XX Factor: the blog

Hey, Seniors: You Can't Call My Generation Entitled While You're Demanding Freebies

Photograph of a senior woman

I’m all confused about which age group is supposed to be the Entitlement Generation. I thought it was mine; after all, I’m always hearing my elders snark about how today’s twentysomethings never graduate in four years, won’t submit to cubicle culture, and can’t get out of our parents’ basements. But it looks more and more like seniors are trying to strip us of our title.

Yesterday, Philip Rucker revealed that seniors are fretting over proposed Medicare cuts that might result in them losing some benefits. Sen. John Kyl of Arizona (a member of the over-60 club himself) is livid. “Seniors like the choices they now have, and they don’t deserve to have them ripped away,” Kyl complains. “That’s not right, that’s not fair to take these benefits away from seniors.” What benefits so concern the good senator—doctor’s visits? Prescriptions? Hip replacements? No, no, and no. Kyl and his constituents are flipping out because the cuts could affect a special Medicare program that bestows “freebies” on seniors: free aspirin, free thermometers, free Band-Aids. Nancy, a 68-year-old Tuscon resident who gets a free gym membership, “said she supports health-care reform but does not want Medicare Advantage subsidies to decrease.” Health care reform is all well and good, as long as the taxpayers continue to bankroll my yoga classes.

As though complaining about health care reform (ironic, given that health care expansion is by its very nature a transfer of wealth from the young to the old) weren't enough, seniors are being pandered to by officials who have decided to give them all $250 in January, just for being old. Usually seniors get a cost of living adjustment in their Social Security benefits at the beginning of the year. Never mind that there shouldn’t be such an adjustment in 2010, because the recession has driven the cost of living down. Never mind that 2009’s adjustment was artificially inflated by high energy prices that dropped quickly, giving seniors a huge boost in their buying power over the past year. It’s apparently unthinkable that we might start a year without doling out more cash to old folks, so $250 a piece it is. That’s $13 billion total.

It’s maddening. But the young people who are watching our national debt balloon while our statesmen fight for the right to free Band-Aids have no one to be mad at but ourselves. You can’t blame seniors for liking free stuff—who doesn’t? And you can’t blame politicians for representing the interests of the people who put them in office. That’s their job. But why, exactly, is it seniors who propel politicians to success? It’s not their numbers. (18-to-34-year-olds have an edge of about 30 million people on people over 65.) It’s their voting record. Old folks vote. Young people don’t. And unfortunately, this is accepted wisdom that we don’t look willing to subvert anytime soon. Despite the much-hyped “youth vote” in the 2008 presidential election, fewer than half of eligible 18-to-24-year-olds voted, while 70 percent of seniors did. Even worse, election experts say the youth turnout then was about Barack Obama, not about a sustainable surge in political interest among young people.

If we want to begin to wrest control of the political system away from the Centrum Silver set, we’re going to have to start rolling out for every state and national election, not just getting on board when a particularly cool candidate comes along to replace a particularly loathsome one. Until we start competing with seniors’ numbers at the polls, we should have zero expectation that we’ll compete with their influence on politicians—or that we’ll be able to stop the politicians from spending workers’ money on retirees’ freebies.

Photograph of senior woman by Digital Vision/Getty Images.

Comments

As a member of the "Centrum

By: lindam249 | Wed, 10/21/2009 - 22:27

As a member of the "Centrum Silver set" (ouch!. . .so sneering.) I think I can say with assurance that most of us are deeply concerned about the futures of our children and grandchildren and are not as self centered as this article suggests. Yes, of course there are always the me-first people, but they exist in all generations. I agree that the $250 payment in place of a cost of living adjustment to Social Security is uncalled for and I hope it will not be approved. I do want to point out, however, that many of us who saved carefully for our retirement saw those funds that we now live on sink in value and do not have time left to rebuild them. In many cases the money we had hoped to pass on to the next generation will be used up covering our own living expenses. Every generation is feeling the impact of the current economic downturn. We must offer support to those most in need, whatever their age, and not get into unproductive generational spats.

