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)
View Poll Results: Retired- under 65? Do you get Obamacare Subsidies?
Yes and I am proud of it 28 31.46%
No, I am paying for the insurance without help 30 33.71%
My ex employer pays for my health insurance 21 23.60%
What is Obamacare? 10 11.24%
Voters: 89. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2017, 02:20 AM
 
35 posts, read 17,858 times
Reputation: 56

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ncguy444 View Post
Great post...your theory is 100% correct. It's kind of like when you are born with a silver spoon and inherit the family farm or business is that fair? A few years ago under Bush there was no inheritance tax even if you were giving away a billion dollars to your drug addicted kids. Is it fair that if you come from a wealthy family your parents can send you to best colleges enabling you to get the job opportunities that don't exist for most people? Is it ethical that if you are raised in a wealthy neighborhood all kinds of doors open up for you through neighborhood connections. The system is and will always be rigged to enhance the wealth and power of a select few through the power of lobbyists. Lastly, if you scrimp and save a little bit to maybe possibly make the lives of your children or grandchildren easier, should it all be taken away by the medical establishment whose greed is the primary cause of this particular issue..
"It's kind of like when you are born with a silver spoon and inherit the family farm or business is that fair?"

First, yes. life's not fair. And what about the people who were born into poverty or lower middle class, and ended up loaded... Personally know dozens of the latter. That's not fair either? Geez... stop complaining

"Is it fair that if you come from a wealthy family your parents can send you to best colleges enabling you to get the job opportunities that don't exist for most people?"

You can do the same when virtually destitute. My friend from Vietnam came to the US with literally $20, and now she is a top plastic surgeon at Mass General... a rarity, but if driven and smart enough, there is a way. Richest self-made Americans without a college degree: William H. Gates III William H. Gates III Harvard University, dropout Net worth: $43 billion Source: Microsoft Paul Allen Paul Allen Washington State University, dropout Net worth: $21 billion Source: Microsoft; Charter Communications Larry Ellison Larry Ellison University of Illinois, dropout Net worth: $15.2 billion Oracle Michael Dell Michael Dell University of Texas Austin, dropout Net worth: $11.2 billion Dell.
The average net worth of Forbes 400 members without a college degree is 6.6% higher than members with a degree.
Geez... stop complaining

"Is it ethical that if you are raised in a wealthy neighborhood all kinds of doors open up for you through neighborhood connections."
Ethical? Yes. Legal? Yes. Smart? Yes. Have you ever turned down an opportunity, through networking at one job to get a better one? Geez... stop complaining

"Lastly, if you scrimp and save a little bit to maybe possibly make the lives of your children or grandchildren easier, should it all be taken away by the medical establishment whose greed is the primary cause of this particular issue.."

We were taught to be dependent upon no one but ourselves. A little bit of scrimping and saving may help, but ultimately it is all up to the individual. Geez... stop complaining


This is a thread about using Obamacare during early retirement. Can we leave all the complaining at the site whiners.com?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-23-2017, 04:36 AM
 
Location: On the road
5,947 posts, read 2,895,036 times
Reputation: 11392
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
1). My point was to your statement that it is extremely rare for most people to retire with considerable assets when young. The percentage is larger than you think. At 45, most of my friends and I ended paying working careers, because they worked smarter, not harder.
To say this you must know what percentage retire early with considerable assets when young and what percentage I think have, so I'm fairly skeptical. There isn't even an agreed upon definition of vague terms like "extremely rare" to qualify/disqualify the claim. Anecdotal evidence does not a trend make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
2). In terms of taking time off, I have so many hobbies that my vacations are based on building things, learning things, and doing things complex enough that I was not sure I could do it. Ever build a pro-street drag car as a vacation hobby? I love it, and that ignores traveling 4 months a year now. To you it may suck, but this thread isn't about you; it is about retiring in your 30's and 40's with millions and using ACA.
Interesting hobbies and vacations are not mutually exclusive, one can have hobbies and still not go the route of not taking vacations for 20 years. The opinion "vacation=good" is hardly one owned only by me, so it isn't about making the thread about me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
3). Extremely rare? While only 1% of the millionaires at less than 35 years old (you know how many people that is?), the average age is 62, and there are 3.3M millionaires and 41.2 thousand millionaires worth over $30M. It is not exactly 'rare'. A dollar isn't what it used to be.
By your own statistics, 1% of the 3.3 million millionaires is under 35 so there are 33,000 millionaires under 35. What percentage of those 33,000 have annual incomes within the percentages of US poverty level to be using ACA subsidies, and are doing so? That is who we're talking about, and I submit it is insignificant compared to the US population and the number of people on ACA. The percentage of millionaires with assets over 30 million is completely irrelevant to the discussion unless you really believe they also have annual incomes within poverty level ranges, which I doubt.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
Back to the thread,; if you have serious illnesses (as I have had), private insurance is far, far more cost effective than ACA.
Absolutely false.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2017, 07:07 AM
 
1,283 posts, read 290,719 times
Reputation: 1518
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoByFour View Post
I am in favor of ACA and anything that gets us to a single-payer system, but I also think that the costs of that need to be in proportion to need. I personally don't think that retiring early while getting government subsidies is an ethical use of such a program. It might be legal, but it is questionable in my mind.

