U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-16-2014, 05:52 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,121,606 times
Reputation: 8970

Advertisements

[quote=mathjak107;36113191]
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Apparently you seem to believe that renters magically escape costs of maintenance, property taxes (higher than owner-occ taxes) and stuff like that.

I pay more to rent a ROOM than my next door neighbors spend to own a HOUSE.

And yes, I pay the water bill, as well as the electric bill and the gas bill.[/Q

覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
The issue is you failed financially for whatever the reasons and now you are bitter you are not getting the rewards and perks of those who managed to succeed.

Generally life does not reward failure unless the gov't takes from us and rewards failure on their own.

For those who are very misfortuned charities take that roll as well.

Instead of complaining so much about the bridge having to be lowered you need to find ways of raising the water. If you chose not to that is your choice as others do it all the time.

Well I do believe I have a grievance when I have to pay more than someone else while getting less for the excessive dollars I paid (and there will be screams of bloody murder when a national sales tax compounds the inequity). I've seen others at times complain about the 'sliding scale payment' scale sometimes used by liberals for admission to events - I'm complaining about what amounts to a reverse sliding scale where the poor pay more for the same thing as everyone else pays - and in this case, also get less.

Conservatives say people should not be punished for being rich. Why should people be punished for being poor?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-16-2014, 05:54 PM
 
71,979 posts, read 72,020,102 times
Reputation: 49554
[quote=mathjak107;36113191]
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Apparently you seem to believe that renters magically escape costs of maintenance, property taxes (higher than owner-occ taxes) and stuff like that.

I pay more to rent a ROOM than my next door neighbors spend to own a HOUSE.

And yes, I pay the water bill, as well as the electric bill and the gas bill.[/Q

———————————————————————————————————
The issue is you failed financially for whatever the reasons and now you are bitter you are not getting the rewards and perks of those who managed to succeed.

Generally life does not reward failure unless the gov't takes from us and rewards failure on their own.

For those who are very misfortuned charities take that roll as well.

Instead of complaining so much about the bridge having to be lowered you need to find ways of raising the water. If you chose not to that is your choice as others do it all the time.

You do have access to cheaply constructed homes. buy a mobile home and park it in a trailer park.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2014, 05:56 PM
 
71,979 posts, read 72,020,102 times
Reputation: 49554
[quote=freemkt;36113766]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post


Well I do believe I have a grievance when I have to pay more than someone else while getting less for the excessive dollars I paid (and there will be screams of bloody murder when a national sales tax compounds the inequity). I've seen others at times complain about the 'sliding scale payment' scale sometimes used by liberals for admission to events - I'm complaining about what amounts to a reverse sliding scale where the poor pay more for the same thing as everyone else pays - and in this case, also get less.

Conservatives say people should not be punished for being rich. Why should people be punished for being poor?
Because being successful should not be met with punishment but failure should have consequences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2014, 06:47 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,121,606 times
Reputation: 8970
[quote=mathjak107;36113804]
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post

Because being successful should not be met with punishment but failure should have consequences.

Failure to work and produce should have negative consequences, but not hard work for low wages. Conservatives merely give lip service to the working poor; reminds me of the time Republicans in Ann Arbor stopped the Salvation Army's plans to open a rooming house for men working downtown at low-wage jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2014, 07:02 PM
 
71,979 posts, read 72,020,102 times
Reputation: 49554
If you don't earn enough to meet the goals and wants that you desire then you failed financially.

If you can't afford to do something and want rules bent and ways around what is the standards that exist because you failed at meeting them then yes you failed.
If you think poor you wil be poor.

Financial Success is not measured by how hard you work. Success is measured by you meeting your goals and aspirations and not taking no for an an answer or defeat until those goals are met.

See where we are going with this ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2014, 07:34 PM
 
1,981 posts, read 2,734,716 times
Reputation: 3559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
Being factually correct is important, but on a different level I don't see what all the fuss about the COLA is or why people bother discussing it. Whatever it turns out to be (and in a few more months we'll know) it will not be enough to affect anyone's life. It sort of, more or less, keeps us from falling behind if we live mostly or entirely on Social Security. (Please note the qualifiers).

Someone receiving a high, near maximum, monthly SS benefit of, say, $2300 a month will receive $43.70 a month more if the COLA is 1.9%. The range of variation possible in the COLA at this point is, well, pointless.

Of course, once the actual 2015 COLA is announced, the major annual big-time whining will begin about how it is not enough. It doesn't matter what it is, it will not be enough. How tiresome.
So very gracious of you, Escort Rider.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2014, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Historic Gulfport
464 posts, read 525,389 times
Reputation: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
Actually more and more studies are showing retirees as they age do not need as much inflation adjusting as we think.

It isn't that retirees don't buy things that went up ,it is they buy less things as they age. The drop in spending seems to offset the increases from inflation.
The numbers are showing based on the 3% average about 2% is needed in the early years then zero seems to work from 75-85,then about 1% as medical costs,gifting and charity ramp up.

The colas may really be much ado about nothing over the longer term as spending drops will offset most of what inflation increases.
You are correct about reduced spending for older folks, other than health care.

There is also a lot of talk about adjusting the COLA to incorporate the 'real life' scenario of how consumers respond to increased pricing of certain items....they switch to another item. When the price of beef skyrockets, people buy less of it and more chicken or turkey or pork. So in essence, they are not paying more for food, they are simply buying different foods and keeping their food costs constant. These market forces are not currently reflected in COLA, though they can be, and ought to be.

Too many SS retirees are happy to get an over-valued COLA when they really ought to stop and think how much of a drain an unnecessarily high COLA is on the longevity of the current SS system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2014, 05:41 AM
 
71,979 posts, read 72,020,102 times
Reputation: 49554
The cpi reflects buying habits and trends as it is now. While it does not substitute products out of catagory it does reflect changes consumers make .

Consumers buy more chicken now that beef is to expensive. It isn't an assumption but actual data from the surveys.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2014, 05:49 AM
 
Location: Historic Gulfport
464 posts, read 525,389 times
Reputation: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
The cpi reflects buying habits and trends as it is now. While it does not substitute products out of catagory it does reflect changes consumers make .

Consumers buy more chicken now that beef is to expensive. It isn't an assumption but actual data from the surveys.
The 'chained' CPI has NOT yet been adopted for COLAs, but should be.
Here's an article from the Heritage Foundation about it.

www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/social-security-benefits-and-the-impact-of-the-chained-cpi
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2014, 06:55 AM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,121,606 times
Reputation: 8970
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
If you don't earn enough to meet the goals and wants that you desire then you failed financially.

If you can't afford to do something and want rules bent and ways around what is the standards that exist because you failed at meeting them then yes you failed.
If you think poor you wil be poor.

Financial Success is not measured by how hard you work. Success is measured by you meeting your goals and aspirations and not taking no for an an answer or defeat until those goals are met.

See where we are going with this ?

I make a distinction between incumbent residents and newcomers; nobody is entitled to move into a community they can't afford. The conservative mantra of prop 13 was "people shouldn't be taxed out of their homes" and I generalize this to "people shouldn't be involuntarily displaced from their homes by newcomers". Incumbent residents (obviously) were there first. As long as home ownership is not scalable in a community, zoning is a tool of class warfare to which I object.

Last edited by freemkt; 08-17-2014 at 07:05 AM..
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

ゥ 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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