Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

America's retirement age of 65 is "crazy," BlackRock CEO says

With Americans living longer and spending more years in retirement, the nation's changing demographics are "putting the U.S. retirement system under immense strain," according to BlackRock CEO Larry Fink in his annual shareholder letter.

One way to fix it, he suggests, is for Americans to work longer before they head into retirement.

"No one should have to work longer than they want to. But I do think it's a bit crazy that our anchor idea for the right retirement age — 65 years old — originates from the time of the Ottoman Empire," Fink wrote in his 2024 letter, which largely focuses on the retirement crisis facing the U.S. and other nations as their populations age.

Fink, who is worth an estimated $1.2 billion, notes that many 65-year-olds in the early 1950s didn't get a chance to retire because many had already passed away. In other words, he writes, more than half of workers who had paid into Social Security never got a penny because they died before they could claim the benefit.

"Today, these demographics have completely unraveled, and this unraveling is obviously a wonderful thing," Fink added. "We should want more people to live more years. But we can't overlook the massive impact on the country's retirement system."

Fink's suggestions about addressing the nation's retirement crisis come amid a debate about the future of Social Security, which will face a funding shortfall in less than a decade. Some Republican lawmakers have proposed raising the retirement age for claiming Social Security benefits, arguing, like Fink, that because Americans are living longer, they should work longer, too.

But that ignores the reality of aging in the workplace, with the AARP finding in a 2022 survey that the majority of workers over 50 say they face ageism at work. And because of ill health or an unexpected job loss, many older Americans stop working before they planned to. In fact, the median age of retirement in the U.S. is 62 — even lower than the "traditional" retirement age of 65.

Fink is right in saying that the retirement system isn't working for most households, noted retirement expert and New School of Research professor Teresa Ghilarducci told CBS MoneyWatch.

But his assessment that people should work longer misses the mark, she added. Many Americans haven't been able to save for their old age, with about 3 in 10 workers age 59 or older having no money put away for retirement.

"After a 40-year-old experiment of a voluntary, do-it-yourself-based pension system, half of workers have no easy way to save for retirement," she said. "And in rich nations, why isn't age 65 a good target for most workers to stop working for someone else?"

She added, "Working longer won't get us out of this. Most people don't retire when they want to, anyway."

Vested interest?

To be sure, America's retirement gap, or the gulf between what people need to fund their golden years versus what they've actually saved, isn't new, nor is Social Security's looming funding emergency. Yet Fink's comments are noteworthy because of his status as the head of the world's largest asset manager, with more than $10 trillion in assets, including many retirement accounts.

Of course, Fink has a vested interest in Americans boosting their retirement assets, given that his firm collects fees from those accounts. And in his letter, he also promotes a new target-date fund from BlackRock called LifePath Paycheck, which will roll out in April.

"He's steering the conversation toward BlackRock — and a lot of people who talk about Social Security reform on Wall Street want to privatize it in some manner and make money," Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff, an expert on Social Security, told CBS MoneyWatch.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 123April 1, 2024 9:30 PM

To be sure, Fink also praises public policy success stories for addressing retirement savings, such as Australia's system, which began in the early 1990s and requires employers to put a portion of a worker's income into a fund. Today, Australia has the world's 54th largest population but the 4th largest retirement system, he noted.

"As a nation, we should do everything we can to make retirement investing more automatic for workers," he noted.

Fink also writes that his mother, an English teacher, and his father, a shoe-store owner, were never in the top tax bracket. But, he added, they were able to save enough for a comfortable retirement, with funds that could have lasted until they were 100, although they passed away long before reaching that age.

One reason for their secure retirement, he points out, is that as a state employee his mom could participate in California's state pension system, CalPERS. But access to pensions has halved since 1980, with only about 15% of employees having access to defined benefit plans in 2021 versus 30% four decades ago, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Can boomers fix the problem?

Fink, who was born in 1952, said that his generation has an obligation to help fix the nation's retirement problems. The financial insecurity facing younger Americans, such as millennials and Gen Z, are creating generations of disillusioned, anxious workers, he noted.

"They believe my generation — the baby boomers — have focused on their own financial well-being to the detriment of who comes next. And in the case of retirement, they're right," Fink wrote.

He added, "And before my generation fully disappears from positions of corporate and political leadership, we have an obligation to change that."

Boomer (and older) lawmakers and politicians often don't see eye-to-eye on how to fix the retirement crisis. But failing to fix the issue damages not only the retirements of individual Americans, but the country's collective belief in the future of the U.S., Fink noted.

"We risk becoming a country where people keep their money under the mattress and their dreams bottled up in their bedroom," he noted.

by Anonymousreply 1March 27, 2024 6:39 PM

I recently retired as 61, and am glad I did! I'm one of that 15% who have a pension and am not eligible for Social Security. I paid in for 40 years, so I don't feel the least bit guilty. Social Security was never designed to be anyone's sole source of income. Until we start putting pensions and decent retirement plans in place it's only going to get worse for people.

