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 03-02-2018, 03:35 PM
 
Location: California
30,693 posts, read 33,456,199 times
Reputation: 26112

Advertisements

Why are they waiting for you guys to retire before wanting to move in with you? I'm confused about that part.


You either want to live with others or you don't. I would think a healthy married couple would not, with the exception of raising any children they might have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-03-2018, 06:44 AM
 
1,527 posts, read 633,511 times
Reputation: 5072
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Isn't this the way things use to be? Isn't this how they were for many, many years around the world? Isn't this the way it is for many families in America still today? Parents, siblings etc etc being able to provide for the common good. With cuts in SS, Medicaid and Medicare possible, things might come back after going full circle in some families.
Yes, but pooling resources and working together for the common good is different from enabling freeloaders. In the first situation, everyone (assuming mental and/or physical capability here) contributes something such as money, doing chores, caregiving, etc. In the second, one person or group provides but doesn’t receive anything even if the people for whom they provide have the ability to contribute.

From the OP’s post, I infer that the relatives habitually have been less than responsible with their finances and that they are aspiring freeloaders. I would not be inclined to help them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 07:16 AM
 
29,774 posts, read 34,856,103 times
Reputation: 11687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusano View Post
Yes, but pooling resources and working together for the common good is different from enabling freeloaders. In the first situation, everyone (assuming mental and/or physical capability here) contributes something such as money, doing chores, caregiving, etc. In the second, one person or group provides but doesn’t receive anything even if the people for whom they provide have the ability to contribute.

From the OP’s post, I infer that the relatives habitually have been less than responsible with their finances and that they are aspiring freeloaders. I would not be inclined to help them.
In cultures that embrace this, it begins from birth with shared communal activities that create the bond. It is known that not all will be successful and from birth a shared life experience is promoted. In many cultures that is why parents have multiple children hoping some will be able to care for them in their old age.

Shared responsibilities begin at a young age and continues through life. One debilitating accident and the go getter sister might become dependent on their less than motivated brother to help her get by.

There are those elected officials who believe that it is the role of the family and not Medicaid to provide for seniors who can't afford services. That family can and should be part of the resources seniors have in addition to their savings and not be reliant on just SS. It is a existing mindset.

Some might even argue that it is the broad social safety net that has created changes in the family and changes in individual responsibility to their families and their own lives.

This could be the last year of divorce as we currently no it. All because of tax law changes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 07:42 AM
 
6,239 posts, read 4,721,373 times
Reputation: 12780
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
.......
There are those elected officials who believe that it is the role of the family and not Medicaid to provide for seniors who can't afford services. That family can and should be part of the resources seniors have in addition to their savings and not be reliant on just SS. It is a existing mindset.

.........
It may be an "existing mindset" but the concept is seriously out of date. Less than 50% of kids live in a traditional family and the percentage continues to drop. We have plenty of elected officials who are seriously behind the times when it comes to gender roles, sexual orientation, personal freedoms, and all sorts of other issues.


Fewer than half of US kids live in 'traditional' family | Pew Research Center
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 08:02 AM
 
29,774 posts, read 34,856,103 times
Reputation: 11687
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
It may be an "existing mindset" but the concept is seriously out of date. Less than 50% of kids live in a traditional family and the percentage continues to drop. We have plenty of elected officials who are seriously behind the times when it comes to gender roles, sexual orientation, personal freedoms, and all sorts of other issues.


Fewer than half of US kids live in 'traditional' family | Pew Research Center
As I noted some would say that it is the existing Social Net of recent history that has created the conditions you note. Some would say the current path is not sustainable and we need to recreate what once worked with ethics and morals that complement it. Some might say they have had considerable success in gaining elected office and are actively using their time to change the current path and once AGAIN be what they preferred life to be. The path forward is not seen the same in our society and many are not willing to give up what they consider fundamental in order to embrace the change that others seek.

Heck budget cuts and tax cuts creating deficits and more budget cuts may well bring about a different family/social paradigm than what many now want to embrace. How many homeless does it take to make a change? Even tariffs on steel and aluminum along with the recent increase in lumbar cost will make many rethink what their housing options will be as less comes to market and what does is more expensive. The changes in the new tax law on alimony etc may create more families staying together even if unhappy but still under the same roof with the kids. Behavioral Economics can go both ways, Progressive or Conservative.

So let the games begin or should I say continue!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 08:26 AM
 
6,239 posts, read 4,721,373 times
Reputation: 12780
You seem to believe that politicians and society should decide how others should behave. Those acceptable behaviors are what once worked, what some consider to be ethical or moral. I and many others are 100% opposed to that approach. It has something to do with freedom, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness instead of ideas that one group wants to impose on another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 01:00 PM
 
29,774 posts, read 34,856,103 times
Reputation: 11687
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
You seem to believe that politicians and society should decide how others should behave. Those acceptable behaviors are what once worked, what some consider to be ethical or moral. I and many others are 100% opposed to that approach. It has something to do with freedom, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness instead of ideas that one group wants to impose on another.
And I assume also the right to be homeless, broke, unable to provide in old age, broken family, divorced, illness, substance abuse, being on the wrong side of income inequality, debt etc etc.

