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.
Just for the record.... who are the affluent elderly, anyways?
: flowing in abundance <affluent streams> <affluent creativity> : having a generously sufficient and typically increasing supply of material possessions <our affluent society
---
Alternatives to means tests (which is what this is all about btw)...
seem to focus on what those affluent people will do with their "excess" (charity, fuzzy kittens, etc)
Remember the driving test over certain age thread?
The implication there was that despite all the assertions to the contrary...
the larger number simply won't self regulate.
The government has been pilfering SS for years and using the money for whatever they needed, like a slush fund. I think LBJ was the one who started it. Why should people be penalized for their liberal spending?
1. The fact of having a right to something.
2. The amount to which a person has a right.
SSA refers to someone who 1. is "insured", meaning they have paid into the SS system according to the rules (or is a dependent of someone who is insured and eligible for benefits on the worker's record), and 2. applied for their benefits, as "entitled". Before applying they are "eligible".
Someone who is not insured is not eligible for SS, but may be eligible for Supplemental security income (SSI), which is not an insurance, it is welfare, and carries stringent income and asset limits in order to qualify for it.
Entitlement is not a dirty word, it refers to having the right to something. Once you apply and have been approved, you become entitled to it. In the case of welfare or public assistance, you are entitled as long as you are within the limits, and it is, or should be, taken away once you exceed the limits.
: flowing in abundance <affluent streams> <affluent creativity> : having a generously sufficient and typically increasing supply of material possessions <our affluent society
Could you be a bit more specific rather than giving me dictionary definitions of the words. I had a philosophy prof 41 years ago who, when you asked him about the meaning of a passage, would read it slower. If you persisted, he would read the paragraph sylable by sylable. Very early on, no one every asked him any questions again.
Many seniors have nothing because they squandered their money throughout their life. Others budgeted, invested and planned for their retirement. So, because they did the right thing they should be penalized? I think not.
Actually Social security doesn't become an entitlement according to the SSA until you have had 120 quarters in the system.
If you move to Maine, with less than 120 Quarters(30 years) in the system, and work for just one day as a teacher there(as well as 17 other US states), you will lose 70-100% of your social security benefits.
Once you reach 30 years in the system, (something I did more than 10 years ago), then you reach permanent status, and nothing can keep you from getting you payment except your own government or a national catastrophe.
Many seniors have nothing because they squandered their money throughout their life. Others budgeted, invested and planned for their retirement. So, because they did the right thing they should be penalized? I think not.
That's the way getting a student loan for your kid works. If you have yourself into total Hock, and have no money to your name, then your kids and you can get mucho payments for their education. But if you paid off your house, and have no really bills to pay, then you are expected to come up with the $30,000 a year all by yourself, essentially putting yourself in Hock like the others.
Just for the record.... who are the affluent elderly, anyways?
: flowing in abundance <affluent streams> <affluent creativity> : having a generously sufficient and typically increasing supply of material possessions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarathu
Could you be a bit more specific rather than giving me dictionary definitions of the words.
It isn't defined in this context.
At best... it's implied.
Sorry, but I can't be more specific until "they" are.
(btw, neither can anyone else)
The government has been pilfering SS for years and using the money for whatever they needed, like a slush fund. I think LBJ was the one who started it. Why should people be penalized for their liberal spending?
: flowing in abundance <affluent streams> <affluent creativity> : having a generously sufficient and typically increasing supply of material possessions
It isn't defined in this context.
At best... it's implied.
Sorry, but I can't be more specific until "they" are.
(btw, neither can anyone else)
Oh... its another kind of elderly bashing. I failed to see it for what it is.
Did you enjoy Buffets offer to pay like everyone else. I don't believe he really meant it. I think he was willing to pay more on what he claims that his company pays him for a salary, which is about 100K a year. But his real income is about 2.5 billion a year. I don't think he was planning on paying what I pay, which would be 11% of 2.5 billion, or more than $250 million a year.
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 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.