The American workforce is some of the most poorly-treated in the western world. We work longer hours for less pay, fewer benefits, and almost no vacation time. Let's rethink our attitudes toward work, not retirement age.

by Anonymousreply 2March 27, 2024 7:00 PM

I'm not sure what this guy is saying.

Does he think that because Americans are living longer, that the retirement age should be HIGHER than 65?

If so, then he should go fuck himself!

by Anonymousreply 3March 27, 2024 7:26 PM

[quote]One way to fix it, he suggests, is for Americans to work longer before they head into retirement.

A logical way to fix it is to raise the wage limit for social security deductions on wages.

This BlackRock CEO is the real life version of Mr. Potter from It's a Wonderful Life.

by Anonymousreply 4March 27, 2024 7:27 PM

It’s easy for a billionaire to say people should work later than 65. He has unlimited access to healthcare. Most Americans have minimal savings so making them work longer would be a disaster. Plus companies don’t want elderly employees.

by Anonymousreply 5March 27, 2024 7:30 PM

Heaven forbid, people should be allowed to enjoy their "golden years," after working for a lifetime.



by Anonymousreply 6March 27, 2024 7:34 PM

These "raise the retirement age" arguments always assume everyone has a white-collar job.

If you work hard labor for decades, your body simply isn't up to working until 70 or whatever. And no one is going to hire a bricklayer who's 65.

by Anonymousreply 7March 27, 2024 7:59 PM

He wants to raise the retirement age because he feels like it's arbitrary and has remained the same for too long. Try getting someone like him to agree to a 32 hour work week.

by Anonymousreply 8March 27, 2024 8:05 PM

He’s brilliant and all his republican politicos should run on raising the age and run on it hard!

by Anonymousreply 9March 27, 2024 8:07 PM

I think being able to shift policy when you look that old is crazy. If you want to work until you’re dead great, but some people treat it as a means to finance their lives.

by Anonymousreply 10March 27, 2024 8:46 PM

This asshole is mad that people aren't working themselves to death so shitheels like him can make more money.

Fuck THAT noise.

by Anonymousreply 11March 27, 2024 8:47 PM

Billionaire willing to work Americans into death. We're coming for you someday, fink.

by Anonymousreply 12March 27, 2024 8:53 PM

There is a belief among Republicans that anyone who isn’t a millionaire is a freeloader. But God forbid they would sacrifice any of their wealth to help out others less fortunate,

by Anonymousreply 13March 27, 2024 8:59 PM

BlackRock has something like $10 trillion under management. Pension funds are losing money to bad investments, so that's on his team, not the sweat of retirement age people.

by Anonymousreply 14March 27, 2024 9:04 PM

The problem isn't that Americans are retiring too early. It's because the US spending/working class doesn't have anywhere near enough saved for their retirement and we have a boatload of boomers coming onto the benefit rolls now and up until a decade or so, give or take a few years. By the time the boomers are done dessicating SS like locusts nothing will be left for Gen X like me. A lot of Gen Xers don't have enough retirement savings and we were forced to accept 401ks or 403bs based on mutual funds instead of traditional pensions. My 403b has waffled so many times since the housing bubble of the aughts it makes my head spin. The Greatest Generation folks are re-entering the work force, some because they're bored and unhappy with retirement, and others because they need the money. If they can't do it I don't know how my generation will. How the millenials and Z's will handle it, I don't know. What I do know is that Americans should not be forced to work until they drop dead. They should be able to leave the work force when they are tired and have a good 10-12 years left if not 15. Why not let them enjoy what they have worked so hard for. Ageism is real in the work force; many of these employers don't want to pay back loaded benefits whose costs increase as workers age. Also, younger is cheaper for salaries, too.

by Anonymousreply 15March 27, 2024 9:05 PM

He is not a Republican. Inform yourself, he is the greatest promotor of woke ideology. His companies have been forcing their partners (and they are world's biggest hedge fond) to introduce woke and DEI policies in order to cooperate with them.

by Anonymousreply 16March 27, 2024 9:08 PM

I hate people like him.

by Anonymousreply 17March 27, 2024 9:08 PM

I can guarantee you that Mr. Fink has never done a day of physical labor in his life.

Otherwise, he wouldn't say such a god damned stupid thing like saying the retirement age should be raised.

by Anonymousreply 18March 27, 2024 9:26 PM



by Anonymousreply 19March 27, 2024 10:04 PM

What is his job? Sitting in meetings and talking on the phone? Signing documents? Showing up at events? That’s not hard work.

by Anonymousreply 20March 27, 2024 10:14 PM

[quote]Does he think that because Americans are living longer, that the retirement age should be HIGHER than 65?

