Medicare should start at age 50...

[Harry Dresden]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

you did not answer my question g...

 

[g5000]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

you did not answer my question g...

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

Go to every/any company. Show me where all the 60 something year olds are sitting. Sure there might be 1 or 2 or 3 seniors working at your company, but most of the people are in their 20's 30's and 40's.

I saw a senior working at Kohl's department store yesterday. He looked like he was probably successful in his life. But, he's an old dog. The corporation he worked for probably sent him out to pasture. He's not going to ever find a job that pays what he used to make. Of course he would love to get another job in corporate America but no one will hire his old ass. So, he needs to take a job at Kohl's to supplement his income until he can retire.

that old dog may have been collecting full retirement but did not like sitting around the house so he took a job....it may also have been a part time one...

 

[Harry Dresden]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

you did not answer my question g...

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

thats because you did not answer it....what are people who actually do physical work and have a hard time working to 65 let alone 70 supposed to do under your plan?...

 

[g5000]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

you did not answer my question g...

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

thats because you did not answer it....what are people who actually do physical work and have a hard time working to 65 let alone 70 supposed to do under your plan?...

If they are disabled, then they get disability. Otherwise, keep working like the laborers who had much harder lives did in the 1930s.

 

[Harry Dresden]

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

you did not answer my question g...

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

thats because you did not answer it....what are people who actually do physical work and have a hard time working to 65 let alone 70 supposed to do under your plan?...

If they are disabled, then they get disability. Otherwise, keep working like the laborers who had much harder lives did in the 1930s.

no one said they are disabled....so do you work sitting at a desk looking out the window,or are you out there in all kinds of weather doing a real physical job?....because you dont seem to get what i am saying....

 

[WTH_Progs?]

I mean, if we've been already been forced to pay for this shit for 30 years, why not make it usable for the people that need it?
Face it - Medicare at 65 is useless to retirees at 60-65. I will not be able to retire until I'm 70 years old because my wife is 5 years younger than me.

At the very minimum, Medicare should kick in at minimum retirement age (62).

https://www.newsmax.com/t/health/ar...onth=06&date=19&id=651325&oref=duckduckgo.com

ILMAO........So, random number "50" must get Medicare. How neat.

Explain to all of why your decision to marry a younger woman is the fault of society?

 

[bendog]

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

you did not answer my question g...

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

thats because you did not answer it....what are people who actually do physical work and have a hard time working to 65 let alone 70 supposed to do under your plan?...

If they are disabled, then they get disability. Otherwise, keep working like the laborers who had much harder lives did in the 1930s.

no one said they are disabled....so do you work sitting at a desk looking out the window,or are you out there in all kinds of weather doing a real physical job?....because you dont seem to get what i am saying....

Obamacare actually fixed this to the degree it's fixable. If a person drove a truck, worked skilled const, had a mftring job, etc. and then essentially aged out of being able to do the work - even if they didn't meet SocSecDisability eligibility - they have to find some job they can do, even if it's in a convenience store or even at Pet Smart, but they should be eligible under Medicaid Expansion … unless they live in a Red State where they are fucked because the State is too stupid to figure out they can expand Medicaid without increasing state spending.

 

[Harry Dresden]

you did not answer my question g...

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

thats because you did not answer it....what are people who actually do physical work and have a hard time working to 65 let alone 70 supposed to do under your plan?...

If they are disabled, then they get disability. Otherwise, keep working like the laborers who had much harder lives did in the 1930s.

no one said they are disabled....so do you work sitting at a desk looking out the window,or are you out there in all kinds of weather doing a real physical job?....because you dont seem to get what i am saying....

Obamacare actually fixed this to the degree it's fixable. If a person drove a truck, worked skilled const, had a mftring job, etc. and then essentially aged out of being able to do the work - even if they didn't meet SocSecDisability eligibility - they have to find some job they can do, even if it's in a convenience store or even at Pet Smart, but they should be eligible under Medicaid Expansion … unless they live in a Red State where they are fucked because the State is too stupid to figure out they can expand Medicaid without increasing state spending.

well when you are making 30 bucks an hour and have to take a 10 dollar an hour job it might make things worse financially...why cant certain jobs that are hard on the body let those guys continue to retire at 65 or less with full retirement?.....

 

[bendog]

I did answer your question. You just don't like it.

thats because you did not answer it....what are people who actually do physical work and have a hard time working to 65 let alone 70 supposed to do under your plan?...

