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.
But when we turn 65 that drops way down because we become eligible for Medicare. The thread is about how much money we expect to spend in retirement. If people choose to retire before age 65, then yes, they have the difficult and expensive problem of what to do about medical insurance.
This thread is beginning to change from retirement to politics, many of the posts remarks are starting to turn that direction. Could be that most posters here are not retired and want to change the subject matter to fit their current lifestyle . Beleive me when I say, your whole world changes after retirement, especially when you turn 65. You really have to be here to fully understand.
I ran my own small business for 40 years, everyday was a fight about health insurance. It got to the point we could no longer provide coverage for most employies . It only took one person with pre existing health issues to upset the coverage of all. What I did was increase the pay so they could go look for their own insurance. Some did, most did not, ther took their chances, or got coverage under their spouse's insurance plan.
Today, under Medacare it's a different world, it's like I was set free from being jailed all those years fighting for my workers and myself. I know all too well the nightmares with a wife who survived cancer buy Lost the battle with all the insurance providers. Those were some tough years.
But when we turn 65 that drops way down because we become eligible for Medicare. The thread is about how much money we expect to spend in retirement. If people choose to retire before age 65, then yes, they have the difficult and expensive problem of what to do about medical insurance.
Unfortunately, it's not a choice for an increasing number of people. A large government contractor near me just put several hundred employees on RIF. The reason? "We lost a contract, so we have no money dontcha know." What a "coincidence" the people let go all happen to be in their late 50s or older and all had been with the company 20+ years, (and thus had good insurance plans promised when they joined the company back in the 80s). And what a coincidence that the company is still hiring 20 somethings.
Good luck having those people find a new job, much less a job that will replace the insurance they just lost.
A friend of mine was one of those people--he just lost his job at age 57 even though he had always been a loyal employee with good job reviews. He had been with the company since the 1980s. Getting replacement insurance will drain his retirement savings--or he can choose to go without, crossing his fingers that he will need no medical procedures of any sort for 8 years. That's a gamble you can take when you're 20, not such a good gamble in your late 50s.
like at any point of our lives folks can always be left with no choice. but the thing to remember with the guidence, opinions and advice on city data or any forums is that advice is geared for those who do have choices.
otherwise there is nothing to debate or think about and that is true on any subject and none of this stuff applys to them.
Good point Mathjak, but even so sometimes I think we all need to remember that retirement is not a choice for a lot of people. A decade ago you could say things like "don't choose to retire until you're 65" but nowadays that's not realistic. It can come across as callous and a bit clueless, like Marie Antoinette saying "let them eat cake"
Good point Mathjak, but even so sometimes I think we all need to remember that retirement is not a choice for a lot of people. A decade ago you could say things like "don't choose to retire until you're 65" but nowadays that's not realistic. It can come across as callous and a bit clueless, like Marie Antoinette saying "let them eat cake"
Very true. I know quite a few people over 55 YO personnally that can't find work let alone work with health insurance .
in reality though there would be no real point in folks reading the posts about choices if they have no choice and taking it to heart. i have to say i don't read any posts i am not interested in ,can not do , or won't do.
but it could be just out of curiousity they read things that don't pertain to them and i am quite sure they know that these threads are not about them and their choices since they have none.
these threads are really an exchange of thoughts and ideas of all of us collectively to help those the thread pertains to make an formed decision about what it is they have a choice in.
i don't think we all want to start a thread with "this may not pertain to you "
there are so many that do have a choice of retire and take ss at 62 or wait. these are the folks these discussions pertain to.
but you will always get someone who brings up many don't have a choice.
my answer is that is correct, then this does not pertain to them does it.
Isn't the answer to the thread question a function of our own income in retirement? Perhaps if the question was what percentage of our monthly retirement income do we expect to spend on consumption and not savings we might have a somewhat different discussion. For some it might be 100% for others 80% and for the unfortunate ones over 100%. That would give us three broad categories of savers, break even folks and incurring debt to stay afloat in retirement folks. As some have noted it is the forced retirement that has forced many into the 100% or taking on debt category while others who were able to retire on their time schedule are below the 100% threshold. These are tough times and traditional options have gone out the window for many and retirement is being redefined.
well it can be really any subject it applys to. there will always be folks something will not apply to because they have no choice.
it is a shame they have no choice but the posts are not directed to them. i get d/m's all the time commenting on things saying they can not do that because they had no choice.
i feel sorry for them but it is not them the post is directed to.
Unfortunately, it's not a choice for an increasing number of people. A large government contractor near me just put several hundred employees on RIF. The reason? "We lost a contract, so we have no money dontcha know." What a "coincidence" the people let go all happen to be in their late 50s or older and all had been with the company 20+ years, (and thus had good insurance plans promised when they joined the company back in the 80s). And what a coincidence that the company is still hiring 20 somethings.
Good luck having those people find a new job, much less a job that will replace the insurance they just lost.
A friend of mine was one of those people--he just lost his job at age 57 even though he had always been a loyal employee with good job reviews. He had been with the company since the 1980s. Getting replacement insurance will drain his retirement savings--or he can choose to go without, crossing his fingers that he will need no medical procedures of any sort for 8 years. That's a gamble you can take when you're 20, not such a good gamble in your late 50s.
Just one more reason NOT to be " workin for the man" all your productive life. I saw that handwriting on the wall many years ago when in my late 20s. I got very tired being transferred all over North America , not being able to chose my own destiny , or at lest have the privilege to try...
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.