March 10, 2013
1 of 65
BEGINNING
On March 12, 1948, the life expectancy for an American male was 64 years and 8 months. Since I was born on that day, I will be celebrating my 65th birthday on March 12, 2013 – and I will be long past my expiration date. If I was a carton of milk, I would have been thrown out long ago. Fortunately, though, my wife Cathy has decided to keep me around for at least a little longer.
Now that I am turning 65, which is a fairly significant birthday in many ways, I have decided to spend a little time writing about what has been a pretty normal, pretty satisfying life. I intend to do this for the next 65 days – 65 years in 65 days seems to have a nice ring to it.
Why is 65 significant? One reason is that it is the age at which a person could traditionally retire and collect Social Security under the law that was passed in 1935. It is interesting to note that the life expectancy of the American male in 1935 was not quite 60 years. It seems like a cruel joke to tell those people that they could receive a pension at age 65, doesn’t it? Actually, it is not as absurd as it may seem at first glance. The life expectancy numbers are skewed by the fact that during the first half of the Twentieth Century it was not uncommon for death to occur during infancy or childhood. Of those born in 1870 (65 years before the Social Security law was enacted), only half of the males and less than 60% of the females lived until age 65, but those that did could expect to live until they were 80 or older. There were more than 9 million Americans over the age of 65 when monthly Social Security benefits were first paid in 1940. Before that, one time lump sum benefits were paid to retirees.
The law has changed so that for “Baby Boomers” like me the “full” retirement age is now 66, though a person may begin receiving reduced benefits as early as age 62. I am not yet receiving benefits. After having paid into the system with the belief that Social Security would be available to me, I am preparing to start receiving payments soon; just not quite yet. I need to decide if I am really retired or not.
When I say that my life has been “normal,” I mean that nothing really extraordinary has happened. It is certainly a much different life than ones that have been lived by many other people who would consider their lives to be at least as “normal” as mine. Most of what I have come to call my life has been the interaction between those other “normal” people and me. I think the interaction with me has been good for some of them, and I know it has been bad for others. On the other hand, some of those people have been a positive influence on my life; but others not so much. Over the next couple of months I want to write about some of those other people, some of the events that have occurred around me and some odd thoughts that have passed through my mind.
With that introduction, I am finished writing for Day One.
To paraphrase poet Gregory Corso: It has been reported that the oldest existing piece of human writing begins with the words, “Things are not as they used to be.”
From 1937 until 1940, Social Security payments were made in one lump sum, rather than monthly. The very first payment was made to a retired Cleveland motorman named Ernest Ackerman. His lump sum was 19 cents. I hope he wasn’t planning a long retirement.
Mr. Ackerman was probably happy, though, because his lump sum was nearly four times what he had paid into the system.
In January of 1940, the first monthly Social Security check was issued to a 65-year old woman named Ida Mae Fuller, who began receiving $22.54 per month. By her second check she had received more than she paid into the system; and she continued to receive checks until she died in 1975 at age 100. She was also quite happy with the Social Security system.
As you say, though, the times they are a changing. Almost no one is happy with the system these days. Demographics are a large part of the problem, as retirees are living longer and there are not enough workers paying in. Economics is another part, as wages of the average Social Security paying worker are kept low, the disparity between the rich and the norm is growing and the rich may not be paying their fair share. Perhaps if corporations are now “people,” they should be required to contribute.
I could go on and on about this. Rather than doing that, let me just say, I hope there is some answer that may be “blowin’ in the wind.”
If I come up with a viable answer, I will share it. I am sure you will do the same.
So what IS “normal” and “extraordinary”? “When we ponder what’s normal, it’s often in the sense of determining whether the way we think and act is the same as — or at least similar to — the majority of other people”. http://www.howstuffworks.com/define-normal.htm
Slavey was once OK’d by a majority ….. and that was normal….
Times have certainly changed….since social security was enacted. Today the US economy has forced many people to collect a reduced social security at age 62 due to layoffs, company closings, illness, and disability. Do the math, are there advantages for early retirement?
Wikipedia states: “Life expectancy is based on Factors that are associated with variations in life expectancy include family history, marital status, economic status, physique, exercise, diet, drug use including smoking and alcohol consumption, disposition, education, environment, sleep, climate, and health care”.,,,, and the world life expectancy is now 67.2….you’re not the norm!
Unfortunatley, there is a new proposal to change the “norm” and that is to cut social security…
There are billions and billions of taxpayer dollars going to corporations for subsidies…free money…and tax loopholes for allowing offshoring of money to the Camen Islands? Is this extraordinary?
Corporations are people now…..Normal?
Yes, …”the times they are a changing”.