No, Rose. He's saying they should retire at 25.

by Anonymousreply 21March 27, 2024 10:17 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22March 27, 2024 10:18 PM

Hey stupid girlie at R19. Yes, woke.

by Anonymousreply 23March 27, 2024 10:18 PM

I broke a nail counting my millions. Wah wah. I need my nappy.

by Anonymousreply 24March 27, 2024 10:24 PM

I love how people worth 1.2 billion tell people who aren't they need to work longer.

by Anonymousreply 25March 27, 2024 11:19 PM

[quote]Plus companies don’t want elderly employees.

Ageism is very real and basically impossible to prove. Few HR people are dumb enough to write down "Candidate is too old". They use phrases like "not a good fit with the team"

[quote]If you work hard labor for decades, your body simply isn't up to working until 70 or whatever. And no one is going to hire a bricklayer who's 65.

What REALLY infuriates me, is jobs like a bricklayer are honestly outliers. Many 65+ people would have trouble doing a 8 hour shift as a greeter at Walmart (which they have since gotten rid of).

This guy lives on another planet and doesn't even realize it, but CBS interviews him anyway.

by Anonymousreply 26March 27, 2024 11:25 PM

Fuck this prick!

He phones it in from his fucking yacht in the Caribbean while screaming people need to work themselves into the grave and bitching about telework, healthcare and paid leave.

He can jump into a fucking volcano with a stick of dynamite shoved up his clenched asshole.

by Anonymousreply 27March 27, 2024 11:39 PM

Yep, been there in the 80s:

—“Trickle down” (piss on my shoulder while I’m working…hard labor, not shuffling paper) — “All boats rise” If you have a yacht and off-shore it to avoid taxes —“ Work harder and longer and the dream will be fulfilled.” As I take my well-deserved semi-monthly, company-paid “Refocus and Reflect”-time with my personal trainer in Bali.

by Anonymousreply 28March 28, 2024 1:34 AM

That's fine if you are a fucking CEO of a major corporation. You can choose what year you want to officially retire. He can work to 80 and it will be relatively manageable.

Even most working class or middle class people who want to work past 65 or 67, are usually force retired by their long time employer. And nobody will hire you past 60, regardless of your experience and abilities, and regardless of their policies on age discrimination.

by Anonymousreply 29March 28, 2024 1:41 AM

If you can and want to work past 65 you should. But unless you have a pension and 401k to go along with your social security benefits it’s hard financially to “enjoy” your golden years.

by Anonymousreply 30March 28, 2024 2:21 AM

Most people employed in law enforcement have retirement at 55. Taking that away from them is a great idea and will work out wonderfully for Mr. Fink.

by Anonymousreply 31March 28, 2024 2:22 AM

This rat Fink is 71 but I am sure there are very few senior leaders at BlackRock over 50.

by Anonymousreply 32March 28, 2024 2:26 AM

There needs to be riots and massive strikes. Look at the French. Voting isn't going to do it.

by Anonymousreply 33March 28, 2024 2:35 AM

R16 I’m going to stop you right there, bitch. He’s absolutely a Republican. Many old school business Republicans are socially liberal.

All Republicans have openly floated raising the retirement age. No Democrats have. They absolutely want to work you to death so they can get richer. On top of all of this, AI will take many jobs, leaving fewer and fewer jobs. What are people to do? Go homeless? Republicans don’t give a FUCK about you. Quit voting for them. Heaven help us if they ever get complete power again because they’ll never let go and then the real shit they’ve creamed their panties about doing WILL happen.

by Anonymousreply 34March 28, 2024 2:43 AM

I ee elderly people every time I go to the supermarket. Working as cashiers. On their feet for hours, all of them over 65. Most over 70. They do it because they need the money. Maybe they had some kind of catastrophic illness that wiped their savings out. Maybe their retirement savings didn't last. Who knows. But they are serious and focused and there's no joy in the expressions. I try to be kind to them, to acknowledge them. It makes me feel bad that our society in this country is so shabby to the elderly. To "save" Social Security is easy. Remove the cap.

by Anonymousreply 35March 28, 2024 3:15 AM

So what is he saying? 65 is too soon? Or too late?

by Anonymousreply 36March 28, 2024 3:18 AM

yes, work until you die, worker bees!

by Anonymousreply 37March 28, 2024 3:21 AM

The corporate greed in this country is astounding. They dumped people into the 401K and the IRA plans, and stopped contributing to pensions and a lot of people are fucked up now. When my dad retired from the COunty, he got a pension and healthcare to supplement his Medicare. My mother got a pension too. They had the house paid off, and drove the same car for 12 years. But they had enough to live comfortable and not worry about groceries.

by Anonymousreply 38March 28, 2024 3:24 AM

I’m guessing his company is somehow funding these 65 year old retirees?

by Anonymousreply 39March 28, 2024 3:27 AM

[quote] There needs to be riots and massive strikes. Look at the French. Voting isn't going to do it.

I agree 100%.


