Latest News
Is it time to re-define “old age?” - New York Times
It’s probably not earth-shaking news that many Americans are working longer, sometimes well into what might be considered their normal “retirement years.” Here at the AMAC Foundation, we frequently speak with those in their 70s who are still working, as well as some in their 80s, and – believe it or not – even a few in their 90s. Fact is, for a variety of reasons, the trend is for people to work longer, even if they may change careers to do so. And that is facilitated by increases in life expectancy – good news for sure, but a strain on old benefit models designed for earlier retirement and shorter lifespans; programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Two highly respected and quite erudite professionals, C. Eugene Steuerle and Glenn Kramon, have joined forces in this New York Times article to suggest that maybe it’s time to re-define “old age” and adjust the nation’s benefit programs accordingly.
As an example of the leading thoughts on reforming Social Security, the Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC, Inc.) believes Social Security must be preserved and modernized. This can be achieved without tax increases by slight modifications to cost of living adjustments and payments to high income beneficiaries plus gradually increasing the full (but not early) retirement age. AMAC Action, AMAC’s advocacy arm, supports raising the thresholds at which benefits are taxed and then indexing for inflation, and calls for eliminating the reduction in people’s benefits for those choosing to work before full retirement age. AMAC is resolute in its mission that Social Security be preserved for current and successive generations and has gotten the attention of lawmakers in D.C., meeting with many congressional offices and staff over the past decade.