|
More true than we want to believe.
|
More true than we want to believe.
|
More true than we want to believe.
On 8/5/17 5:16 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? For millions of American workers who were screwed out of their pensions by corporate creed, Social Security is all they will have left, and for the tens of millions of American workers who will never be able to get into the middle class or rise from it, there's little hope for a decent retirement, even with Social Security. |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 16:16:11 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? No, we vacation in the mountains ... on your money |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:36:39 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/5/17 5:16 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? For millions of American workers who were screwed out of their pensions by corporate creed, Social Security is all they will have left, and for the tens of millions of American workers who will never be able to get into the middle class or rise from it, there's little hope for a decent retirement, even with Social Security. Do you think you deserve to rise from the lower middle class? Does being a great liar qualify you for same? |
More true than we want to believe.
|
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:15:39 -0500, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 16:16:11 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? No, we vacation in the mountains ... on your money Glad to be helping. Enjoy. For the record, I appreciate spending your earnings also. |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:36:39 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/5/17 5:16 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? For millions of American workers who were screwed out of their pensions by corporate creed, Social Security is all they will have left, and for the tens of millions of American workers who will never be able to get into the middle class or rise from it, there's little hope for a decent retirement, even with Social Security. Too bad it is a huge Ponzi scam that is going to blow up in less than a decade. Both SS and MC are upside down and there does not seem to be any plan from either side to bail it out. The "trust fund" is a fantasy and we can't even pay back the debt we are incurring today. That trust fund is just another line item on the debt. The fix had to happen in the 50s and 60s and it would have involved changing the retirement age to something more closely related to life expectancy. Before you say it, yes I am the best example of that mistake by our government. If I don't get hit by a bus or some other unseen calamity, I will be retired longer than I worked. It wasn't my idea. It was all just part of that Clinton prosperity we keep hearing about. (AKA creative bookkeeping) BTW most workers of the first cohort of the boomer generation are doing just fine with their corporate pensions. It was during the Clinton administration when the defined pension plan started disappearing. Even so most are vested in some defined benefits. Ah prosperity! |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 05 Aug 2017 18:29:43 -0400, John H
wrote: On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:15:39 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 16:16:11 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? No, we vacation in the mountains ... on your money Glad to be helping. Enjoy. For the record, I appreciate spending your earnings also. Hey they made us do it. I am sort of curious what would have happened to my money if I had put all of my FICA into IBM stock (or even a decent fund). Some day, if I get bored I may load it into excel and see. The spreadsheet for the stock already exists on the shareholder site. I just need to enter my SS payments from the statements I have. My basis, even on shares I bought in the 90s, is less than $10. I would have been buying them since 66. Just based on the basis calculations I have done on the shares I have I believe it would be in the millions. I will be lucky to get a half million out of SS. (I will be over 85 when that happens) |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:36:39 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/5/17 5:16 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... http://tinyurl.com/ydxb8j66 from the onion Your vacation photos? For millions of American workers who were screwed out of their pensions by corporate creed, Social Security is all they will have left, and for the tens of millions of American workers who will never be able to get into the middle class or rise from it, there's little hope for a decent retirement, even with Social Security. Too bad it is a huge Ponzi scam that is going to blow up in less than a decade. Both SS and MC are upside down and there does not seem to be any plan from either side to bail it out. The "trust fund" is a fantasy and we can't even pay back the debt we are incurring today. That trust fund is just another line item on the debt. The fix had to happen in the 50s and 60s and it would have involved changing the retirement age to something more closely related to life expectancy. Before you say it, yes I am the best example of that mistake by our government. If I don't get hit by a bus or some other unseen calamity, I will be retired longer than I worked. It wasn't my idea. It was all just part of that Clinton prosperity we keep hearing about. (AKA creative bookkeeping) BTW most workers of the first cohort of the boomer generation are doing just fine with their corporate pensions. It was during the Clinton administration when the defined pension plan started disappearing. Even so most are vested in some defined benefits. Ah prosperity! Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) |
More true than we want to believe.
|
More true than we want to believe.