Get those heads on some motherfucking PIKES.

by Anonymousreply 40March 28, 2024 3:42 AM

people like him need to be kicked to death by a mob in the street to fix this country

by Anonymousreply 41March 28, 2024 3:55 AM

I worked at BlackRock years ago. Not by choice -- they acquired my company. Suffice it to say, his comments don't surprise me. Me not saying any more about that place is being charitable, NDA / non-disparagement not withstanding. The day I stood up and decided to leave that company without another job lined up remains one of the best personal and professional decisions I've ever made. The road rose up to meet me just fine.

by Anonymousreply 42March 28, 2024 3:59 AM

FACT: The American Work ethic was a concept created by John D. Rockefeller (the Elon Musk of his time) as a way to get more labor for dirt cheap prices out of his own employees. He pitched it to the churches who preached to their flock, the rest is history.

"You should work hard because you are dedicated to your job and working hard is next to God, not because you just want the money." - The Management.

by Anonymousreply 43March 28, 2024 4:19 AM

All these stupid school shooters should be targeting billionaires. Scratch that, all the security hired by billionaires should turn on their bosses. That's the real way to turn this country around.

by Anonymousreply 44March 28, 2024 4:23 AM

[quote] all the security hired by billionaires should turn on their bosses. That's the real way to turn this country around

That would be amazing.

But would it ever happen?

The billionaires will have access to all the food, water, and technology when the world turns to shit.

They'll reap the benefits from their employer.

by Anonymousreply 45March 28, 2024 8:26 AM

Die in a grease fire, Mr. Fink!

by Anonymousreply 46March 28, 2024 9:28 AM

R43 it’s derived from calvinism

by Anonymousreply 47March 28, 2024 10:00 AM

[quote]I’m going to stop you right there, bitch. He’s absolutely a Republican. Many old school business Republicans are socially liberal. All Republicans have openly floated raising the retirement age. No Democrats have. They absolutely want to work you to death so they can get richer. On top of all of this, AI will take many jobs, leaving fewer and fewer jobs. What are people to do? Go homeless? Republicans don’t give a FUCK about you. Quit voting for them. Heaven help us if they ever get complete power again because they’ll never let go and then the real shit they’ve creamed their panties about doing WILL happen.

R34 you are stupid brainwashed queen who knows nothing. Republicans tend to get more money from older industries such as energy and manufacturing. Democrats do better with technology, health care and most of all Wall street.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 48March 28, 2024 10:21 AM

For the queen at R34.

Btw. larry Fink is your typical liberal Jew.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 49March 28, 2024 10:23 AM

Fink is as Republican as Soros.

by Anonymousreply 50March 28, 2024 10:25 AM

This makes me so angry. The super-wealthy have no business opining on the optimal retirement age for the economy. They OWN the economy and are inherently biased.

The big problem with raising the retirement age is that yes, people are living longer but not better. In fact, Gen Xers are experiencing a huge spike in dementia.

Blue-collar workers, whose bodies are hit harder in their jobs, suffer especially from later retirement.

In short, this fucker needs to shut it.

by Anonymousreply 51March 28, 2024 10:29 AM

Link on dementia - terrifying.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 52March 28, 2024 10:31 AM

Is it any wonder coming from the CEO of one of the companies that created major housing crisis.

They have been outbidding buyers on the housing market for years, buying hundred of thousand of apartments and family houses, raising rents and making people’s life miserable.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 53March 28, 2024 10:50 AM

The largest shareholder in America's largest gunmakers too.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 54March 28, 2024 10:52 AM

R48 I triggered the little bitch. Fink is socially liberal, fiscally conservative you stupid cunt. Besides, REPUBLICANS are proposing this BS. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. REPUBLICANS want to cut or eliminate SS and Medicare. Vote for them at your own peril.

by Anonymousreply 55March 28, 2024 10:58 AM

R49, you just had to get that "jew" in there. Didn't you?

by Anonymousreply 56March 28, 2024 11:01 AM

R55 stupid gurlina, go back shopping and leave serious conversation to adults.

You have to be braindead to believe that liberal corporative overlords close to Democrat party are less ruthless than the Republican ones. In fact, military industrial complex is closer to Democrats these days. These people are sociopaths living off (mostly 3rd world) people's blood. So are the ones buying homes, outbidding ordinary people, raising rents to high heaven and taking renter's half earnings monthly. Those are modern days Scrooges.

They are just like misers who are offering to pay the cheapest bill. It cost them nothing to support DEI, lgbt, transing children. Paying fair wages and refraining from ripping off people would be more expensive.

by Anonymousreply 57March 28, 2024 11:57 AM

I realize what he’s getting at. When 65 was adopted as the retirement age, most people were dying by then, so the safety net was for those who outlived them. Now too many of us are living into our 80s and that’s a strain on the system.

But try being well into your 50s and lose your job. Oh, that’s fun to try to find a company that will have you.