@clairific

By: xxreader | Mon, 10/19/2009 - 13:31

I see your point, but yoga isn't included with standard medicare. Seniors have to purchase a supplemental plan. FYI - I do not feel that yoga should be covered under medicare anyway - but let's stop pretending these programs are provided for free.

Should universal health-care be enacted, that won't be free either. Pardon me for sounding like such a republican, but I think the f word (free) shouldn't be used as casually.

@xxreader

By: claireific | Mon, 10/19/2009 - 11:25

I don't think Meredith is saying that seniors should lose all Medicare benefits and be booted out into the cold. I believe she IS saying that in a time when many of us have no healthcare benefits at all and the economy is struggling to get back on its feet, it's shamefully selfish that a group of people are frothing at the mouth that a single accessory program be eliminated from the Medicare budget so the entire program may be able to function more efficiently.

I'm 25, and nearly every day I'm reminded how lucky I am to have excellent health, dental and vision coverage through my state government employer. But let's be honest, just how cold would hell have to become before the government would enact a program that gave free first aid supplies and yoga classes to young adults? Even the legions of us working $9.00/hour secretary and barista jobs with our college degrees because that's all there is, and fighting every month to find money to pay off student loans? How exactly is this population a swarming mass of entitled brats?

Freebies? Entitlements?

By: xxreader | Sat, 10/17/2009 - 17:25

Hi - I'm 31 years old. Every two weeks I look at my pay stub. The government deducts a portion of money I have earned and am therefore entitled to, to fund my social security and future medicare benefits.

So am I to understand that you think when I'm 70 these "entitlements" are provided to me for free as if I never (nor your grandparents never) contributed? I am so sorry, but you are misinformed. People that work (just like you) pay for their future entitlements.

Further, we do not have any choice. We must pay in to social security and medicare (and other programs which provide entitlements to the unemployed). Perhaps you could put yourself into a senior citizen's shoes. They spent years working. They paid into medicare. Now they're worried that some of the benefits they were promised as a part of this involuntary deduction will be slashed. I would have to say that I would feel the same way at 75, 85, 90. Meredith, would you not? Maybe we think differently.

In addition - there are two measures of CPI and inflation. One includes energy and food, one does not. That is called real CPI. Entitlements are adjusted to reflect real CPI as it is a more accurate measure of the rate of inflation.

I went back to college at 49

By: whitecat | Fri, 10/16/2009 - 17:48

Surprise, surprise - all the grants and scholarships are reserved for under-30s. What, pray tell, does it matter what my 85-year-old surviving parent earns in regards to how much I should be awarded in student grants and scholarships? Yet there it was, on every application.

I had to pay my own way out of my retirement fund. I'd do it again if I could afford it, because students get all kinds of freebies and discounts no matter what their age - free public transportation; lower movie, food, and museum entry fees; even some of the best health care I ever got included with tuition. I'm actually surprised these college-student perks weren't off-limits to those over 30.

I don't think freebies should be age-delimited. I say, free bandaids and aspirin for all! I draw the line at free gym memberships, though, even though students can use the campus gym facilities free. You could always walk.

BTW, Boomers vote in large numbers too. I've never missed an election. It's nice that Gen Y and Gen X are starting to realize that our "entitlement" comes not from our selfishness, but from our participation in the political process.

Amen

By: jerseygirl | Fri, 10/16/2009 - 15:38

I'm closer in age to the seniors than the 30 year olds, but I am taken aback by the "I want mine" attitude among older voters -- at least some of them. And don't forget that today's retirees are more of the baby boom than the "greatest generation" cohort, so it's not even though they, as a generation, have all the much to brag about.

I live in Florida, where seniors don't want to pay reasonable property taxes to fund public schools because, after all, what interest do they have in educating the next generation?

Society thrives when we have an intergenerational compact, in which those of us of working age spread resources to those either too old or too young to provide for themselves. Today's seniors seem to have turned that into an entitlement that only runs in one direction.