Medicare and Social Security: What you paid compared with what y

Nevada · #41 02/10/13, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Vet

That is what you get for letting the government take care of you instead of taking care of your self. If you had a account to spend any way you want on health care you will have a much better health care and some left over to suplement your retirement.

Wishful thinking. For both SS & Medicare, you'll never do as well in the private sector.

unregistered168043 · #42 02/10/13, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haypoint

I guess if you are dead it matters not. Out living your Health Care is quite a bit different. You want your wife to die of untreated cancer because her Health Savings account couldn't cover it? What's the next step? SS age limit? Just stop paying because you are too old? Stop paying if you use up the SS you paid in?
Sure there are people that never collect. But most get back more than they put in.

It does matter if you have been forced to pay money into something that you never live to collect. That money could have been used to enrich your life while you lived. If that happens voluntarily, by choice, then that is one thing. When people are FORCED to pay into something they have to divert resources that they may have chosen to spend elsewhere. This robs them of their choices and interferes with their personal pursuit of happiness. I'm not sure how anyone can justify that...you steal someone's money on the premise of it being 'for their own good', then it turns out that it wasn't. Can you go back and give that person everything that they sacrificed to pay into this scheme? If not, then you have no right to take it.

And the assumption that 'most get back more than they put in' is one that I do not accept. The inflation was underestimated, and they never considered the huge number of people who die without collecting a dime. They only considered a hypothetical person who lived to be 76 and paid in x amount for x amount of time. The article presented a superficial, almost juvenile type of logic.

unregistered168043 · #43 02/10/13, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevada

Both Social Security and Medicare are types of annuities, where benefits are available for as long as you live. That means they are insurance against growing very old. The average life span is about 78 now, so half of us will be gone by that age. When people die young, their contributions are applied to those who live to be very old. Again, it's the nature of insurance to do that.

People who die young didn't get screwed. They just never grew old to need the benefits, similar to not having your house burn down so you never needed fire insurance benefits.

Thats fine when the insurance is voluntarily entered into by the individual. When the person is robbed of that choice then whoever does the robbing takes responsibility for denying that person everything that they might have chosen to use that money for. IMO nobody has that right. That is the problem with mandatory legislation that is aimed at promoting 'the common good', it rarely does what it intends to do and carries all the unintended consequences that come with robbing the individual of their choices. This interferes with the pursuit happiness, contaminates the market, and drags society down to the lowest common denominator.

belladulcinea · #44 02/10/13, 03:57 PM

So do these figures take into account just what the individual paid in or what both the employer and the individual paid in?

unregistered168043 · #45 02/10/13, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevada

That's the nature of insurance. What happens if your house doesn't burn down and how much do you get back?

Yes that is the nature of gambling. I have no problem with it when it is voluntarily entered into by the individual. When the money is stolen and gambled with on the premise of some elitist knowing how to gamble your money better than you, thats what I object to.

All the people who die before collecting a DIME, who have had their money stolen their entire working lives by people who claim to know how to spend their money better then them....those people have been horribly wronged. They've been cheated out of life. They can't speak for themselves so I guess the injustice goes unnoticed by those who think they know better.

unregistered168043 · #46 02/10/13, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO_cows

A brief review of the obituaries in the Kansas City Star shows that 18 out of 89 people who died this week were 65 or younger. 20% who probably paid in but drew nothing out.

Exactly. Then there are those who may live to be 66 and still lose on the deal because they only collect for 1 year. Then 67,68,69,70....at what age do you even break even? Then add in all those who don't even retire at 65 but work until they are much older, or are dead. They live to be older but collect very little or nothing. If we had the true figures we would probably see that it is close to a 50/50 gamble. The article doesnt consider any of these real life situations, only the hypothetical 'perfect scenario'.

Nevada · #47 02/10/13, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darntootin

Yes that is the nature of gambling. I have no problem with it when it is voluntarily entered into by the individual. When the money is stolen and gambled with on the premise of some elitist knowing how to gamble your money better than you, thats what I object to.

Insurance is a gamble, I agree, but the legal definition of gambling & insurance differ.

Gambling is when you have no interest in the outcome except monetary. For example, you have no interest in where the ball might land during a roulette wheel spin except whether you might profit from where it lands.

Insurance is when you have interests in the outcome other than monetary. For example, you don't want your house to burn down because your house is important to you for reasons other than its monetary value. Likewise, life insurance benefits are not as important to you as staying alive.

Nevada · #48 02/10/13, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darntootin

All the people who die before collecting a DIME, who have had their money stolen their entire working lives by people who claim to know how to spend their money better then them....those people have been horribly wronged. They've been cheated out of life. They can't speak for themselves so I guess the injustice goes unnoticed by those who think they know better.