The wonders of freedom of pursuit. Oh yes and may I add College debt because parents said Nada after 18 and then their kids say Nada when the parents are aged and unable to take care of themselves,
so their parents suffer at some point if they can't provide for themselves.

With freedom as you describe it comes the big R word you left out and that is RESPONSIBILITY along with the A word of ACCOUNTABIITY for the life choices freedom allowed you.

People are perfectly happy to allow people to live their lives as they choose and to let them live with the outcomes of their choices. What creates the friction is when the advocates of that right to choose then want someone else to pick up the costs to fix their lives. Not saying I agree but I am able to read the tea leaves and see the direction things are heading.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 01:11 PM
 
1,527 posts, read 633,511 times
Reputation: 5072
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
In cultures that embrace this, it begins from birth with shared communal activities that create the bond. It is known that not all will be successful and from birth a shared life experience is promoted. In many cultures that is why parents have multiple children hoping some will be able to care for them in their old age.

Shared responsibilities begin at a young age and continues through life. One debilitating accident and the go getter sister might become dependent on their less than motivated brother to help her get by.

There are those elected officials who believe that it is the role of the family and not Medicaid to provide for seniors who can't afford services. That family can and should be part of the resources seniors have in addition to their savings and not be reliant on just SS. It is a existing mindset.

Some might even argue that it is the broad social safety net that has created changes in the family and changes in individual responsibility to their families and their own lives.

This could be the last year of divorce as we currently no it. All because of tax law changes.
I am not sure about the divorce ending part, but agree with much of your post otherwise. Accidents and illnesses certainly have undesirable effects. I hate being dependent on anyone! I don’t mind helping in cases of misfortune; I don’t think most people mind that. However, if a family member goes gambling and loses the rent money, he’d better expect to be homeless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 01:12 PM
 
6,239 posts, read 4,721,373 times
Reputation: 12780
Freedom includes the ability to make choices that others consider to be poor or choices that leave the individual in a bad place.


I think most of us would agree that society needs to at least prevent people from starving in the streets. Beyond that most of us do want to avoid bailing out people under most circumstances. Most of these concerns about other people's choices have little to do with reality. The vast majority of people who find themselves in dire straits got that way through health issues or accidents that have nothing to do with poor choices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 01:20 PM
 
29,774 posts, read 34,856,103 times
Reputation: 11687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusano View Post
I am not sure about the divorce ending part, but agree with much of your post otherwise. Accidents and illnesses certainly have undesirable effects. I hate being dependent on anyone! I don’t mind helping in cases of misfortune; I don’t think most people mind that. However, if a family member goes gambling and loses the rent money, he’d better expect to be homeless.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextave.../#7fc1981f4e02

Quote:
The House bill explains the rationale for changing the alimony rules this way: “The provision would eliminate what is effectively a ‘divorce subsidy’ under current law, in that a divorced couple can often achieve a better tax result for payments between them than a married couple can.”
The arbitrage created by the difference in tax rates has long served as a benefit to the spouse paying the alimony and has been a factor both in negotiating matrimonial settlements and in bridging the gap between the parties’ needs and their actual income. Judges ruling in contested matrimonial matters typically take the tax deductibility and taxable income of alimony into account.
What the Effect Might Be on Couples Who Divorce
If alimony is no longer deductible, the ability of an ex-spouse to pay it may be limited, due to other fixed expenses, such as child support payments, and education expenses for children. There is only so much juice that can be squeezed from the orange.
Everyone understands that divorce creates a trauma not only for couple involved, but most particularly for their children. Two separated families cannot live as cheaply as one. The present tax structure helps lessen or ameliorate those burdens. It is very difficult for divorcing couples to instantaneously make lifestyle adjustments which coincide with the necessary reduction of income to each party.
If the alimony provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act takes effect, it would clearly make a difficult and painful experience more difficult and more painful.
https://greatlakesdfs.com/tax-reform...rce-rate-2018/

Quote:
When tax reform was passed in December, the tax deduction for spousal support (alimony) was eliminated. However, for marriages that are terminated by December 31, 2018, the tax deduction will be grandfathered. After that, there will be no more deduction for spousal support. Like the way child support is currently treated, it will be tax neutral to the payor and to the receiver.
For marriages where there is a large discrepancy in income between the two parties, this could mean a lot less income to go around. It could also mean that the payor will be agreeable to a much smaller amount of spousal support. Don’t misunderstand. This is not a negative for one party or the other. It is negative for both. Less income to go around generally means less income for both parties (not one of the other). This could be particularly tricky for those who are duking it out in court as the timeline is not in their control.
Only time will tell but could get interesting as time passes.
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