If they are disabled, then they get disability. Otherwise, keep working like the laborers who had much harder lives did in the 1930s.

no one said they are disabled....so do you work sitting at a desk looking out the window,or are you out there in all kinds of weather doing a real physical job?....because you dont seem to get what i am saying....

Obamacare actually fixed this to the degree it's fixable. If a person drove a truck, worked skilled const, had a mftring job, etc. and then essentially aged out of being able to do the work - even if they didn't meet SocSecDisability eligibility - they have to find some job they can do, even if it's in a convenience store or even at Pet Smart, but they should be eligible under Medicaid Expansion … unless they live in a Red State where they are fucked because the State is too stupid to figure out they can expand Medicaid without increasing state spending.

well when you are making 30 bucks an hour and have to take a 10 dollar an hour job it might make things worse financially...why cant certain jobs that are hard on the body let those guys continue to retire at 65 or less with full retirement?.....

I guess you won't like the answer but it is that labor is a market commodity, and if the labor one is capable of performing is less valuable, it will pay less. But Obama and the dems DID find a way to have people who lost better paying jobs with HC benefits to keep HC without actually making goods or even HC more expensive for the rest of us.

if you liked buying cars and tvs and washers at 1970 prices …. Trump's the guy.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Here's some fun. For a time I worked for Welfare. Liberal setting, plenty of emotions and confusion, 100 man hours to do what should take one, and they'd still **** it up. Useless meetings, with sometimes 30 people getting nothing done costing the taxpayer $100+ an hour each in just wages and benefits................Oh, didn't mean to go into a rant, I had a point to make...........................

Anyway, well into "Obamacare" implementation that cost many BILLIONS in computer operations alone, I explained to a pack of them that "Obamacare" meant many BILLIONS more in Medicaid. They thought it was a absurd suggestion and weren't happy to hear it. I'm sure there's a Medicare component too. Medicaid wasn't even my task at the time and never had been, while it was theirs. They loved Obamacare from start, and nothing was going to change their minds.

BTW, I'm not even a programmer, but I took on a task an engineer managed full-time for 1.5 years. During the first two weeks I developed a program to automate the "full time job" including a template for further use. From there it was 10 minutes a week to back up the program. You know what I got? Not a thank you, get fucked or neato. They were just generally offended. Private would have been up my ass for promotions and opportunity, but this place was emotionally operated. That's government, though the closer to mass & welfare the operation the more fucked the operation.

On a side, my department spent millions on useless software, somehow always returning to my developments no matter how hard they wanted to reject them. Face of a "liberal".

This is me taking a wiz on social healthcare.

 

[WillPower]

Something doesn't smell right here.

Try taking a shower more than once a week.

 

[WillPower]

Again everyone deserves the same benefits, treating people different because of racial sexual or socio economic status is illegal in the USA.

So you are advocating for criminality

 

[WillPower]

I am going to guess that SS and Medicare are on average worth about $20,000 a year. So you think a person who makes $100,000 a year should have to give up $20,000 a year? Doesn't seem fair.

Which is the bigger number....20 or 100? I'm good no matter what happens but your plan (do nothing) will see both programs go broke...then what? Good luck selling pencils in the Brave New World, fool.

 

[Seawytch]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

And people still do. You're "raise the retirement age" line is coming from a white collar position of privilege and doesn't take into account how nearly impossible it is for people over 50 to even get a job.

 

[WillowTree]

First off I am not a boy. I am a woman and secondly if you don’t want to take it that’s your prerogative. Nextly, did you know if you opt out of Medicare you forefit you social security also? You are generous if you want to gift the gov with that amount of money but the rest of us don’t. Got it now?

You're neither a boy or a woman...you're an idiot. You don't have to use your Medicare benefits if you choose not to. I'm entitled to Medicare and VA...I've never used either. If I got bitten by a mohave rattler I might since that can cost $100K for antivenom. I have car insurance for any injury I may get in traffic. I run and depend on self-defense for dogs and nutcases I encounter. And I'm not "gifting" anybody for anything...if you have no pride, go ahead and soak the government for money you don't need and then look in the mirror and try to justify it.

Stuff it libtard.

 

[bendog]

The retirement age needs to be increased to 70, and indexed to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living longer than our ancestors, so we should be working longer. Common sense.

When Social Security was instituted in 1935, the average life expectancy was 60. Only 5.4% of the population was over 65. SS was intended for people who beat the odds, it was not intended for everyone to collect.

When Medicare was added in 1965, average life expectancy was 70. United States - Life expectancy at birth 1965

At that time, 9 percent of the population was over 65.

Today, 15 percent of the population is over 65. A smaller and smaller percentage of the population is carrying a larger and larger percentage. This is unsustainable.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.

If you think a retirement age of 70 is unfair, just imagine how unfair a retirement age of 65 was in 1935.
what about those with outdoor jobs that beat the hell out of you physically over 30 years and may not be able to go that far?.....

That was just as true, in fact it was more true, of blue collar jobs in 1935. Life and work were far harder on people back then.

And people still do. You're "raise the retirement age" line is coming from a white collar position of privilege and doesn't take into account how nearly impossible it is for people over 50 to even get a job.

yeah. Hopefully the dems will not capitulate to raising the retirement age again, or further reducing the "early" retirement at 62. Depending on how much is necessary, I might could see reducing the COLA in exchange for eliminating the cap on soc sec taxes. So long as the system can pay benefits, people can usually move in with family to make ends meet if absolutely necessary.

 

[WillPower]

It's always amazed me, at least until I realized today's democrats have always been communists, that the American people never had a choice about joining those programs. The same money, invested in the private sector, thru two depressions and countless recessions, has averaged a 10%, nearly 3 times what the government averages. The Rats borrowed from SS leaving behind IOUs....when we opened the box, they were gone, worthless. Now they even TAX the benefits they want you to believe THEY gave you. Barry the Fairy said:...."you didn't build that business, we did." Except they were never there to make buying and price decisions, size and cost of the facility, how to handle the regulation maze, how many employees to have, what equipment to buy or lease...none of it. Yet there they were April 15th with their hand out demanding a third of what you worked for and worried about in the middle of the night. Don't pay, you go to prison and lose everything to an IRS who can literally walk into your home and demand to see what you have in your wallet, open your drawers and cupboards and take anything of value. The mafia never had a fraction of that kind of horror for Americans and yet some here don't believe any of it is wrong and want more of it out of spite and envy.

 

[Unkotare]

Most conservatives I know pay more than they have to rather often. I see many conservative friends and fellow parents at PTA events raising money for the schools buying overpriced cakes and cookies and whatnot as a way of supporting our local schools. I see fellow conservatives volunteering at churches and community centers every day. I see liberals trying to convince themselves that having the government confiscate more of everyone's hard-earned money somehow counts as an act of 'charity.' When I pay twice as much as a pumpkin really costs so the local elementary school can raise much-needed funds, I know where it is going. When taxes get hiked (again and again) I am sure much of it goes to giving public works jobs to the third cousin of some state rep. or funding a study of the gender transitioning of sea mollusks or some such nonsense.

 

[skews13]

It's always amazed me, at least until I realized today's democrats have always been communists, that the American people never had a choice about joining those programs. The same money, invested in the private sector, thru two depressions and countless recessions, has averaged a 10%, nearly 3 times what the government averages. The Rats borrowed from SS leaving behind IOUs....when we opened the box, they were gone, worthless. Now they even TAX the benefits they want you to believe THEY gave you. Barry the Fairy said:...."you didn't build that business, we did." Except they were never there to make buying and price decisions, size and cost of the facility, how to handle the regulation maze, how many employees to have, wat equipment to buy or lease...none of it. Yet there they were April 15th with their hand out demanding a third of what you worked for and worried about in the middle of the night. Don't pay, you go to prison and lose everything to an IRS who can literally walk into your home and demand to see what you have in your wallet, open your drawers and cupboards and take anything of value. The mafia never had a fraction of that kind of horror for Americans and yet some here don't believe any of it is wrong and want more of it out of spite and envy.

Wrong. Those programs are the most popular programs ever enacted. FDR was popularly elected FOUR times by the people for a reason. Because Republicans suck. There is no Republican past, present, or future that could ever win an election popularly by the people for President. And the way the population demographics are fast changing, those future elections arent looking real good either.

And as far as the IRS goes, Amazon and Exxon Mobil got refunds last year, and the working poor paid 25.6 % of their income in taxes while the CEOs of those companies paid 23%. Nobody has any sympathy for your tax whine.