U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 11-20-2017, 01:37 PM
 
3,335 posts, read 922,918 times
Reputation: 2570

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
This is not correct. Those asset limits are not for health insurance which falls under expanded medicaid .that is for regular medicaid which covers long term care.

States that have expanded medicaid like ny and many others have No Asset limits involved in eligibility for health insurance. Look it up again
Ok, checked again and you're right they don't count assets. But the income limit is very low.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-20-2017, 01:45 PM
 
64,576 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42997
correct . so retirees who retire early have been living off cash they set a side , delaying ss and pulling roth income for big tax free incomes while using medicaid until they are 65 . some states are going after recovery if you are 55 -64 and using it for health insurance but it is very state and situation dependent . ny said they are not going after recovery for health insurance usage

Last edited by mathjak107; 11-20-2017 at 01:57 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 01:56 PM
 
3,335 posts, read 922,918 times
Reputation: 2570
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
correct . so retirees who retire early have been living off cash they set a side , delaying ss and pulling roth income for big tax free incomes while using medicaid until they are 65 . some states are going after recovery if you are 55 -64 and using it for health insurance but it is very state dependent
The trouble with these generous programs is they can be taken advantage of. Even if there were an asset limit, you can still own a house worth $840k. It doesn't seem like taxpayers should pay for healthcare for someone who owns an expensive house. Most of those taxpayers probably can't afford a house like that.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 01:59 PM
 
64,576 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42997
there was not a whole lot of thought that went in to the aca planning . i already had both my insurers fail at it . there are lots of issues but the laws are the laws and if they allow things to take place we don't like it really does not matter . the rules and laws dictate what can be done whether you or i think it is moral .

there are lots of reasons all the tools and laws are left in place as far as regular medicaid and long term care . as florida ,ny and CT courts said " they do not want a state filled with impoverished stay at home seniors who were driven in to poverty because of a poor long term care health system . then we end up supporting 2 people on public assistance not just one ."
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
9,865 posts, read 8,003,412 times
Reputation: 11215
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
depending what they get they may be doing better .

while not everyone gets everything ,the fact is all these perks lower incomes and savings potentially can get can really add up and surpass much higher income levels .


these equivalent numbers today are much , much higher as these are the older levels . medical insurance alone for a middle class couple can easily hit 10-20k .

we need 250k in savings alone just to spin off enough income to cover our health insurance in retirement . medicare and supplement here in ny runs close to 10k a year for a couple .

it is not really those with no savings and little income that are being pounded with expenses as much as those in the middle who have to pay their own way with no welfare or assistance .

they need far more savings just reach the level of those who qualify for more assistance .


In the income row, by the amount of tax you list, this is taxable income, not gross income. The difference is in the deductions, which depend on the type of household filing, size of household and a lot of other factors that influence deductions. A family of 4 with husband and wife filing jointly and nothing more, would mean a gross income of around $80,000 at the very least (but I haven't checked that against the 1040 form and tax schedules for 2016 and 2017).
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 02:23 PM
 
64,576 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42997
health insurance from the aca or medicaid is based on magi which is before deductions . it even adds back in tax free muni interest .

https://www.dhhs.nh.gov/ocom/documen...rief042015.pdf

as far as what i said about us needing 250k to cover our insurance ,that has nothing to do with taxes . we are retired and 250k can generate about 10k a year which our insurance costs consume
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 02:28 PM
 
Location: Forest bathing
1,133 posts, read 673,764 times
Reputation: 2648
My sister will be 65 next year. She rents, makes around $13.50/hour cleaning hotel rooms. No pension, little savings, about $1200/month SSA if she retires at 66. She plans to work until she is 70. Thankfully, she is fit and healthy but flipping queen mattresses all day takes its toll. My other sister and I are better off so plan on helping out. We all survived growing up poor. Our mom pays for her phone and sends her $100 each month. There is subsidized senior apartments here and she will be encouraged to participate in any assistance. She has a simple life and is not extravagant. She is the face of the not so working poor who is just below incomee thresholds for food stamps, etc.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 02:29 PM
 
3,700 posts, read 3,026,594 times
Reputation: 10007
Wow, so many top notch financial strategists here, and most are too simple minded to see that all that lifelong saving and investing was for naught. After all, the only thing that is required (according to some here) is that we all aspire to a dire form of poverty throughout our lives, and THEN--kick back and enjoy the glamorous lifestyle provided by the gubmint..

Of course I pay my taxes, local, federal, state, AND, I still have quite a bit of dough left for "retirement vacations" and lots of other stuff I could do without, but--don't..The point is, we can all sit around and pee and moan over our "plight", you know, the one of seeing our tax dollars actually helping another real citizen, instead of one of our esteemed "new citizen corporations."

I'm seventy two and on Medicare with a non premium advantage plan that isn't all that punitive. Man, some people never tire of kicking those who are already down, enough already--go and enjoy your lives, and try to find something to celebrate in the knowledge that all the poor aren't living in tents-- on your block...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 02:30 PM
 
64,576 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42997
no one ever said retiring was a right . it is still only a privilege for those who have the resources to live without working or count on tax payers to assist if you qualify . .
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2017, 02:33 PM
 
715 posts, read 255,245 times
Reputation: 1036
Quote:
Originally Posted by TampaBull13 View Post
A "defined pension" is retirement savings
I'm not sure if you're serious or being facetious. If it's the former or for people just entering the job market, Hemlock140 has it exactly right. It used to be a standard operating procedure for companies to reward their long-term employees with a 'defined pension', separate from either their savings or 401K's. I worked for my last and final employer for 30 years. Thankfully I was just barely able to get 20 years in before they cutoff pensions and switched existing and new employees into 401K accounts.

Pensions were good for life, didn't depend on the stock market and were passed on to surviving spouses. The new 401K's being dependent on the stock market and which mutual funds the employee picks makes a secure retirement much more risky which I believe is a retirement crisis. Over the last few years our corporations have accumulated more cash they've had in decades. But instead of using it for employee raises or paying back their country that makes their profits possible, they ship it offshore

Moderator cut: .

Last edited by toosie; 11-21-2017 at 03:24 PM.. Reason: Leave partisan politics out of it please
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top