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)
 
Old 01-09-2017, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,134 posts, read 13,651,906 times
Reputation: 22174

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
one reasonable plan i saw had 3 changes .

increase payroll taxes a little bit
increase the cap on payroll taxes so higher incomes can pay more and get more
extend the retirement age to 69 over the next 48 years .

we are adding 1 year of life every 4 years approx. so 48 years from now life expectancy will be such that at 69 the masses will still have the same number of "healthy " years in retirement .
Life expectancy has increased for the wealthy but since 1980 it has decreased for the lower middle class & the poor https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.aa5fc14dcd6c
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2017, 11:00 AM
 
Location: SoCal
13,307 posts, read 6,369,679 times
Reputation: 9937
I'm surprised they only keep track since 1980, I would think it's a no brainier that this is a long term problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 11:33 AM
 
105 posts, read 93,933 times
Reputation: 230
The media narrative is everyone is living longer and as a result we all should work until we are seventy.

Just because the rich live longer does not mean that working class folks are in better shape in their sixties than they were 20 years ago. Or that employers are more open to hiring people in their 60s. In fact, working class people are generally in worse physical condition, are not living longer and face more age discrimination than 20 years ago. And with falling real inflation adjusted wages for working class folks, they find it harder to save and invest for retirement. AGREE?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,134 posts, read 13,651,906 times
Reputation: 22174
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I know it's here in California. If you are homeless, no money, how do they charge you? hospitals can't turn you away. See below link for where to go. County clinics.
How to find medical care if you're uninsured | Center for Health Reporting
There is no requirement that any hospital other than a County hospital provide non emergent in patient care.
Out of 58 counties, only 12 have County Hospitals. Access and quality of indigent care in California depends on where you live.

The good news is that California has a decent medicaid system (medi-cal) and also offers expanded medicaid, so there are far fewer people in the state without access to healthcare than there are in some other states.

If they end expanded medicaid it's not going to be good for California, there is no infrastructure in place to provide healthcare to the 2 million Californians who became eligible under the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 11:56 AM
 
249 posts, read 197,564 times
Reputation: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I know it's here in California. If you are homeless, no money, how do they charge you? hospitals can't turn you away. See below link for where to go. County clinics.
How to find medical care if you're uninsured | Center for Health Reporting
Hospitals close their emergency rooms to avoid the uninsured, this makes care less available for the insured.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 12:00 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,307 posts, read 6,369,679 times
Reputation: 9937
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
There is no requirement that any hospital other than a County hospital provide non emergent in patient care.
Out of 58 counties, only 12 have County Hospitals. Access and quality of indigent care in California depends on where you live.

The good news is that California has a decent medicaid system (medi-cal) and also offers expanded medicaid, so there are far fewer people in the state without access to healthcare than there are in some other states.

If they end expanded medicaid it's not going to be good for California, there is no infrastructure in place to provide healthcare to the 2 million Californians who became eligible under the law.
Hospitals are not allowed to turn sick people away. That's why they push for ACA so hospitals can get paid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 12:00 PM
 
9,893 posts, read 3,284,238 times
Reputation: 7254
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I think this is for younger generation. When I was in college, my FRA was raised from 65 to 67. It will be 10 more years before I can get SS. I'm hoping they will keep the 62 years as the earliest you can take out. But Congress has to do something. The U.K. has already raised the retirement age for people younger than 40 to 68.
Edit to say, you can't take money out at 62 in UK.
the UK has a vastly deeper, wider and stronger social safety net. if you lose your job after 50 in the UK you will receive a much more reasonable income stream until the day you die. You will have strong healthcare coverage the entire time, you will never go hungry . Unemployed in the UK and you are much less likely to lose your home, the state makes efforts to help keep you in your home in order to help protect the family and to help keep you as a "stakeholder" or "invested" ...


Frankly the UK is so far ahead in terms of supporting those who need it that there is little point even comparing them.




I would add it sounds like you dont think it matters all that much because it is for the "younger" gen. the truth is we can afford to pay SS so much than the republicans want you to know. In fact we have more than enough monies to pay SS and healthcare but instead we spend it fighting endless and pointless wars that do nothing to make us more secure and in fact have made us the primary target in world...


SS is vital. People need security, it is even in the title! Social Security. Pushing the age out further only means that more old folks will be forced to work themselves to death, more will have to work while suffering from cancer or other crippling disorders. We need to provide stronger deeper wider social safety nets. Security in healthcare, old age pensions, and shelter are the keystones to aninvested secure happy population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 12:01 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,307 posts, read 6,369,679 times
Reputation: 9937
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmarlin20 View Post
Hospitals close their emergency rooms to avoid the uninsured, this makes care less available for the insured.
How can they do that. Any hospital has to have emergency room. I dont see it's around here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 12:10 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,307 posts, read 6,369,679 times
Reputation: 9937
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilcart View Post
the UK has a vastly deeper, wider and stronger social safety net. if you lose your job after 50 in the UK you will receive a much more reasonable income stream until the day you die. You will have strong healthcare coverage the entire time, you will never go hungry . Unemployed in the UK and you are much less likely to lose your home, the state makes efforts to help keep you in your home in order to help protect the family and to help keep you as a "stakeholder" or "invested" ...


Frankly the UK is so far ahead in terms of supporting those who need it that there is little point even comparing them.




I would add it sounds like you dont think it matters all that much because it is for the "younger" gen. the truth is we can afford to pay SS so much than the republicans want you to know. In fact we have more than enough monies to pay SS and healthcare but instead we spend it fighting endless and pointless wars that do nothing to make us more secure and in fact have made us the primary target in world...


SS is vital. People need security, it is even in the title! Social Security. Pushing the age out further only means that more old folks will be forced to work themselves to death, more will have to work while suffering from cancer or other crippling disorders. We need to provide stronger deeper wider social safety nets. Security in healthcare, old age pensions, and shelter are the keystones to aninvested secure happy population.
You would think. My husband's best friend is in this category. He has a Phd in engineering but has not been fully employed since he got laid off from an oil job in the USA when he was in his mid 40s. Has not found a real full time job since. With all the social safety net I've heard, I'm not too confident about it. His standard of living is very low, even with a wife still working. How low? He refused to throw out a pickle onion jar that expired in 2012. He ate the whole thing. He's even eaten rotten salads that I refused to eat while making joke that he has strong stomach, never got sick. He rarely eats large portion of meat until I bought them and cooked them. His claim is that meat is not good, but admitted sheepishly that it costs too much money so he doesn't buy them. Yet he was happy to ate all the pork chop that I cooked, the meat costing me at most $3. His house is paid off because of inheritance. So all in all, he thinks he has a good life. My husband and I thought otherwise. While he is a bit eccentric but if it's not considered a good life, not to our standard.

Regarding SS, I never said its not vital, my husband gets SS, but the whole thing about more tax is not always the best way to fix SS or for growth. Hence we may have to end up depend more on government. It's a safety net.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 12:17 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque NM
1,663 posts, read 1,530,329 times
Reputation: 3650
Fifteen percent or $600 of my property taxes go to support the local county hospital. The memorandum of understanding between the county and the hospital for the mil rate indicates that the funding (9% of the hospital revenues) is to provide care to "indigent residents of the county." But the hospital has no intention of tracking where the money goes so the money actually goes to treat any indigents showing up to include many illegal immigrants. Basically my county, located in the center of the state, is subsidizing the rest of the state and illegals and our tax rate is already almost twice that of the other counties.
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.

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