U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
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 11-05-2016, 12:33 PM
Location: Central IL
15,201 posts, read 8,509,345 times
Reputation: 35598


In terms of retirement living I'm not of the ilk that overly deprive themselves through their working years so they can live in relative luxury when they retire - that to me is extremely sad. I can MAINTAIN my standard of living plus add in travel since I'll have paid off my perfectly acceptable and reasonably sized home by then.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 11-05-2016, 12:55 PM
71,490 posts, read 71,652,652 times
Reputation: 49069
Originally Posted by lenora View Post
Mathjak, you drank the kool aid. The mental impairment standard was changed by Reagan (of all people) over 30 years ago and even before Reagan was President, mental illness was included in the list of medical impairments that could render one disabled.

"...realistically evaluate the ability of a mentally impaired person to engage in SGA in a competitive workplace."

Ronnie (and Congress) decided the mental impairment regulations did not accurately reflect the fact that many mentally impaired people cannot perform in a work environment. He also supported, amazingly enough, a common sense requirement that Psychologists or Psychiatrists, should review and sign off on a disability decision when the claimant had mental health impairments. Before this legislation, SSA used docs such as retired orthopedists, etc. to evaluate mental impairments.


Also, there are only two trust funds, the DI fund that you noted and the OASI fund that pays out both retirement AND survivor benefits. It's dishonest to criticize the transfer of OASI funds to the DI fund without noting that DI funds were previously transferred to the OASI fund. It's a two way street here; one could argue the DI fund would not have needed this recent transfer had the DI fund not been previously raided to save the OASI fund. The actuaries, rightly so, had predicted and taken into account the effect of an aging Boomer generation on the DI fund. However, they did not anticipate a reduced birthrate by our generation nor did they anticipate the reduction of FICA contributions due to high unemployment during the unanticipated Great Recession. IOW, s*** happened.

while ss retirement /survivor fall under the same heading each dollar of fica that comes in is allocated differently to all 3 funds . there are three distinct allocated amounts and 3 distinct funds getting the money .

i see nothing wrong with the money moving between those internal funds . they are all funded with the same dollar from fica .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 12:55 PM
Location: Divided Tribes of America
13,679 posts, read 5,512,458 times
Reputation: 5368
By living in a VAN...down by the river.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 12:59 PM
Location: SF Bay & Diamond Head
1,779 posts, read 1,417,822 times
Reputation: 1971
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_An...he_Grasshopper I think the problem people have with the hand outs are when the people getting them squandered their money in their working life. The people that I know that are having a difficult time in retirement are the ones that had to have everything NOW. I never felt deprived just because I couldn't have every new piece of crap. Should there be a different standard for people that planned for tomorrow than those that didn't? I can understand someone needing help because of some catastrophe or illness but should we bail out someone because they only thought of me me me for today only?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 01:08 PM
Location: Central IL
15,201 posts, read 8,509,345 times
Reputation: 35598
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
The traditional model for many was a home fully paid for that could be sold to supplement the golden years.

I've managed Section 8 Housing since the 80's back from a time that many had no idea such programs even existed where a rent subsidy meant living in a neighborhood instead of the projects.

For some it is a generational way of life... I know many 4 generations on public assistance.

Still was left speechless one day when I declined a service call because I needed to get my taxes done... the Grandmother, head of household, living in a nice suburban home I managed said she has never paid taxes...

It did provide an insight to a life where all the basics are covered with benefits transferring should you want to relocate...

So there are plenty that maintain the same lifestyle into retirement without millions or even thousands...

A study a few years back said a Bay Area family of 4 would need an income of 65k to equal the low income benefits provided starting with housing, medical, food, education, childcare, etc...
Right...but now, people expect to not have to sell their home or to sell it and buy something else, at least. And folks expect to get Medicaid-type benefits but to game the system somehow so they can keep their wealth...and to still give out inheritances.

Expectations are far less humble these days - I guess we all want our cake and to eat it too! So yes, unless you have millions you won't get country club LTC, you'll have to downsize your home, your kids may not get any inheritance...that's what most people have to do and it's not terrible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 01:30 PM
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,428,989 times
Reputation: 15678
The median salary of a firefighter in Menlo Park, CA is $147,000 per year. That's the MEDIAN. Note it is a high COL area, and to encourage employees to live closer to work, the city awards an additional $200 to $2,000 per month per employee as a housing stipend based on longevity and rank. The city did this because they would like first responders to live closer to Menlo Park. For example, one recently retired firefighter has long lived in Reno, Nevada, commuting to Menlo Park for shifts. That commute is (at best) 4.5 hours each way during non-rush-hour, and at worst 10 or 11 hours each way (if there are snowstorms, traffic jams & accidents on I-80).

With the median at $147,000 per year, retirees with more seniority are of course even higher. Retiring at 50, they have pensions north of the median. Having worked for perhaps 25 to 30 years, they will have $150K-ish pensions for perhaps another 35 or 40 years (plus COL raises)

The net present value of that stream of pension payments is many millions of dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 03:39 PM
26,589 posts, read 52,257,058 times
Reputation: 20405
^^^Yes... know a lot... 12 from my High School Class joined Oakland Police Department with 2 year Admin of Justice AA... not a one has a pension less than a 100k... one is 180k plus lifetime medical.

It really boggles the mind when you can extrapolate 6 to 8 MILLION in benefits to a single retired individual...

It would be one thing if Oakland were wealthy like Cuppertino... but every election cycle numerous measures on the ballot asking for hundreds more each...

The irony is those paying the pensions often have no pensions themselves... call it sour grapes, pension envy but if you are funding you have a right to speak...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 04:02 PM
Location: Oregon, formerly Texas
5,450 posts, read 3,755,521 times
Reputation: 9257
Police officers put their lives on the line and also hold the lives of others in their hands. I want them to have secure employment, not have to wonder where their next rent payment is coming from. Bad police = unsafe community.

Would you rather they look for bribes from criminal elements to supplement their pay? Because that's what you get in countries that don't pay their law enforcement much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 05:09 PM
Location: R.I.
970 posts, read 603,310 times
Reputation: 4175
Originally Posted by selhars View Post
Are you suggesting we shouldn't help provide for those who can't work? OR, just pointing out that some people need to be mindful of the fact that taxpayers are funding that safety net, and therefore supporting certain retirees?
It is not a matter of who should or should not be helped. What pays for these safety net programs are taxes. Taxes come from people who work and pay taxes. When the workforce is reduced which it is now, and over the next 10 years it will continue to be reduced with the millions of baby boomers exiting the workforce, and many of those jobs not being replaced by workers who will pick up the level of the taxes that the baby boomers formerly paid, how do you think safety net programs can continue to remain at the level they are now without the funds from taxes to pay for them ? Maybe the time has come when we need start reducing the billions of tax payer dollars that we ongoing send to multiple impoverished countries and redirect those funds in taking better care of our own impoverished and disadvantaged American citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-05-2016, 05:39 PM
Location: Silicon Valley
18,081 posts, read 22,924,480 times
Reputation: 35201
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
in effect you are not living on your low income . tax payers are just giving you more income .

no matter how you slice it you needed a higher income level one way or another .

not that everyone has these programs available or even qualify's for them but this gives you an idea of even if you have a poverty level income what your real income with assistance is really the equal of .

these charts are older and the numbers are much higher today .
The reality of my life has nothing to do with your charts. We're not talking about how low income help is financed. My point was that nobody is going to end up starving under a bridge with zero healthcare. I think this info will be more helpful than scaring the daylights out of someone who will never be able to amass a huge retirement fund.
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.

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

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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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