I remember back during the election about a year ago, retirement age increase was brought up as a possible way to reduce the size of the government, which, supposedly, puts constrains on the economic growth of our country. Now that we are in the middle of a government shutdown over the government size (and its debt), somehow that issue, the age at which a person is entitled to Social Security and Medicare, again pops in my mind, abet with a different tact. Instead of thinking of the deficit and debt and crown-out effect and personal liberty and whatnot, the age itself somehow reminds me of something more abstract, but perhaps more noble: the advancement (or retreat) of our society as a whole.
Confucius once said something along this line: an ideal state would nurture her children, care for her elders, and marry her young men. Well, back in the day, a man could only marry when he had cash for the wedding and income to sustain a family, thus the difficulty of marriage. Back then, of course, women did not have much to say on these matters. That idea can updated to our modern world like this: an ideal state would nurture her children, care for her elders, and provide all her young people with an equal chance of success. Of course, that does not mean the government has to do all the work and pay all the bills. For example, it can foster such an economy and culture such that all children are well-fed and educated, that all capable bodies can find work that allows for a good life and saving for a comfortable retirement. Such state, of course, has fulfills its ideals without spending a cent.
How do Social Security and Medicare fit into this picture? In the, you know, "good o' days," let's say 100 years ago, a man would start working at around age 6 or 7, for about 10 or more hours a day (with Sunday off if they are in Christian nations, perhaps) for about as long as he lived. Women would, of course, not worry so much about working, since she would not have that choice. She would be married off to the highest bidder (this, actually, is good for her, too), then proceed to spend most of her time with pregnancy, child births, house work, and screaming children. This, of course, assumes that she survived child births. Oh, and nations went to wars, and men are shepherd off to battles. Depends on how old you would like to go, they would be hacking boards for nobles (hey, not everyone could afford fancy armor and good weapons) or shooting targets. Universally, their wives and children would starve and, if survive, grow up to more or less the same future. It's a tradition of our species to fill our past with glories and charming princes and beautiful princesses whose jobs were to fall in love and have happy endings. The fact is that every victory cost tens of thousands heads to be chopped off or blown off, along with tens of thousands of starving family with no money, no food, no dignity. The fancy castles where beautiful princesses and charming knights fell in love? Well, those are mostly unpaid labor of countless men, most of whom were neither charming nor handsome. It's hard to be when you are poor, possibly starving, with little prospect for getting better.
How about retirement and old age? There is this romantic ideals of "families taking care of each other." You can almost imagine a person, perhaps in his or her thirties to forties, talking about how his or her culture would have the parents taken care by the grown and productive children, while the grand kids would be loved and treasured by the whole family. Beautiful, yes? If you have a good family, with perhaps lands or businesses. Otherwise, an elder would either work (if capable) or beg/starve on the street. As a side note, children have roughly the same fate, except longer. Hey, a sage like Confucius had a lot of matters to think about. If he thought something is important, well, it's usually is.
It is my opinion that the most visible evidences of the advancement of our society are the nurture of our youngsters (in form of free, public education, as well as nutrition supplement) and the dignity with which an elder citizen can retire. Maybe grown-up children don't usually provide for their parents as much. Actually, that's a good sign. That means that the elder parents can care for themselves. Pension and Social Security provide them with day to day cash, while Medicare covers them during the worst days (aka sick ones). They no longer have to stick to their children for support. Those who plan ahead can even do awesome things such as traveling and golf. In fact, just watch the language. Retirement is sometimes called "golden age" these days. Just think about it. Rewind your world 100 years, and put an elder person (50, says) with a modest earning throughout his life there. Frankly, if he saved hard enough, maybe he can afford his own funeral. Golden year? Dream on (or move 100 years ahead).
It saddens me how little people think about these matters during their debates regarding retirement and social safety nets. In an age when employers no longer provide pension and stock market threatens savings and 401K daily, it seems rather strange for me that people, especially young ones, keep on screaming about the supposed extravagant of Social Security and Medicare, and how much such programs should be cut back and/or eliminated. I mean, really? True, if you work hard, save well, you can retire on your own money. However, what if you get some bad sickness when you are, says 40? Have you seen medical bills? How about if your children are good enough to be accepted to Harvard, but not enough to have a good scholarship? Or the stock market decides to crash just when you are ready for golf, cruise, and world travel. Or you get laid off for extended period of time, and has to dip into your saving. There are countless things that can happen, each of which can wipe out your plan. Thus, the requirements for independence of good retirement include incredible good luck to avoid all of these things. Remember, the "self-reliant man" is very much a myth. In the not-so-distant past, it is usually a noble man, who, of course, are self-reliant on top of his serfs. Before that, these are the one eaten by lions; the survived either farmed (still do) or hunted in groups.
We have a modern economy, a complex and efficient financial system, a strong infrastructure, and countless sophisticated technologies. Plus, we have a (mostly) democratic and reliable government and a caring, open-minded society. What are those for if we can't provide for our vulnerable ones, namely children and elders? Why do we need all manners of technologies and productivity gain if we can't guarantee that when a person is 65 and has worked hard, that person can relax and live with dignity? Seriously, what is the use of an advanced economy if it can't do that much?
Frankly, look back at the last 20 years (roughly 1990 to presence). How have we progress as a society? Other than abilities to fatten ourselves to death and bastardize our brains with TV and internet, how have our lives improve? I mean, yes, you can order a taxi with your phone and be reminded with a random person's birthday; oh, and your phone is now super complicated with great capability to distract you. However, let's put this in perspective. Do these trivia really enrich our lives, and make us more civilized and humane? In my humble opinion, the only significant improvement to our society in the last decade is the decline of poverty, which, of course, has come back with vengeance (a side note: this sometimes made me wonder where all of the gain in productivity went).
Oh, let's talk politics. What have we been doing for the last 20 years (since the start of Bill Clinton administration, just to be fair). Before that, America fought Communism to promote freedom. Before that was fighting inflation, which was preceded by Great Society (skipping Nixon here), which was preceded by Moon Mission, which was concurrent with Civil Right movement, which was preceded by Fascism fighting, etc. During these time, rise in productivity allowed us to ban child labor, reduce work week length, reach the moon, defeat American enemies, and, of course, install Social Security and Medicare to ensure the dignity of the elders. What was the focus of politics of late 20th and early 21st century America? Well, we impeached of a president on ground of, um, extramarital affair, engaged in war a against terrorism which smells more and more racist every day, engaged in another war over women right (but this time to push them back to their places), and declared taxes and government treason. Big issues, huh?
Anyhow, let's close this long and winding post. I want to emphasize that I don't advocate for borrowing and deficit to oblivion. What I wish to remind everyone is that we get together, build a society, an economy, and a government for a reason, and I am very sure that reason is not to have a balanced budget. Frankly, I don't think the reason is a phone playing music, either, although the phone is still cool. Maybe the reason is the nurture of children, the care of elders, and success of hard-working people. Maybe the reason is an equal chance of good life and dignity. Maybe the reason is happiness for all people, be them young, old, male, female, disabled, brilliant. Either way, before simply reduce and/or destroy programs that assist the vulnerable, let's remind ourselves of why we are here, together (oh, and that we are here, together).