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 20:08:29 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. Now you are feeding into Harry's post about all of those poor people having to eat cat food or something because all they have is SS and you want to cut the benefits. A also disagree that it covers 70% of current payments unless they are assuming they still have the trust fund, interest on the investment etc and we know it is just debt. Certainly full faith and credit of the government but debt nonetheless. I assume we pay the SS people before the Chinese but maybe not. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Medicare IS single payer. What changes? Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. My out of pocket is maxed out at $6500 a year. Right now my deductibles and co pays don't even eat all of my HRA. I gave them back close to a grand last year. I don't really plan to be sick very long anyway. I will punch out. I have seen dying of miserable diseases more than I like to think about and I don't plan on doing it. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. Harry seems to take a shot at me whenever he can but I think his plan is to die at his desk. |
More true than we want to believe.
On 8/5/2017 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. My goal was to have the option (or opportunity) to retire at 55. I beat it by 2 years and have never looked back. :-) --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
More true than we want to believe.
On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 08:50:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. As opposed to a liberal arts field with easily replaceable skills, eh? Yup. |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 08:50:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. I had my contract with the state before I retired from IBM. That went on for over 7 years. It was a totally different job (State Electrical Inspector) that actually paid me more money and was far more interesting than what the computer business had become. I still had the skills to stay with computers, just not the desire. The fact that the retirement deal changed in 1Q97 drove a bunch of us out in 96. The other guy who retired when I did, stayed on as a contractor. My boss wanted me to go to Ft Lauderdale as a contractor and teach them the best practices we had developed in Ft Myers but I was just done. |
More true than we want to believe.
In article , says...
On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 20:08:29 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. Now you are feeding into Harry's post about all of those poor people having to eat cat food or something because all they have is SS and you want to cut the benefits. Eggs must be broken to make an omelet. You can make the numbers work with any of numerous combinations of cuts. I expect the cuts would be heaviest on the top, because those people are more likely to also have pensions, as is my case. Less people squawking too. Now I don't think that will happen, but it accounts for your worst case scenario. A also disagree that it covers 70% of current payments unless they are assuming they still have the trust fund, interest on the investment etc and we know it is just debt. Certainly full faith and credit of the government but debt nonetheless. I assume we pay the SS people before the Chinese but maybe not. Actually, the payout would be more like 75-77% of current payout. This has 75%. http://wallstreetpit.com/112602-soci...oney-runs-dry/ MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Medicare IS single payer. What changes? I mean national single payer insurance. Medicare for old folks will cease to exist. Everybody will have the same health care plan available to them. Your worst nightmare, excepting maybe having your gun rights "infringed." Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. My out of pocket is maxed out at $6500 a year. Right now my deductibles and co pays don't even eat all of my HRA. I gave them back close to a grand last year. I don't really plan to be sick very long anyway. I will punch out. I have seen dying of miserable diseases more than I like to think about and I don't plan on doing it. I can imagine many health issues that will max your deductible for many years without you coming to the point of offing yourself. But it's your choice. |
More true than we want to believe.
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 16:16:09 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 20:08:29 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. Now you are feeding into Harry's post about all of those poor people having to eat cat food or something because all they have is SS and you want to cut the benefits. Eggs must be broken to make an omelet. You can make the numbers work with any of numerous combinations of cuts. I expect the cuts would be heaviest on the top, because those people are more likely to also have pensions, as is my case. Less people squawking too. Now I don't think that will happen, but it accounts for your worst case scenario. Yeah, the "eggs" are the payments to the post boomer generations. A also disagree that it covers 70% of current payments unless they are assuming they still have the trust fund, interest on the investment etc and we know it is just debt. Certainly full faith and credit of the government but debt nonetheless. I assume we pay the SS people before the Chinese but maybe not. Actually, the payout would be more like 75-77% of current payout. This has 75%. http://wallstreetpit.com/112602-soci...oney-runs-dry/ That assumes there is actually a trust fund and that the government can come up with the money to buy back those bonds. Any calculation that is not expense to revenue (from FICA) is a fantasy. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Medicare IS single payer. What changes? I mean national single payer insurance. Medicare for old folks will cease to exist. Everybody will have the same health care plan available to them. Your worst nightmare, excepting maybe having your gun rights "infringed." certainly trying to expand a failing system to the whole country is scary. What do you figure the taxes will have to be to pay for that? 3% of every wage dollar in the US can't pay for part A of the care for 16% of the population. What happens when that becomes part A, B, C and D for 100% of the population? Would you really support a 15-20% "first dollar" tax on every wage dollar in the US? That is the kind of numbers we are talking about. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. My out of pocket is maxed out at $6500 a year. Right now my deductibles and co pays don't even eat all of my HRA. I gave them back close to a grand last year. I don't really plan to be sick very long anyway. I will punch out. I have seen dying of miserable diseases more than I like to think about and I don't plan on doing it. I can imagine many health issues that will max your deductible for many years without you coming to the point of offing yourself. But it's your choice. $6000 a year is not that big a deal. I would be checking out because I don't want to be that sick. |
More true than we want to believe.
