We have a "social safety net" that is in danger of being cut through. If yours was cut, then how long do you think you would live. Would you be able to get some of your medicines by your own means? The Republicans are right in this: if people are as generous as they supposedly are we do not need to increase taxes. The generous wealthy (through their gifts) would support the poor with contributions for food and medical care. Not necessarily in kind but with donations of money to buy what the poor supposedly need. You need a new kidney, Halle Berry will give you one of hers. Of course, it irks some individuals that others did not do "right". Having three or four b*stards, and demanding the money to raise them irks some members of our republic. Being foolish enough to get your legs blown off in a war bothers others who consider the expense of taking care of you for your lifetime. Having some person grow old who did not set aside money for the time of life (but now wants to be supported in their old age) really puts a damper on the party. We were happy when s/he was consuming several beers in our bar instead of "saving" for their old age, but whatthehell? I wonder what our economy would have been like over the last 30 years if people had saved for their retirement (and medical care) rather than "enjoyed themselves" in the Toledo watering holes.
Comments ... #
Sounds like the wealthy just dont want their tax loopholes closed...
I plan on retiring at 62 if I can get health insurance or I'll happy work longer if my kids get into ivy league.
I work for two things - my kids and retirement. I love what I do but I look forward to sleeping in, travel and fishing everyday.
Halle Berry won't be giving anyone a kidney. She might need one of yours, though, LOL. She is a Type I diabetic (insulin-dependent, like me) and high risk for kidney failure. I've spent most of my working life with one employer. Make decent money but have never had a pension. Insulin is ridiculously expensive and if I retire, the medical benefits go away. Probably should have looked for a less well-paying job with better benefits, but needed the $$ to raise my kids as a single parent. Like upso, I will probably drop dead at work.
Apparently, http://www.deathclock.com knows when I'm dying:
- Wednesday, November 11, 2037
- Seconds left to live... 829,616,480
Well that figures. A fortune teller told me the Detroit Lions would win their first Super Bowl in February 2038.
If I become more optimistic, however, The Death Clock says I'll live more than a decade longer. But optimism sounds like a lot of work.
I am retired. From my first career. Being self employed, I was my own pension benefit plan. I'm old enough for Social Security and Medicare, but only receive Medicare at this time. I'm now pursuing a second degree ( associates in Landscape and Turf Management, - the first was a UT Bachelor of Business Admin. in finance). Financially, I don't have to work. I don't have to sit in classrooms with a bunch of kids and get another degree. I don't have to work my current summer internship job (absolutely love it). But folks - I AM A BABY BOOMER - and we boomers do not go gently into that good night. If my health holds I plan on working until age 72, then I'll revisit my goals. I have three job offers in my new career as soon as I'm out of the classroom. Life could not be better.
The question is not how long will you live, but how well will you live.
Holland, sounds like your rich, maybe you should be taxed more until you cant afford those luxuries.
Rich, I'm definitely not. I like to think that I'm moderately frugal and savvy. But I'm more than happy to pay my fair share of taxes. I'm a centrist/liberal Democrat. Taxes are the cost of living in a civilized society that provided me with the opportunities that I took, and take, full advantage of. When we sold our businesses we paid a 28% capital gains tax right off the top. We are more than OK with that.
Who knows? Some of that tax money might have gone to fund Owens Community College and I'm getting a return on my investment - so to speak - with lower tuition fees.
When it comes to government I have a healthy distaste for a lot of the bureaucracy, but a healthy appreciation for democracy.
Guess your ok with folks that don't pay taxes and still live off the public dime then too.
November 11 of 2037? Well lah-di-dah JR. I ran that death clock link and I'm already in the ground. I slid in sideways on Thursday, April 24, 2008.
Now for the wake... who's up for a few drinks to help me celebrate my untimely demise and subsequent screwing of the I.R.S.?
That's a broad statement "folks that dont pay taxes and still live off the public dime".
Give a specific example - welfare? unemployment? social security? medicade? school free lunch program? the WIC peogram? Foodstamps? What? Come on. What's your real beef? If you earn it you should keep it all and any one in need should grovel to you for charity?
Rugged individualism. Personal responsibility. Yada Yada Yada. If that was really the case then conservatives would understand its everyone's personal responsibility to buy health insurance.
I'm grown up enough to know that there will ALWAYS be the lazy cheats who scam the system. Its part of the human condition. Its a constant balancing act to provide services and aid to those truly in need without aiding and abetting the cheats. That will never change. I don't stay up nights worrying about it.
Now - you want to discuss Corporate Welfare? Start another post and then its Game On!
Back to the original topic of this post. Actuarily speaking I should be dead in 2.32 years. Actuarily speaking my husband should have died 7.7 years ago. Its time to PARTY! On someone elses dime - social security.
Rich, I'm definitely not.
Being rich or wealthy is a relative term. What's rich to me is not necessarily rich to someone else.
As for folks who do not pay taxes and 'live off the public dime' I would suppose that anyone on welfare would qualify, as would someone who is completely disabled. Truth?