If you are using government subsidies in order for you to retire early, you are doing that at the expense of others. Just work longer and pay your own bills. I retired 3 years ago at 62 but I paid my own insurance 100%. And I am proud of it. I have no regrets about "poor tax planning" or whatever.
Are you ready to have government actuaries and accountants put a monetary value on your life? I think you'd do well to understand that the government DOES NOT think you're special. Especially if you're now a cost center or a liability. Health care is_a_finite_resource and there will be some form of rationing enforced. So think hard before you advocate for a single payer program. Google "Liverpool Care Protocol" and see what you think after that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2017, 07:37 AM
 
1,283 posts, read 290,719 times
Reputation: 1518
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
Imagine this scenario.

At age 60 you have accumulated two million dollars and have decided to wind down your career by switching to a part time lower paying job doing something you enjoy, now making only $18k annually but still same lifestyle due to significant retirement savings and still contributing to your IRA.

When you file your taxes, TurboTax points out that since you are low income but contributed to an IRA you qualify for the Retirement Savings Contributions Credit a program designed to encourage low income Americans to save money for retirement. What a nice surprise! The government wants to give you $2,500 for having put $5,000 in your IRA.

Do you turn it down?
Not this guy! Not a chance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2017, 10:36 AM
 
35 posts, read 17,858 times
Reputation: 56
My responses in red

Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
To say this you must know what percentage retire early with considerable assets when young and what percentage I think have, so I'm fairly skeptical. There isn't even an agreed upon definition of vague terms like "extremely rare" to qualify/disqualify the claim. Anecdotal evidence does not a trend make.

This is true... my sample size is only in the several hundreds; those that either worked with me or in a similar field, so my sample size is only a fraction of 1% of the 1% under-35 retired MM, of course with the IPO's that went off in our fields in the early 90's, there was a significant number of over-$30M youngsters mixed in with them. I had a pile of 20-something year-olds hardware engineers buying Brownstones in Boston with cash from the IPO's.


Interesting hobbies and vacations are not mutually exclusive, one can have hobbies and still not go the route of not taking vacations for 20 years. The opinion "vacation=good" is hardly one owned only by me, so it isn't about making the thread about me.

Just responding to your statement that did make an aspect of this thread all about you. You stated "To each their own, but to me this sucks." To some people, 'interesting hobbies = vacation = good'. "No thanks, gotta live a little man"



By your own statistics, 1% of the 3.3 million millionaires is under 35 so there are 33,000 millionaires under 35. What percentage of those 33,000 have annual incomes within the percentages of US poverty level to be using ACA subsidies, and are doing so? That is who we're talking about, and I submit it is insignificant compared to the US population and the number of people on ACA. The percentage of millionaires with assets over 30 million is completely irrelevant to the discussion unless you really believe they also have annual incomes within poverty level ranges, which I doubt.

"The number of U.S. households with a net worth of $1 million or more, excluding primary residence, rose to 9.63 million in 2013, according to a new report from Spectrem Group, a consulting and research firm. " More sources can be provided, but I assume you know Google. Not my statistics. I am just the messenger.

Back to the thread,; if you have serious illnesses (as I have had), private insurance is far, far more cost effective than ACA.

Absolutely false.

"Absolutely false" is a statement made when something cannot possibly be true, nor in any way accurate. A sample size of one event/situation/existence of the contrary makes the statement "absolutely false" as being "absolutely false". Since I do exist, and have had direct personal experience to the contrary of your statement, this single sample point is sufficient to discount your entire statement. Try again.

The topic of this thread is "Retired Early? Do you use Obamacare subsidies to help pay for your health insurance?" So, the readers of this post may: 1). Not care if you are skeptical, 2). Not care if you think not taking vacations suck, 3). Not care about how many or percentages of early-retired people use Obamacare, other than those who answer the question or have direct personal knowledge of those that do 4). not want to read statements made that are factually inaccurate (Such as 'Absolutely false'). Therefore, sticking to the question posed will demonstrate the ability of continuity of thought.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2017, 05:26 PM
 
Location: On the road
5,947 posts, read 2,895,036 times
Reputation: 11392
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
This is true... my sample size is only in the several hundreds
So your sample size isn't really useful to make broader generalizations about whether it is extremely rare for people to retire as millionaires in their 30s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
The number of U.S. households with a net worth of $1 million or more, excluding primary residence, rose to 9.63 million in 2013, according to a new report from Spectrem Group, a consulting and research firm. " More sources can be provided, but I assume you know Google. Not my statistics. I am just the messenger.
You are a messenger who doesn't understand that your statistics don't help your argument. Nobody has doubted there are millionaires, what I've claimed is that people accumulating millions to retire in their 30s is extremely rare. Showing the total number of millionaires regardless of age, and showing how many are under 35 without knowing whether they actually accumulated it themselves isn't relevant.

