The "Life Expectancy" Lie

One of the things the congressional Republicans (and their Wall Street masters) are pushing these days is that the age of qualifying for Medicare (and possibly even Social Security) should be raised. The age to qualify for full Social Security benefits has already been raised from65 to 66, and some in Congress want it raised even further. While the age for Medicare qualification is still 65, the congressional GOP wants to raise it to 67 -- and they are holding the middle class tax cuts as hostage to try and force the president (and congressional Democrats) to go along with that.

One of the main arguments for raising the age of qualification for both programs is the idea that life expectancy has increased in this country, and that would be true. The general life expectancy for Americans has increased, but the harsh fact is that for some it has increased a lot and for others it has not increased at all -- meaning that the average, which is used to further the right-wing argument, is pretty useless when it comes to individual needs.

The above chart, compiled from data in a 2007 Social Security bulletin, begins to get at the real truth about life expectancy. As the chart shows, the life expectancy for the top half of income earners in this country (who tend to have less physically-demanding jobs) rose by 6 or 7 years between 1977 and 2007. But the rise in life expectancy for the bottom half of this country's income earners (who usually have far more physically-demanding jobs) barely rose at all, averaging only about 1 year. 

While raising the qualification age might make sense for the top income earners in the U.S., these are not the people who need Social Security and Medicare the most. In fact, many of them don't need these programs at all. But lower wage earners, who do need these programs, would be seriously hurt by raising the qualification age. In other words, raising the age to qualify for either of these programs would just hurt the people who need those programs the most.