Do you feel the same way about fire insurance when you home doesn't burn down? Do you feel the same way about car insurance when you don't have a wreck?

belladulcinea · #49 02/10/13, 05:21 PM

Home and car insurance are not ripped out your pay check, you can get away without both, car not so much these days but it still is happening and you also have choices of how much you are willing to pay, the deductible and so on. How do you keep from paying SS or Medicare?????

Nevada · #50 02/10/13, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by belladulcinea

Home and car insurance are not ripped out your pay check, you can get away without both, car not so much these days but it still is happening and you also have choices of how much you are willing to pay, the deductible and so on. How do you keep from paying SS or Medicare?????

Almost everybody who has car and fire insurance is forced to have it. The DMV forces you to get car insurance, and your mortgage company forces you to get fire insurance.

belladulcinea · #51 02/10/13, 06:05 PM

You do not HAVE to own a home, you do not HAVE to buy a car, you can choose how you want to insure your car/home. You HAVE to pay SS and Medicare if you get a paycheck. It's apples to oranges.

arabian knight · #52 02/10/13, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevada

Wishful thinking. For both SS & Medicare, you'll never do as well in the private sector.

I think you had better talk to the folks that are from the railroad before making a blanket statement like that.
And the few counties in Texas that not only are people getting Twice as much but some even are getting 3 times the amount IF they had gone through the SS System.

arabian knight · #53 02/10/13, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by belladulcinea

You do not HAVE to own a home, you do not HAVE to buy a car, you can choose how you want to insure your car/home. You HAVE to pay SS and Medicare if you get a paycheck. It's apples to oranges.

Agree 100%
And not only that. you have WAY more policies to CHOICE FROM, in any of those type of insurance programs, AND you also have the CHOICE to go as LOW as you want in coverage or as high as you want. Apples and oranges never do mix and neither will trying to compare auto insurance to this MANDATED Health carp.

arabian knight · #54 02/10/13, 06:16 PM

Reagan, Clinton, Bush: the second-term curse awaiting Obama

Quote:

“Obamacare” is not out of the woods yet, despite having survived an election and a Supreme Court challenge. Some governors refuse to accept federal funds enabling the expansion of Medicaid in their states. Congressional Republicans will demand the dismantling of Obamacare provisions in looming negotiations over spending cuts. The next two years will decide whether Obamacare dies a death by a thousand cuts or is strengthened for future expansion.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/21/...bile&wpmp_tp=1

Nevada · #55 02/10/13, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by belladulcinea

You do not HAVE to own a home, you do not HAVE to buy a car, you can choose how you want to insure your car/home.

Sure. You can rent, in which case you pay your landlord's fore insurance. You can also take the bus, in which case you help pay the bus company's auto insurance.

Old Vet · #56 02/10/13, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevada

Wishful thinking. For both SS & Medicare, you'll never do as well in the private sector.

Not if you take the crowns shilling. On the other hand if you had a account that was started at birth and you had money added to it every year and not sent to the government and had control of who to spend it with you wold find that medical cost would come way down. It is called capitalist but if you don't thing that is the way to go then go to another country that does not have it. I said nothing about insurance or co pays.

where I want to · #57 02/10/13, 07:15 PM

In the first place, many of the people who die before getting social security leave children and occasionally spouses who collect on their record. And many people who die before retirement age still get social security disability.
As for the argument from people who say they would have been so much richer if social security funds had not been "wrenched" from their income, the same proportion of people who can't seem to save a dime for the future now would have done the same with any additional money. And a whole lot of people would have lost money in the stock market or through fraud or those a law suit or though misjudgement or sheer carelessness ...........
Like with other money, most would be in the position of working til they died, which would probably not be so long without Medicare. Picture a lot of old people begging for charity or living with their children, wihich is how my great grandparents lived in their old age. I, on the other hand, actually did not have to support my parents, which left more freedom for me to save.
A very few would be richer- most would be desperate.

arabian knight · #58 02/10/13, 08:46 PM

All railroad workers on not on the SS System. That takes in a bunch. And besides even when Bush was pushing for some getting out of SS System is was Voluntary, so those close to retirement would not be doing it anyways. It was really aimed at the young workers to have MORE money for them in their retirement years.
And still is a god idea.

Tricky Grama · #59 02/11/13, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by belladulcinea

Home and car insurance are not ripped out your pay check, you can get away without both, car not so much these days but it still is happening and you also have choices of how much you are willing to pay, the deductible and so on. How do you keep from paying SS or Medicare?????

Medicare and Social Security: What you paid compared with what y - General Chat

Tricky Grama · #60 02/11/13, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haley1

Who funds the hsa for the child?

It is funded as ins. is.