About Me

My photo
Nazareth, Pa., United States

Thursday, July 06, 2017

Rudiger on The Entitled Generation

By day, Rudiger Lyle Martinez is your typical Northampton County worker. But once the clocks strike thirteen, he dons his other hat as a rising local political pundit. He also claims to be a writer, but refuses to share any of his work because he knows I'm a plagiarist. He did one show me an alternative county newsletter he writes, consisting mostly of one-liners. What he says about my generation is slightly unflattering.

In a previous post, I described Rudiger as a millennial  He's corrected me and said he's actually Gen-X. Same thing.

Anyhoo, he describes my generation, the babyboomers, as pretty much the most selfish and narcissistic generation that has ever existed. We are an entitled group who have pretty much screwed our children, grandchildren and a few generations after that.

"Enjoy the fruit of your garbage generation," says Rudiger.


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Sadly he is right. The generation that was going to change the world decided to become the me generation. Boomers ARE ALLL AOBUT WHAT IS IN IT FOR THEM. Never MET WPOPLE MORE INTERSTD IN THEMSELVES THAN SOCIETY OR OTHERS. They are supposedly the first really educated American generation but most of them are closed minded dopes that don't believe in science. They are the backbone of the etui party and the Trump army.

Society is worse for their existence.

Anonymous said...


"a two-earner couple receiving an average wage — $44,600 per spouse in 2012 dollars — and turning 65 in 2010 would have paid $722,000 into Social Security and Medicare and can be expected to take out $966,000 in benefits. So, this couple will be paid about one-third more in benefits than they paid in taxes."

"Some types of families did much better than average. A couple with only one spouse working (and receiving the same average wage) would have paid in $361,000 if they turned 65 in 2010, but can expect to get back $854,000 — more than double what they paid in.

"According to this calculation, past and current generations will pay $71.3 trillion in payroll taxes but will receive $93.4 trillion in benefits. Adjusting for past and future transfers from the federal Treasury, the difference between "paid-in" and "paid-out" works out to $21.6 trillion.

"The $21.6 trillion number will change as soon as we change policies whereby today’s generations pay more taxes or surrender some benefits,"

so today's generation will pay more and get less then the boomers

Anonymous said...

If the Federal Government would have let me keep my $722.000 I and my wife paid into Social Security, I could have invested it and I would have tripled our investment. That means I would have approximately 2.2 million dollars in my retirement nest egg. Even if I would draw down $150,000 per year, I would never use all my principal and there would be loads of money left for my heirs to waste away. The Federal Government screwed the working class by taking my money out of Social Security and using it for the everyday operation of our government. It has nothing to do with being greedy or selfish but it does have everything to do with government waste and incumbent elected officials recklessly spending my tax dollars. It isn't our fault people are living longer, thanks to medical science, which also increased spending from the federal government coffers. Because I'm living longer doesn't make me greedy. 1:49 AM wants us to stop receiving benefits once we reach the point of our contributions that we made into Social Security. He fails to recognize the whole picture.
The slanted and distorted view of contributor 1:49 AM is just that, Slanted and distorted.

Anonymous said...

Aren't the Gen-Xer's quite adept at blaming others for what they don't have?

Anonymous said...

so your saying your 722k is only for you?
you paid for the previous retirees.so you have to reduce the 772k by the amount the previous retirees got.
as to triple your 722k kinda doubt that.
market takes a header just before retirement and 30 percent vanishes for example.
never said you stop getting benefits.
one measure of a society is how they treat the elderly.
so seniors should be taken care of.
also from the article--medicare
"The couple will have paid $122,000 in Medicare taxes but will receive $387,000 in benefits — more than three times what they paid in."
as to living longer would that mean you should pay more for healthcare?
should your costs go up if you live longer than average?
as to politicians spending your tax dollars why did you let them?
or to be clearer what action did you take to make sure they would spend wisely on what is important to you?

Anonymous said...

One point here is that people always say if the government had not taken out SS, I would have invested it. The truth is no you would not have invested it, you would have spent it. The proof is the fact that half the people of retirement age have less than $10,000 in savings.

We do not save, we spend. Fortunately SS is keeping many people from the soup kitchens.

Anonymous said...

It appears some here have never heard of the financial terms "compounding" or "net present value".

Anonymous said...

Who is this guy? Another blogger?

Anonymous said...

He's being groomed by Bernice for a meat puppetry performance to be performed above the Army Navy Store hovel in Naz.

Robert Trotner said...

Bernie, you never fail to educate and enlight with your own brand of humor. Reading your blogposts are a highlight of my day.

Anonymous said...

This kid looks like a real jabroonie

Anonymous said...

@ July 6, 2017 at 3:16 AM
Actually we are blaming the boomers for what we YOU'VE left us.
Insurmountable debt.