger dividend check to the shareholders.

And you can bet that, in the event of a pension-destroying bankruptcy, the company will still take care of all executives past and present. Can't risk offending The Talent, after all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:29 AM

68. You capture the current climate so well. The cruelty has veered way over into absurd levels of mean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JPZenger (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:53 PM

47. This happened basically with a couple of my companies. We were given incentive stock to

stay with the company. Some got this in lieu of good raises. Then, the company got sold off and the incentive stock went away before one reached the age to claim it when they lost their jobs. Some lost thousands and thousands, their intended life savings. We live in a bullshit country and people are constantly fed propaganda by those on the take of how great it all is ... and I say bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #47)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:00 PM

60. It's kind of like the carrot/stick thing

they dangle that carrot in front of you so you spend your life striving to get there and at some point you discover that the only thing that was really there was the stick because that distant carrot was just a picture not a real carrot. Some of us only ever got the stick and never even got close enough to the alleged carrot to even smell it (if it was an actual carrot that is).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2naSalit (Reply #60)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:18 PM

62. Yep, exactly. And some of us, myself certainly included, fall for it hook, line and

sinker, especially when young and having faith in the CEO and company.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:24 PM

40. I worked until I was 71.

I wanted to continue working, but I was laid off. I wasn't let go because of my age. Three others were laid off that same day including my boss, and they were in the 40s and 50s. The company was downsizing and was eliminating jobs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:08 PM

42. More tension on what is already a very thin thread holding all this together.

 

Age discrimination is already epidemic here and gets worse every year because employer know there is no downside to it. Sooner than we like to believe, something is going to give and all hell is going to break loose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:00 PM

48. I think all hell is eventually going to break lose. I think DHS knows this too is why we see all of

the never ending surveillance cameras and devices all over the place (and so profitable) ... and why so much is being funded for militarization of local police. We are propagandized to believe it's to protect us from "them" over "there." And eventually that is bullshit.

They are IMO building a net to keep the serfs/peasants/masses in line as the system collapses. And it will, none in their right mind can think this egregious system can be kept patched and glued together. Question is when, and I have no idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #48)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 06:20 PM

55. No doubt, see Venezuela.

 

I don't know when either, we've already gone through several scenarios that I believed the American public would never sit still for. Alas, I was wrong about that.

It seems that people have become so dim witted (I blame television) that until something, several somethings, kicks them directly in the ass, they will choose to ignore it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:17 PM

44. 40's & 50's unemployment is usually NOT intentional (on the worker's part)

Some companies go out of their way to "trim-the-fat" and get rid of employees of that age group...especially since they cost more to health-insure.

Why keep a 60 year old "old guy", who is not computer savvy, and whom you pay "top-dollar" to, when you can hire 3 "young/eager/computer-savvy/easy-to-dump-on" people for the same or less cash outlay?

Low wage people are used to job insecurity, so using the "diner" analogy is not valid anyway. It's "our version" of "pulling voters from apartments". and I wish dems would stop using it.

What's being gutted is the worker who has been on the same job for a long time, and who's at the, or close to the top money in their field. These people are usually into their 50's and are starting to cost the company when they search of health insurance companies to get coverage for the workforce.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:18 PM

50. Let's face it.

Capitalism,as it is structured now is failing fast. Why? Well--isn't it because humans are involved? Some of us humans are totally bereft of empathy for our fellows and the fact that 30,000 children a day die of starvation,torture and murder,wars rage on and some areas/countries,don't even have clean water to drink tells me that neither capitalism nor socialism or any other form of human political/social endeaver has worked. The world is not being run correctly and seemingly took the wrong turn when political/social systems that evolved that allowed some to have so much and others to have so little, began the slide into the inequity extant that is presently seen. It's all of human construct(commodities do not jump out of the ground with price tags on them) and can(somehow) be realigned,one(or many) would hope. Humans need a complete re-thinking of how and why the present system/s have degenerated into such a complete clusterfuck, that there seems no amelioration possible. The problem(one of many) is that those with the power/money,have no incentive to make this world a better place by massive change--they're doing just fine,thank you. So,democrats have stood guard, as it were,against the republican,Randian 'I WANT IT ALL,NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES' avaricious thinking for decades. They have,however, lost the heart for fighting for REAL change within the context of the present rightward swing and the realization that to keep their"jobs" they must not be too radically left.

I say--put forward a sensible bill to institute single payer medical coverage for all(as has been proven workable in the Scandinavian countries), a bill to provide free education for any and all,to the highest level achievable by each individual and bring these bills forward for republicans to shoot down. Will not solve the aformentioned worldwide problems,but within the capitalist system under which we operate would be a decent start. Again--those that could reshape --will not. Oh yeah--relations between countries need to stop using weapons and start using diplomacy to settle differances. That would (for the US) release massive amounts of money to begin the programs I mentioned. Of course,unfortunately some need killed--it's all they understand. Too damn bad,but that's how that goes.

By the by--Ayn Rand was on welfare for the last part of her life. Can you say hypocrite?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:22 PM

52. Every day an older worker stays on is a day younger workers can't start yet

We need to be talking about lowering the retirement age in a soft labor market, not raising it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #52)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:33 PM

54. No.

What is needed is that those that choose to take their businesses/factories overseas need tariffs put on their products so high that they would not continue to do so. If we can't make it here--we don't need it. Some heros are needed to bring jobs back here and pay a living wage. To pay someone 18 cents an hour and then to re-sell their products here for HIGH prices is an affront to us all. It's shameless. Costco can pay a living wage --why not others?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scratcho (Reply #54)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:12 PM

61. I agree with both your posts in this conversation...

and, even though I'm pretty new here, I welcome you to DU!!!

You make very solid points, keep going please...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2naSalit (Reply #61)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 01:31 PM

67. Thanks ,brother.


I do tend to go on sometimes. Thanks for the welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #52)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:21 PM

64. Yep, often the way things are done defies all logic. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread