ShareThis Page
Ready to support socialism – come 2035 |

Ready to support socialism – come 2035


My golden years are shaping up to be way better than I expected.

CNBC reports the U.S. Census Bureau projects that in 2035, adults over age 65 will outnumber children under age 18 for the first time in U.S. history.

I will be 72 in 2035 — if taxes don’t kill me before then — and it will be the most glorious time of my life.

It will be glorious, partly, because surveys show that Americans are happiest in their old age.

It will be glorious, partly, because I’ll be debt-free. All my risks, sacrifices and investments over the years (rental properties, etc.) will finally pay me back.

But being 72 will be glorious mostly because I’ll be part of a massive geezer voting bloc that will force younger generations to fund my government largesse.

The irony of this demographic shift is delicious.

Take millennials, ages 20 to 35. The Census Bureau expects them to become America’s largest generation in 2019.

In 2016, reports The Washington Post, more millennials voted for “progressive” Bernie Sanders than for Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton combined.

According to a 2017 YouGov study commissioned by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, 44 percent of millennials would prefer to live in a socialist country — 7 percent would prefer communism.

Only 42 percent favor capitalism, the system that produced the incredible wealth that millions of Americans take for granted today.

To be sure, the views each of us holds are influenced by our generation, and younger generations see things differently than I do.

As a tail-end baby boomer — baby boomers range in age from 51 to 69, and boomers on the tail end tend to be more conservative than those on the front end — I favor more libertarian policies.

Unlike millennials, I prefer that government policies seek to unleash the genius of American entrepreneurs, so that our country will innovate more and generate more wealth — which, to me, is the best way to pay our bills and care for the needy.

Such policies were not in style during the Obama years, when increasing regulations and taxes slowed the economy and ObamaCare caused health-insurance premiums and deductibles to soar.

For years, I was a self-employed writer, selling my marketing wares to technology corporations. But as the stagnant economy decreased business opportunities, my taxes were ridiculously high and my health-care premiums and deductibles soared, I finally gave up and took a full-time position.

Well, President Trump has, for the most part, restored pro-growth policies. I hope the robust economy we are currently enjoying allows me to invest more and grow my nest egg, so that I will be in solid enough shape to enjoy my golden years 10 or 15 or 17 years from now.

Because at that point, I intend to liquidate all of my assets at great profit, hide the proceeds in a Swiss bank account and register as a Democrat.

I’ll have enough free time on my hands to attend 2035’s early rallies for whoever the 2036 presidential election’s “progressive,” Bernie Sanders-style candidate is — and do everything in my power to persuade my fellow libertarian/conservative retirees to ignore their consciences and vote for him or her.

We’ll be the first older generation that understands technology and social media. We’ll use both to organize protests. We’ll threaten to toss out any politician who doesn’t deliver our goodies.

So, my young American pals, be careful what you wish for.

The socialistic policies that look favorable to the young now won’t look so good to them in 2035 when we seize the lion’s share of their earnings so we can vacation in the sun, sipping taxpayer-funded adult beverages with little umbrellas in them.

Tom Purcell, a freelance writer, lives in Library. His books include “Misadventures of a 1970s Childhood” and “Wicked Is the Whiskey,” a Sean McClanahan mystery. Visit him on the web at Email him at:

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.