First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#1 Dec 6, 2012
An average-wage two-earner couple retiring in 2011 would have paid in $114,000 to Medicare during their careers but can expect to receive "medical services" – including prescriptions and hospital care – worth $355,000, or about three times what they paid in". The same couple would have paid in about $614,000 to Social Security but can expect to receive only $555,000 in benefits.

The Social Security tax of 4.2%(usually 6.2%) is due on all wages up to $110,100 earned by workers in 2012, plus an amount of 6.2% is due from the employer, while self employed people must pay the full rate of 13.3%. Medicare tax is 2.9% on all wages paid, 1/2 of which is paid by the employer. This rate has been the same ever since I can remember.

Doesn't it make sense to increase the Medicare tax rate rather than raising the eligibility age to receive Medicare coverage, especially for those who have worked at hard physical labor all their working lives? If you agree, tell your representatives in congress. You can find their addresses on the web, or locally in the Beckley newspaper.
informed citizen

Oak Hill, WV

#2 Dec 6, 2012
Thank you for pointing out the Social Security con and scam game -

"couple would have paid in about $614,000 to Social Security but can expect to receive only $555,000 in benefits."

That couple would have been better off by taking their money and stuffing it in a mattress rather paying into a system that yields a 10% negative return.


Other problem with medicare: When it was created in 1965 the average life-expectancy age was just above 70 with about 4.6 workers supporting each beneficiary, now it is above 80 with only 3.8 workers per beneficiary.

People moan that they paid into the system so they "deserve" it, but the fact (as you pointed out) is that that they get WAY more back than they paid in. Current employees are footing the bill for today's seniors & not (as they think) paying for their future benefits.

The entitlement state is collapsing and our kids and grandkids will have to bear the cost of these programs.

I'll just add the conclusion of this article - folks can read the sad facts and see what we are facing. I think it will take more than just raising the taxes a little - the real fix is going to be a lot more painful. The health costs in the US are from 50-90% higher than any other country. There's no easy fix.

Conclusion

Unless lawmakers promptly reform Social Secu­rity, Medicare, and Medicaid, America faces a future of soaring taxes and government spending that will cause poor economic performance. Americans will pay onerous taxes, and future generations will have lower living standards than Americans enjoy today. The longer lawmakers wait to enact the necessary reforms, the more painful those reforms will be.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008...

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#3 Dec 6, 2012
Heritage is not where I got my information - isn't that the rightwing organizatin that Jim Demint quit the Senate to head today? One has only to read your comment to see why I wouldn't be quoting them.

So I guess another way to fix Medicare is to stop paying for health care after someone reaches 70 years old.

Or as Paul Ryan says, cut out Medicare altogether and give seniors a voucher to buy health insurance on the open market which will cost them at least $6,000 per year out of pocket. In case you didn't realize it, the American people are against this by a 2-1 margin....even a majority of conservatives are against this kind of fix.

Or we could raise the tax rate by a percent or two...that in conjunction with the Medicare savings from Obamacare would put the program on solid footing for the foreseeable future. If we had a single-payor health care system the costs would be lowered substantially. If anyone writes to their representatives in congress they might mention also amending Obamacare to institute the single-payor system.
capitalist pig

Beckley, WV

#4 Dec 6, 2012
The sad fact is that there is no one in DC smart enough to fix Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. We have two choices, we can bankrupt the country or we can sell them all to private enterpise. There is no door number 3.
LL and IC both have some good points, but that bunch of partisans and cowards in DC have neither the will nor the courage to tackle the tough issues.
Give them their due, whether you like them or not, Clinton and Gingrich, Reagan and O'Niel showed leadership and took on some tough issues. Obama and Boehner are both jokes. Boehner cant deal with Obama becasue he is too busy punishing conservative Republicans. Obama is too busy planning his Hawaii Vacation, while forgetting about the people he promised to help in NY.

Since: Aug 12

Beckley, WV

#5 Dec 6, 2012
Washington has no Cojones.
Brian

Glen Carbon, IL

#6 Dec 6, 2012
The medicare deduction from a workers paycheck is 1.45%. To pay in 114,000 would mean the wages would have to be 114,000/.0145 or $7,862,068 in wages, hardly what the average worker makes in a lifetime
Here is a better idea. Eliminate the program in its entirety. Seniors are old enough to know that they should save for retirement instead of buying flatscreens and sporting event tickets. If they are not, let natural selection take over

Since: Aug 12

Beckley, WV

#7 Dec 6, 2012
why can't we go with something like every Baby born at 1:00 a.m. January 1st 2013 is in charge of their Own Social Security, their Own Medical benefits?
Brian

Glen Carbon, IL

#8 Dec 6, 2012
JamieWV wrote:
why can't we go with something like every Baby born at 1:00 a.m. January 1st 2013 is in charge of their Own Social Security, their Own Medical benefits?
Because we have this slug of entitlement minded baby boomers that cry "I paid in blah blah" demanding that they be taken care of. When I was younger I remember the older generations saying they did not want to be a burden on their children. Not the baby boomers. They feel that their children have been put here to feed them.
That is the real problem. The system wont last till the newborn of 2013 would have an effect
The best solution...eliminate the program now and the old...well maybe they need to get a job