Age discrimination is real and will always be there, in large part because companies don’t like people who could walk. They want people who need to work for decades so will comply with anything.

by Anonymousreply 58March 28, 2024 12:13 PM

R58 it was certainly more comfortable for likes of Finks when they had been receiving worker’s money in pension funds for 30-40 years and never had to pay a cent back.

by Anonymousreply 59March 28, 2024 12:30 PM

It's a panic by the ultra-wealthy and corporations.The .com kids are all lazy influencers who don't want to work and there is generational knowledge that is dying on the vine as the gen x ers all get close to retirement. I have a customer, a large printing company who's main person who handled most of the technology retired. They spent months trying to replace him and in the end hired him back as a contractor at a huge salary because they could not find someone who knew what he knew and could do the work he did.

by Anonymousreply 60March 28, 2024 1:06 PM

The Ottoman Empire was only a century ago. Fuck this rich asshole.

by Anonymousreply 61March 28, 2024 1:20 PM

We have the technology which properly employed, could have everyone retiring at 50. This bullshit about work is ridiculous.

by Anonymousreply 62March 28, 2024 2:31 PM

There is going to be a huge wave of retirees in the next 5 - 10 years, and public and private pension funds are underfunded and won't be able to keep up with payouts. This doesn't even have anything to do with Social Security. BlackRock is one of the biggest pension fund investors in the world so that's why he's saying people need to work past 65. The pensions are underfunded.

by Anonymousreply 63March 28, 2024 2:53 PM

Fink can suck my soon-to-be-retired dick.

by Anonymousreply 64March 28, 2024 2:56 PM

He needs older people to keep working, because young people in GenZ won't give corporations the time of day.

They're too busy being influencers. They don't need corporations any more.

So the billionaires know they need to work their current employees until they're dead.

by Anonymousreply 65March 28, 2024 4:11 PM

The loss of institutional knowledge is a very real thing. Not knowing the systems and how they function can put a business at a real disadvantage. You end up going down dead-end paths that were already explored years ago, and recreating the errors that those who came before you fixed. The solution isn't to force employees to stay forever -it is to somehow convince the younger workers that the old guys might actually know what they're doing and have some wisdom to impart. In virtually every field, the young people despise the older workers. They can't wait for them to retire (or drop dead) so they can move up and into power. But they aren't always ready for what they take on. How could they be, with so little experience? Our culture has been worshiping at the altar of youth for so long we sometimes forget that there is no substitute for experience.

Here's an idea: What if workers retired at 65, but continued to receive a partial salary (or medical benefits) from their employers in addition to their pension/social security? In exchange, they would mentor and coach the new hires and help to codify the institutional knowledge of their workplace. Even if this only lasted 3-5 years, it would help everyone out enormously, and the government could subsidize it. Lord knows it would be cheaper than having to foot all the medical bills, etc. Statistically, many of the retirees would die during this transition period, but those who don't would live better and be less of a burden on the system.

Nah. It would just piss off the youngsters even more...

by Anonymousreply 66March 28, 2024 5:10 PM

Am 62 and retiring next month, with significant physical (and probably mental) health issues and just general disgust with the much younger team I manage and with my employer, a major global corporation. I'm tired. Of everything. Have worked since I was age 14, put myself through college and then grad school. It's been a long ride, much of it good, some of it bat shit crazy, but I've been running on fumes lately.

You or someone you know likely uses the products I worked on over the last several decades. That's gratifying, but I'm not just going to go away and die now if I can help it. I can no longer tolerate corporate doublespeak, endless and pointless meetings, and a bunch of kids I never wanted. My only reason for existence for the last few years has been to mentor and promote the couple of good people on my team who don't hate me. I advise everyone to floss, save for retirement, be kind to others, and floss again. There is ageism where I work, but am too old and senile to do anything about it. Bitter much? Indeed. My spouse, age 66, retired last year and is still recovering. We hope to enjoy our last few years together between various medical appointments/procedures.

There are stories of 90-year old women who run marathons. That's not us. We would shoot to kill anyone who told us that we can't retire for several more years. This Fink asshole is just another greedy bastard who wants to enslave people.

by Anonymousreply 67March 28, 2024 5:16 PM

There are two people I k ow where I work that I thought would never retire. One told me last week he was leaving in June.

The other is considering leaving in July. I’m planning on abandoning ship next year, when I can my 401k money without penalty.

We’re all under 65 but fed the fuck up with the endless bullshit. The corporate mentality is toxic.

The people we train were put back on their old jobs because there was no one to backfill for them. Then, a year later, they were put on the jobs WE trained them for and they failed miserably. Quite a few of them quit, yet the idiot suits can’t figure out why.

