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.
Aaaannnnndddd, once again it becomes about your, I emphasize your, choices over the last 30 years leavened with blaming the government for having rules controlling properties from becoming slums.
It's about government and (the loss of) property rights.
But this should hardly be a surprise, since government's property rules - which redistribute income from renters to owners - flowed naturally from an unjust Constitution imposed on landless citizens without their representation.
When people ask me how can they retire, I tell them:
- Pay off your house or move to a cheaper house debt free
- Pay off all other debts
- Wait at least until age 65 because without Medicare your medical expenses are unknown and could become overwhelming
- Make sure you have a secure lifetime income stream that is enough to support your lifestyle
My observation is that the ones who want to retire cannot afford to do it and the ones who can retire want to continue working.
Inspired by Clint Eastwood, awareness of my limitations leads me to seek the tiny house that will allow me to enjoy a modest lifestyle in retirement, but government would rather I be a rent slave enriching some landlord than own that tiny house.
You can't afford a $200 phone. You truly believe you could afford a house, of any size?
When people ask me how can they retire, I tell them:
s
- Wait at least until age 65 because without Medicare your medical expenses are unknown and could become overwhelming
- Make sure you have a secure lifetime income stream that is enough to support your lifestyle
.
But what if you can afford to purchase a health plan on your own?
But what if you can afford to purchase a health plan on your own?
no way in hell I'm working till 65....
depending on your income the aca plans can be subsidized and have cost sharing on the co-pays and out of pockets. retirement requires you to be able to afford the things you need , it is a privilege for those who can afford to not work . retirement is not a right so it is best that you can afford what you need .
unfortunately being financially independent is required regardless of how much you don't want to or can't work .
depending on your income the aca plans can be subsidized and have cost sharing on the co-pays and out of pockets. retirement requires you to be able to afford the things you need , it is a privilege for those who can afford to not work . retirement is not a right so it is best that you can afford what you need .
unfortunately being financially independent is required regardless of how much you don't want to or can't work .
hey math...couple things..I'm in no way betting on it,but I read part of Clintons health plan will be Medicare for 55 and above which would be great...assuming that doesn't happen I'm still budgeting 10K per year for health care per year from ages 55-65...
i am not medicare age either but i am retired . i pay 6200.00 for myself on cobra with 2500 deductible and 2500 out of pocket . that is no dental , no vision .
my wife is on medicare and a supplement . we use a high deductible supplement . she runs about 4K a year but the supplement has a 2k deductible before they pay a thing. the good thing is her supplement pays for her gym through silver sneakers which by itself is 480 a year .
Scary thing is many workers could end up "retired" a lot earlier than 67 if the trend to eliminate older workers continues.
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.