“One fish... Two fish... ”

Level 8

Since: Jan 11

Opportunity is everywhere

#9 Dec 6, 2012
Brian wrote:
The medicare deduction from a workers paycheck is 1.45%. To pay in 114,000 would mean the wages would have to be 114,000/.0145 or $7,862,068 in wages, hardly what the average worker makes in a lifetime
Here is a better idea. Eliminate the program in its entirety. Seniors are old enough to know that they should save for retirement instead of buying flatscreens and sporting event tickets. If they are not, let natural selection take over
The $114,000 in the example was based on a two income family, using a Medicare payroll tax rate of 2.9%(employee & employer contributions). It includes a compounding interest rate, and assumes the workers pay in from age 20 to 65 (45 years).

Sharpen your pencil and try again...

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#10 Dec 6, 2012
Brian wrote:
The medicare deduction from a workers paycheck is 1.45%. To pay in 114,000 would mean the wages would have to be 114,000/.0145 or $7,862,068 in wages, hardly what the average worker makes in a lifetime
Here is a better idea. Eliminate the program in its entirety. Seniors are old enough to know that they should save for retirement instead of buying flatscreens and sporting event tickets. If they are not, let natural selection take over
"Seniors are old enough to know that they should save for retirement instead of buying flatscreens and sporting event tickets. If they are not, let natural selection take over"


Unbelievable, You actually get dumber every day.

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#11 Dec 6, 2012
Brian wrote:
<quoted text>Because we have this slug of entitlement minded baby boomers that cry "I paid in blah blah" demanding that they be taken care of. When I was younger I remember the older generations saying they did not want to be a burden on their children. Not the baby boomers. They feel that their children have been put here to feed them.
That is the real problem. The system wont last till the newborn of 2013 would have an effect
The best solution...eliminate the program now and the old...well maybe they need to get a job
LOL.. Do you actually belive the nonsense you post?
Your "messing" with us aren't you?...You'd have to be... No one is as stupid as your posts indicate:)
How about their "children' getting off of their "A" and take care of themselves instead of living at home until they are forty and sucking off of their parents..

That would work too wouldn't it?:)

“One fish... Two fish... ”

Level 8

Since: Jan 11

Opportunity is everywhere

#12 Dec 6, 2012
Brian wrote:
<quoted text>Because we have this slug of entitlement minded baby boomers that cry "I paid in blah blah" demanding that they be taken care of. When I was younger I remember the older generations saying they did not want to be a burden on their children. Not the baby boomers. They feel that their children have been put here to feed them.
That is the real problem. The system wont last till the newborn of 2013 would have an effect
The best solution...eliminate the program now and the old...well maybe they need to get a job
The "older generation" are not a burden on their children BECAUSE of Social Security and Medicare you dolt...

Since: Aug 12

Beckley, WV

#13 Dec 6, 2012
Shootist that would def help :/

I have no idea how to fix this mess were in but .......something needs to be done.

I care deeply for the elderly ( including those who need good care even if they arn't old) and would never want them to go without (good) care, even though i don't know any personally.

It's just sooooo much is wrong with every Government run any-Program, to much corruption from everywhere including citizens, and Doctor's.

It is heart-breaking and my soul really does worry about all this:/
Brian

Glen Carbon, IL

#14 Dec 7, 2012
Natalie_ wrote:
<quoted text>
The $114,000 in the example was based on a two income family, using a Medicare payroll tax rate of 2.9%(employee & employer contributions). It includes a compounding interest rate, and assumes the workers pay in from age 20 to 65 (45 years).
Sharpen your pencil and try again...
The employee does not pay that. The employee pays one half of that or 1.45% Now compounded interest is a ficticious thing you made up too. The Government doesnt invest that money. It spends it on entitlements and even if the Government did have you checked interest rates on savings lately?
Your post smacks of the usual crybaby senior citizen that wants something for nothing feeding off of the younger generation while spouting lies saying that you paid for something that you really didn't.
I don't need to sharpen a pencil. You are just an old hag that feeds off the young no matter how you try and spin it
Brian

Glen Carbon, IL

#15 Dec 7, 2012
Shootist wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.. Do you actually belive the nonsense you post?
Your "messing" with us aren't you?...You'd have to be... No one is as stupid as your posts indicate:)
How about their "children' getting off of their "A" and take care of themselves instead of living at home until they are forty and sucking off of their parents..
That would work too wouldn't it?:)
My children left home at age 18 and have done quite well for themselves. APparently you have raised the usual set of whiney libbie type of children that look for handouts just as you must do because they have learned by the example set by their parents.
What a shame this once great country has been decimated to a welfare state by those like you and yours.
As Europe is finding out right now the power to tax and redistribute is not infinite. What wll you do when you can't steal (tax) from others to support yourself?
Brian