So why not get out while you still have your physical and mental health? Fuck this dumb cunt. He needs to actually WORK in the toxic underbelly he’s created for the rest of his miserable existence.

by Anonymousreply 68March 28, 2024 6:17 PM

R57 Likes shilling for the disastrous Republican Party. There’s an article in the New Yorker about how way worse off the UK is having been under conservative rule for 14 years. Vote Republican and we’ll show them what a hellhole living under maga conservatism will be.

by Anonymousreply 69March 28, 2024 8:44 PM

How much money does he need?

by Anonymousreply 70March 28, 2024 9:56 PM

Most of these bastards won't be satisfied until they have ALL of it, R70. After they consume us, they'll eat each other.

by Anonymousreply 71March 29, 2024 12:42 AM

This is the last year for full retirement age at 65 (born in 1959).

It is utterly disingenuous of the billionaire CEO to gloss over the fact that full retirement is effectively now 67.

Second, he glosses over the fact that only the first $168K of wages have social security taxes levied - or essentialy the first week of his salary each year.

Hey, here's an idea. How about they raise the cap to $250K or $350K, then index to inflation instead of making elderly workers in who work physically demanding jobs continue to work or worse workers like nurses whose jobs are demanding and require mental acuity or teachers of young children whose jobs are mentally taxing who are paid garbage to begin with?

by Anonymousreply 72March 29, 2024 1:03 AM

^^^and another thing.

What this really is about is wanting to reduce the amount people receive by effectively forcing them to start getting distributions "early" rather than obtaining full benefits.

by Anonymousreply 73March 29, 2024 1:05 AM

R72 I've been been arguing that point for many years now. The SS tax cap should be raised higher, perhaps at $500K. Perhaps even increasing the capital gains tax rate. That will stabilize social security for decades.

by Anonymousreply 74March 29, 2024 1:25 AM

R74 there shouldn’t even be a cap

by Anonymousreply 75March 29, 2024 1:34 AM

I disagree. There should be a cap, but not at $168K. They do make small incremental increases over time to adjust to the inflation, but a marked significant cap to something close to $500K should make social security solvent for a long time.

by Anonymousreply 76March 29, 2024 1:41 AM

Remove the cap on social security. These fuckers will take it, but they don’t pay in all the way.

Fuck these greedy pricks!

by Anonymousreply 77March 29, 2024 1:45 AM

Raising the cap is the quickest short-term solution.

Remember, retirement age was raised in 1983 from 65 to 67, but the impact is just NOW being felt as 2024 is the last year for people to retire and receive full benefits at 65. That was 40 years ago.

The truly insidious part about raising the retirement age is that you have to give people at least 20 years to plan. So, let's say they change the law in effective 2025. You'd have to make it effective for people born after 1978. If you were born before 1978, full retirement would be 2045 or earlier (giving the youngest people in that cohort 20 years to plan). If you make the cutoff 1968, the youngest people in that cohort would have been planning on retiring in 2035 (at 67), but would now have to wait until 2038.

That's too short a window. Retirement and retirement savings is a long-term planning game. The math on such things should be clear to anyone simply by looking at the difference in benefits at 65, 67, or 70. Pushing retirement age out to 70 without sufficient time for people to plan is a time bomb.

So, the idea that pushing the retirement age out is anything remotely resembling a short-term solution is laughable.

by Anonymousreply 78March 29, 2024 2:16 AM

You guys are not getting it--he wants you to work longer because there is not enough money in the pension funds for the people retiring! if you are planning to retire with a public fund, like New York Teacher"s Fund, in 20 years you are shit out of luck because BlackRock has lost all your money!

by Anonymousreply 79March 29, 2024 4:33 AM

Fuck billionaires.

Agreed R77 - the EASIEST and fastest answer to all of this? REMOVE THE FUCKING SS CAP!

If you tax all the income over 165k per year, we'd have tons of money for all older people. But nooooo - they'd rather see 70 year olds working at McDonalds.

Nobody wants to hire people over the age of 50. These billionaires are out of control and need to be shamed.

I'm so tired of the ass-kissing to the wealthy the past 30 years in a system designed against the rest of us.

by Anonymousreply 80March 29, 2024 4:46 AM


by Anonymousreply 81March 29, 2024 4:56 AM


by Anonymousreply 82March 29, 2024 5:22 AM

working until death and spending everything you earn on rent. Is crazy. Is evil.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 83March 29, 2024 6:24 AM

Bad plan

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 84March 29, 2024 6:37 AM

Have you noticed that all this wokeness over the top has started after the Occupy Wall street movement has been eradicated.

Lgbt community profited from it short term, but the Wall street overlords have hijacked the left and turned it into DEI, racial issues, abortion, lgbt, transing children etc. They own the media, Hollywood, they are financing academia. US is still without universal healthcare, maternity leave (only US and few 3rd world countries), with miserable paid leave. Real wages are shit, costs of life have risen to high heaven due to price gouging. Now, the corporations are even outbidding ordinary people on housing market houses, ripping off people on rents.

Now they want you to toil till death because they have spent your pension money. And all the while telling you you have the "white privilege".

