Well, hell, if THAT'S all you're worried about

Post #143,318 by jb4 2/25/04 6:02:11 PM Reply	Well, hell, if THAT'S all you're worried about we can fix that by ammending the SS rules so that no freeloading spouse can suck on the ~~corporate~~federal tit by simply outliving his/her/its spouse! It's all too simple! jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating that facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #143,366 by mmoffitt 2/25/04 9:17:54 PM Reply	But they don't have to outlive them! All they have to do is turn 62. They never contribute a dime to the SS [sic] Trust Fund but they get 50% of what their working spouse is entitled to when that spouse reaches age 65. I'm not worried about it at all. Something I don't understand is why the federal government would be interested in this at all. I mean, hell, the states issue marriage licenses - it is not a federal issue at all! bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.
Post #143,376 by boxley 2/25/04 9:50:32 PM Reply	making sure I dont have a problem with that Maybe I misunderstood. My wife has/is raising 4 children, puts up with my shit and keeps this famdamily running. I have been paying into the fund since the age of 14 and vever expected to live to 48 much less 60 so after all the cash I put in I dam well expect the rest of you folks to pay my share until she croaks which considering her mom is 83 and she has none of my bad habits is fair enough for all the cash ya 'all have soaked out of me over the years. 2 guys living together in late middle age and one croaks, the other being a typical guy will find a bar close to home and stay there till they croak of cirrosis. My wife dies after my kids leave I will prolly do the same thing. I dont see a financial downside here by making this available to gay men. However I think that gay women couples should have their retirement age moved to 75 as statistically women live a lot longer than men and married women live longer than married men so 2 women married to each other are going to live forever out of spite. thanx, bill when I was young I envisioned myself as the embodiment of Trinity, Now I realize I have turned into the Bambino questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #143,388 by drewk 2/25/04 10:51:19 PM Reply	Well if that's up for discussion ... However I think that gay women couples should have their retirement age moved to 75 as statistically women live a lot longer than men Considering the retirement age was set at 62 at a time when the average life expectance was about, oh ... 62 ... it seems the financials would work out better if SS retirement age was indexed to average life expectancy. "Oh, but what about my golden years?" The program was put in place to take care of people who didn't have the decency to die once they were too old to work. It was not intended to supplement the income of fit seniors golfing their way across Florida.</generalization> === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #143,389 by Another Scott 2/25/04 11:23:29 PM Reply	Someone here mentioned that life expectancy ... isn't a terribly meaningful statistic in this discussion. It's true that the life expectancy at birth has risen dramatically in the last 100 years, but that's primarily due to improvements in the number of children living past age 5 (or so). If you believe [link\|http://www.ifs.org.uk/conferences/poterba/sld005.htm\|this] slide, the life expectancy for men at age 65 has only increased abut 10 years in the last 1800 years. SS should be treated as social insurance, not an entitlement. That would go a long way toward solving its financial difficulties. My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
Post #143,391 by boxley 2/25/04 11:39:54 PM Reply	now what about equal rights!!!! If statistically as a smoker I will croak 7 to 10 years earlier than average I should be able to get social security at age 57 everything else is pc elitism at the expense of elitism of equal rights, joining grey panthers tomorrow. Got discounts on c4 ak47's and depends. thanx, box when I was young I envisioned myself as the embodiment of Trinity, Now I realize I have turned into the Bambino questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #143,447 by mmoffitt 2/26/04 10:39:42 AM Reply	Quit whining. You're older than I am so you're going to get a hell of a lot more back of your FICA contributions than I am. My inlaws have already gotten back 200% of the contributions my father-in-law made and both are in excellent health, they will live at least another decade, perhaps two. Bottom line: my father-in-law and his employers contributed $50,000 (less than I have so far) and he and his wife have received over $125,000 from the fund already - and that doesn't count the cost of their Medicare. Before they die, even if there are no increases they'll take home at least $250,000 more! Not a bad return. Excluding Medicare, which ain't free, a return of at least $375,000 for a $50,000 investment (actually, my father-in-law contributed only $25,000 if we're going to be honest). Anyone born after 1957 is going to be screwed unconscious. Greenspan just yesterday recommended that SS benefits be cut for future generations. What a magnamimous old fart. Don't cut his, just his kids/their kids/their kids/etc. ad infinitum. Typical of his generation. Born before 1950, the very best investment in your life was the SS Trust Fund. bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.
Post #143,469 by a6l6e6x 2/26/04 12:25:42 PM Reply	I believe you are ignoring the time value of money. A hundred dollars contributed in 1957 is not the same as a hundred dollars contributed now. You at least need to allow for the inflation rate never mind a modest return. That is the cost of FICA to an individual. You are also ignoring the matching contribution from the employer and the same appreciation rules as above. Yeah, I know it is actually run like Ponzi scheme. Alex Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom ... the argument of tyrants ... the creed of slaves. -- William Pitt, addressing the British House of Commons (1783)

Welcome to IWETHEY!