Glen Carbon, IL

#16 Dec 7, 2012
Natalie_ wrote:
<quoted text>
The "older generation" are not a burden on their children BECAUSE of Social Security and Medicare you dolt...
They most certainly are. The olders pull out more than they put in meaning social security is welfare by just another name.
I know from past conversations how math challenged you are so no point in putting up numbers but clearly the old bozos are feeding off of their young. How sad and to think these baby boomers ancestors were so proud, paid their way and were never a burden. The spoiled baby boomers...the ruination of the country

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#17 Dec 7, 2012
Brian wrote:
<quoted text>My children left home at age 18 and have done quite well for themselves. APparently you have raised the usual set of whiney libbie type of children that look for handouts just as you must do because they have learned by the example set by their parents.
What a shame this once great country has been decimated to a welfare state by those like you and yours.
As Europe is finding out right now the power to tax and redistribute is not infinite. What wll you do when you can't steal (tax) from others to support yourself?
How can you even type with your head up your nether regions?...It evidently stays there...Must have been there at birth..
When you ASSUME something, you only make an Ass out of yourself:)
I have NEVER gotten a Welfare check, food stamps, etc. in my life ...I will get a Social Security check to supplement my retirement at some point soon, and yes DUMBASS I paid into it for decades, and I don't plan on sending it back.
I have two children and THEY have never gotten a "check" either, but when someone makes totally assinine statements like
you do, then I will definitely comment on it.

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#18 Dec 7, 2012
JamieWV wrote:
Shootist that would def help :/
I have no idea how to fix this mess were in but .......something needs to be done.
I care deeply for the elderly ( including those who need good care even if they arn't old) and would never want them to go without (good) care, even though i don't know any personally.
It's just sooooo much is wrong with every Government run any-Program, to much corruption from everywhere including citizens, and Doctor's.
It is heart-breaking and my soul really does worry about all this:/
I agree..something must be done and the under fifty crowd will be the one's who get shafted..
How many people actually think the "boomers" are going to take the hit?...Seriously, which ever party institutes that, they are pretty much done...There's still too many of us:)
I do agree we do need to stop handing out checks for everything the way doctors hand out pills for hangnails.. It is rediculous that we are in this fix.

The politicians, etc. blow money like a drunken sailor and cuts have to be made....They create a program that CAN take care of itself, and then raid it later for something else..

Brian is right on one thing...STOP SPENDING MONEY we don't have.
All one has to do is look at Greece for example...You cannot give, and give, and give....then take it back...Creates civil disorder and sometimes Civil War...Best not to give it out in the first place..

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#19 Dec 7, 2012
Brian wrote:
<quoted text>They most certainly are. The olders pull out more than they put in meaning social security is welfare by just another name.
I know from past conversations how math challenged you are so no point in putting up numbers but clearly the old bozos are feeding off of their young. How sad and to think these baby boomers ancestors were so proud, paid their way and were never a burden. The spoiled baby boomers...the ruination of the country
NO they all don't and they HAVE paid it to it for thirty, forty or more years.. How is that welfare?

How many under thirty are forty are still living at home with mommy and daddy?...The figures would shock you..
Who's living off who here moron?
I know there are many fine upstanding, hard working young folks out there, but I have also seen many who would buy one of those TV's you mentioned earlier, or an I Phone, instead of paying the rent, and then have to borrow money from someone to pay it.
I don't know what you're whining about, the young seem to be loaded to me...everytime a new "gadget" comes on the market, there's thousands of them lining up, even camping out to buy it:)
They've either got a LOT of money from somewhere or they are in debt up to their ________..Come to think of it, isn't that what the government does, we're all complaining about?:)

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#20 Dec 7, 2012
Brian wrote:
The medicare deduction from a workers paycheck is 1.45%. To pay in 114,000 would mean the wages would have to be 114,000/.0145 or $7,862,068 in wages, hardly what the average worker makes in a lifetime
Here is a better idea. Eliminate the program in its entirety. Seniors are old enough to know that they should save for retirement instead of buying flatscreens and sporting event tickets. If they are not, let natural selection take over
Actually, the employer matching tax would reduce the lifetime wage to half that amount of less than $4 million which spread over 45 years would be about $88,000...high for middle income people but I guess they're including the top 2% in that figure as well...lol

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Beckley Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
why do black men prefer white women? (May '14) 2 hr Jaja 1,065
Pole dancing classes (Jun '12) 8 hr tawpksbgirl 67
MRSA at Raleigh general wound care center 9 hr Upset 2
Commodities to replace foodstamps 9 hr Concerned 21
Create your own Forum (Jun '15) 12 hr Meme 4,409
Drop A Word, Add A Word (Dec '10) 20 hr Jon_B 7,491
woay tv (Aug '09) 22 hr Max 109

Beckley Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Beckley Mortgages