If you want to save your human rights from the far right, Trump and Magas, the only way is to fight against the liberal elites and bullshit they are selling you. Because, until they are making lives of ordinary people miserable, working and middle class, young men particularly, will be turning right and manipulated by assholes on the right they will go after your rights.

I have noticed that many here live in upper middle class bubble and think gen Z is ultra progressive. It might be true for middle class girls and gay men, but straight boys have turned very conservative and one of the major factors for it is housing crisis, mass immigration, but also when it comes to white men, all this idiotic anti white rhetorics.

by Anonymousreply 85March 29, 2024 8:14 AM

[quote] if you are planning to retire with a public fund, like New York Teacher"s Fund, in 20 years you are shit out of luck because BlackRock has lost all your money!

Oh shit, R79.

Is that true?

How about State Government pension funds?

Are they in the same boat?

by Anonymousreply 86March 29, 2024 9:29 AM

[quote] If you want to save your human rights from the far right, Trump and Magas, the only way is to fight against the liberal elites and bullshit they are selling you.

That certainly makes a LOT of sense.

by Anonymousreply 87March 29, 2024 10:02 AM

One of the biggest problems in this situation is that employers [bold]won't[/bold] hire older workers.

by Anonymousreply 88March 29, 2024 10:20 AM

That was true before the pandemic R88, not now.

by Anonymousreply 89March 29, 2024 1:11 PM

[quote]That was true before the pandemic [R88], not now.

Oh yeah? Ask Mr. BlackRock how many 70 year-olds he has on the payroll.

by Anonymousreply 90March 29, 2024 1:15 PM

How about they remove the cap on SS and then there would not be a problem? the other thing is most ultra-wealthy don't really take a "salary" as they get options, shares, grants and exist on generational wealth.

by Anonymousreply 91March 29, 2024 1:48 PM

R87 it doesn't make sense to you because you refuse to use your own brain (or don't have much to use).

What part of it is it so difficult to comprehend.

If elites are making life of majority miserable, making costs of life unberable, stimulating inflation, housing crisis and in the same time looking down on ordinary people (white working class), people will turn to more extreme political options. What do you think brought Hitler, Milosevic and various other dictators to power. Inflation and desperation.

Regretfully, desperate people won't turn against elites (except in the case of communist revolution). They will turn against minorities, among them usual suspects, gay men. And this is about to happen again in western world. If lgbt community were not neoliberal quislings and empathized with working class instead of rich liberal douchebags that scenario could have been avoided.

by Anonymousreply 92March 29, 2024 2:27 PM

Retirement is different for everyone and should be a choice. But the Medicare/SS boundary of 65 should remain. Life expectancy recently has decreased- and uber wealthy deciding when the less able in practical financial terms should retire legally is nonsense and cruel.

by Anonymousreply 93March 29, 2024 3:08 PM

True, r93. The last people who should be deciding this are the people whose jobs consist of being surrounded by sycophants and flying all over the country in private jets demanding genuflection wherever you go. Yes, I can see why you think clinging to that job is just fine. But for the 99 percent, most jobs are just shitty, a meaningless slog of useless nonsense to fill the days, even when they aren't physically demanding or dangerous.

by Anonymousreply 94March 29, 2024 3:42 PM

Yep. Most of us ONLY work because we need the money. Otherwise, we would do as we pleased.

I would be in my garage all day fixing shit or making outdoor furniture, but I can’t make a living at it. So I work a shitty job that I hate so I can keep a roof over my head, food in my belly and insurance.

by Anonymousreply 95March 29, 2024 5:09 PM

You’re a vile one, Mr Fink

by Anonymousreply 96March 29, 2024 5:21 PM

[quote] Oh yeah? Ask Mr. BlackRock how many 70 year-olds he has on the payroll.

Companies have a lot of 70 year olds on the payroll, especially if they've been employed for 30 years or more.

The question to Mr. Fink is how many NEWLY EMPLOYED 50, 60, or 70 year olds does he have on the payroll?

My guess would be ZERO.

by Anonymousreply 97March 29, 2024 7:08 PM

Exactly, R97.

by Anonymousreply 98March 30, 2024 10:25 PM

Almost all companies had closed their pension funds account for their employees by around 2010. They instead resorted to 401K matching, require the employee themselves contribute to their retirement funds in market in terms of stocks and bonds, and they will match perhaps 50%. So instead of the employer contributing the standard 100% to employees pension retirement , they opted out and now at best pay on 33% of employee retirement funds. In the last 2 decades companies have instead given significant salary, bonuses and retirement parachute severances to executives. So the overwhelming majority of the funds that used to go to employee pensions now goes to executives instead. Capitalism at it's most perverse.

by Anonymousreply 99March 30, 2024 10:52 PM

R89 what a load of garbage - it's a true today as it was before the pandemic. Employers won't hire older workers.

by Anonymousreply 100March 31, 2024 3:50 AM

Please, anyone 40 and older is out

by Anonymousreply 101March 31, 2024 4:06 AM

Rich people want to spend no money on the rest of us. They will have a rude awakening come November.

by Anonymousreply 102March 31, 2024 4:08 AM

You don't want to help young people?