A quick look at Census statistics says there are about 85 million American adults under age 40. Assuming 1% of millionaires reach a million by 40* and that all of them actually accumulated a million themselves you're still looking at 0.11% of an adult under 40 being a millionaire. Back of napkin math and broad estimates so exact number certainly open to debate, but I'm pretty comfortable calling it extremely rare.

*source = It takes the typical self-made millionaire at least 32 years to get rich - Business Insider

Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
"Absolutely false" is a statement made when something cannot possibly be true, nor in any way accurate. A sample size of one event/situation/existence of the contrary makes the statement "absolutely false" as being "absolutely false". Since I do exist, and have had direct personal experience to the contrary of your statement, this single sample point is sufficient to discount your entire statement. Try again.
You need better grounding in logic, you made the absolute statement:

if you have serious illnesses (as I have had), private insurance is far, far more cost effective than ACA.

This implies that anyone who has a serious illness would find private insurance far more cost effective than ACA, since "you" is addressing everyone. Clearly that isn't the case, since for many people ACA would be far more cost effective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronSubotnick View Post
not want to read statements made that are factually inaccurate (Such as 'Absolutely false').
Yes, failings in logic and use of statistics, false claims about whether subsidies are taxed, poor grasp of safe withdrawal rates and retirement expense planning, and advice to not take vacations for decades have been a great contribution to the topic.


So back on topic =

I submit the number of people who retire early with millions then maintain an income within xyz percentage of poverty level to take advantage of subsidies is insignificant, and the cost of the government implementing a system to verify net worth might be a lot more than what the program saves.

I'd also guess that the majority of people questioning the ethics of people who accept the subsidies when they have significant assets would do they same if they were in the same position, if not ACA then other examples given such as qualifying for Savers Credit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2017, 08:56 PM
 
5,694 posts, read 8,762,354 times
Reputation: 4922
Here's a link to high risk pools. The link for my state came up 404 not found.

States That Have Risk Pools

I recall a high risk pool that was phased out with the ACA. Not sure how much value it had as ISTR the max payout was $30K.

I would appreciate it if other posters would contact their states and report which ones have functioning pools. Also please report if the pool is limited to low income individuals. That includes you, Mr subotnick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2017, 10:37 PM
 
6,623 posts, read 3,750,159 times
Reputation: 13698
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
A lot of people don't have subsidy. My kid doesn't get any subsidy, she doesn't have a lot of assets either, she gets her plan on the market. So I doubt about the going without insurance part.
Insurance for seniors is much more expensive than for a kid.

My ACA premium, the bottom of the bottom that doesn't have cancer doctors in its network or other specialists, and covers less than 50% of any high claim illness....starts at $898/month. Two plans up is a silver for $950/month. That's almost $12,000/year for one person. And it's not great insurance.

I'd have to use my IRA for that, which would deplete my life savings with one serious illness and those high premiums.

So that's why the ACA counts income and not assets. That would discourage people saving for their old age, which would mean there'd be a lot of old people having to have the govt help them pay for nursing homes. Nursing homes are more expensive than an ins. policy.

If the early retirees don't get health care, they'll sicker sooner.

So it's in the govt interest to assist older people, early retirees or retirees, to get health care.

INSURANCE is the problem. All that profit sucks money out of our economy and adds to the cost of health care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2017, 10:41 PM
 
6,623 posts, read 3,750,159 times
Reputation: 13698
Quote:
Originally Posted by creeksitter View Post
Here's a link to high risk pools. The link for my state came up 404 not found.

States That Have Risk Pools

I recall a high risk pool that was phased out with the ACA. Not sure how much value it had as ISTR the max payout was $30K.

I would appreciate it if other posters would contact their states and report which ones have functioning pools. Also please report if the pool is limited to low income individuals. That includes you, Mr subotnick.
I checked Louisiana and Texas. Those pools were cancelled as of 12/31/2014, when the Marketplace Exchange started.

I don't see the need for any state to have high risk pools, since high risk people can get ins. through Obamacare...at reduced rates from any high risk pool. (That's why MY premium is so high, though; I have to take up some of the slack for high risk people, since they aren't paying more. I am paying more, because I'm not high risk.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2017, 11:23 PM
 
825 posts, read 564,997 times
Reputation: 2603
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
Imagine this scenario.

At age 60 you have accumulated two million dollars and have decided to wind down your career by switching to a part time lower paying job doing something you enjoy, now making only $18k annually but still same lifestyle due to significant retirement savings and still contributing to your IRA.

When you file your taxes, TurboTax points out that since you are low income but contributed to an IRA you qualify for the Retirement Savings Contributions Credit a program designed to encourage low income Americans to save money for retirement. What a nice surprise! The government wants to give you $2,500 for having put $5,000 in your IRA.

Do you turn it down?
Because my own situation is not too far off from the one proposed above, I looked into the Retirement Savings Contribution Credit. The highest tax credit possible for one individual is $1000; the IRS only grants a tax credit for the first $2000 of an individual's retirement savings contribution. For a married couple filing jointly, the maximum credit possible is $2000 (half of a hypothetical $4000 contribution).

So nobody is getting $2500 for putting $5k in his/her IRA. Still, this tax credit is nothing to sneeze at, and I thank you for making me aware of its existence.

https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans...-savers-credit
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