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. More proof your boat is another BS story. If you actually owned one, that would be a reason to retire. |
More true than we want to believe.
On 8/7/17 8:33 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. More proof your boat is another BS story. If you actually owned one, that would be a reason to retire. Owning a boat means you're retired? Really? Do you own a boat? Are you retired? |
More true than we want to believe.
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 21:34:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/7/17 8:33 PM, Alex wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. More proof your boat is another BS story. If you actually owned one, that would be a reason to retire. Owning a boat means you're retired? Really? Do you own a boat? Are you retired? Read for content. |
More true than we want to believe.
justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message: On 8/7/17 8:33 PM, Alex wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. More proof your boat is another BS story. If you actually owned one, that would be a reason to retire. Owning a boat means you're retired? Really? Do you own a boat? Are you retired? You get confused do easily, it's almost comical. No kidding. He's losing it bigly. |
More true than we want to believe.
John H wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 21:34:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/7/17 8:33 PM, Alex wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/5/17 9:08 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:48:16 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: Don't worry about it. When SS "blows up" they'll just put asset and income limitations on those who are allowed to draw it. That will help but if SS is your only income (on paper) there will still be more people collecting than the number of workers can support. They say that current SS contributions will pay for 70% of payments. They can always reduce SS maximum payments. Or across the board cuts. Not a problem. MC will be taken care of by single payer. No problem. Medicare is already (government) single payer, that has been broke for almost a decade and that is only paying part of the actual cost. (Part A). We pay extra for parts, B, C and D If you want to compare the efficiency of the government compared to private insurers, look at the Advantage plans. For what the government allocates for Part A and what we kick in for part B, I can get parts A, B, C & D for no additional money. Single payer should absorb Medicare. No more Medicare. Advantage is a poor man's substitute for supplementals. Look at your deductibles. It stops working when you have some major health events. Then you'll have much more than Bill Clinton to whine about. The people who are ****ed at me retiring at 49 should be mad at Clinton. It was his loosening of the pension rules that allowed it. They made a little administrative change in how the PBGC calculates risk that allowed companies to send people like me off the payroll and into the pension plan without coming up with any more funding. That is just one way they generated their phony prosperity (read:increased profits) Who's ****ed at you retiring at 49? Maybe ****ed at you whining about it. I retired at 57 and nobody has peeped about it. I have a friend who worked for Sikorsky who became eligible for what I guess was a generous early retirement package five years ago, but his employer "made him an offer he couldn't refuse" to stay on his job, so he stayed and just actually retired this past spring. Now, he's "consulting" with a couple of the customers of his old employer. I guess if you are in a technical field and have skills that are hard to replace, you never really retire unless you really want to retire. "I was retired for a week," he told me in June, "but having nothing real to do except make-work and hobbies and golf and fishing seemed too boring." Yup. More proof your boat is another BS story. If you actually owned one, that would be a reason to retire. Owning a boat means you're retired? Really? Do you own a boat? Are you retired? Read for content. It's likely a lame diversion. I was pretty clear so even Don could understand the point. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com