Rot you old motherfuckers! Rot!

by Anonymousreply 103March 31, 2024 4:23 AM

[quote] If you tax all the income over 165k per year, we'd have tons of money for all older people. But nooooo - they'd rather see 70 year olds working at McDonalds.

Taxing people in that bracket will not make a significant difference. The tax needs to be on the 1%.

by Anonymousreply 104March 31, 2024 4:49 AM

Is 62 still something within the world of social security? I thought 62 was also some sort of specific hurdle.

by Anonymousreply 105March 31, 2024 5:15 AM

[quote] Is 62 still something within the world of social security? I thought 62 was also some sort of specific hurdle.

You can retire early at age 62, with a significant reduction in your SS Benefits.

Otherwise, you will have to wait until 67 to receive your full benefits.

by Anonymousreply 106March 31, 2024 5:19 AM

What if you retire at 62 with a pension and savings, but do not take SS until you are 67? Is the five years of not working and adding to your SS numbers/averages as bad as taking benefits at 62?

by Anonymousreply 107March 31, 2024 5:25 AM

That's a tough one, R107.

You would first have to know how the SSA calculates your benefits estimate.

The website has a benefits calculator.

Then you would need to guess your annual income from age 62 through 67.

Once you have that, you would put those figures in the calculator to come up with your estimated benefits at age 67, IF you were to work for five more years.

Here's a link to the website.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 108March 31, 2024 5:42 AM

Increasing the SS withholding tax cap to $500 along with increasing the capital gains tax (and removing the tax loopholes) should solve the social security solvency problem perhaps indefinitely. The top 1-3 % are by no means paying for their fair share of taxes.

by Anonymousreply 109March 31, 2024 12:49 PM

Edit: Increasing the SS withholding tax cap to $500,000

by Anonymousreply 110March 31, 2024 12:50 PM

r104 if you don't cap the >165K you get the 1%

by Anonymousreply 111March 31, 2024 2:21 PM

Now THIS. THIS is something Datalounge cares about. Not abortion, not student loans, not housing.

by Anonymousreply 112March 31, 2024 2:59 PM

Send this old cunt to Israel to go fight for IDF!

by Anonymousreply 113March 31, 2024 3:02 PM

Is he even Jewish, R113?

by Anonymousreply 114March 31, 2024 3:54 PM

R114 YES

[quote] Fink was born on November 2, 1952.[6][7] He grew up as one of three children in a Jewish family[8][9] in Van Nuys, California, where his mother Lila (1930–2012) was an English professor and his father Frederick (1925–2013) owned a shoe store.

by Anonymousreply 115March 31, 2024 3:56 PM

And R113, since Mr. Fink is SO against the concept of retirement, and since he is HIGHLY OPINIONATED about Gaza-Israel, maybe he should follow his own fucking example and go volunteer for IDF.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 116March 31, 2024 3:58 PM

[quote] [R104] if you don't cap the >165K you get the 1%

Since Social Security is based only on payroll and not investment income or wealth accumulation, you only "get" the 1% to the extent they are taking wages in the form of payroll. If nepo-baby billionaires don't have jobs and don't get salaries and are instead just receiving dividends, interest or cashing in stocks, Social Security doesn't get a penny of money from them, cap or not.

by Anonymousreply 117March 31, 2024 4:02 PM

I find it bewildering how whiny and petulant MAGAs are about their circumstances. YES, a lot of things suck, but they suck for everyone, not just you. I'm a Democrat who has to pay the same overinflated prices that everyone else does.

Speaking of inflation, if Trump and his goons didn't have the great fortune to be able to exploit it in their propaganda, they'd really have no ideology at all, other than 'hate everyone'.

And don't forget that they want to KILL us.

by Anonymousreply 118March 31, 2024 4:24 PM

If we were all helicopetered or driven to work, had an army of assistants and Yes Men, and were paid $70 million a year like him , I am sure many more would be willing to work longer.

by Anonymousreply 119March 31, 2024 4:34 PM

[quote] [R104] if you don't cap the >165K you get the 1%

But you squeeze the middle-class -- $165k to $500k -- without offering any appreciable increase in their SS benefits. The measure should be aimed at the high net worth households that are adept at tax avoidance. So SS should stop at $165k and resume at $500k.

by Anonymousreply 120March 31, 2024 7:01 PM

R120 That may work better, but you have a better chance passing a bill for the under $500K rather that over $500k.

by Anonymousreply 121March 31, 2024 7:48 PM

r117 yes I know but some of them do take a salary which can be taxed.

by Anonymousreply 122April 1, 2024 2:59 PM

r120 fuck you ! I am in that range but have not been it all my life. I needs my SS

by Anonymousreply 123April 1, 2024 9:30 PM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!