Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Given the deep/deepening recession, do you think it was wise
Topic Started: Nov 30 2013, 10:46 PM (3,478 Views)
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Dec 8 2013, 10:48 PM
Speaking of Pat and payments to Medicare. Remembering when those very small taxes were taken out of payroll, I rather image that if truth were told, Pat', hip replacement more that used up significantly more than Pat ever paid into Medicare. That " return on investment" had to be in the rather high double figures. I don't fault Pat for claiming he could have gotten a much higher return on the relatively few dollars paid into Medicare, I just doubt he could have gotten a higher yield on his investment that he, in fact, received.


But don't you think that Pat's $2.5 million would have covered the hip replacement; or the more than likely... hood, that he would have purchased some private health insurance with that money in his 60s and still be way far ahead. And don't you think that there is a great possibility that before his Medicare years that his employer would have covered him as a benefit of employment which was very common.

Your last sentence is where the speculation really lies (IMO), are you saying that over the entire time period that Pat paid into SS and Medicare, a period which could very well have been over a 50 and 40 year period respectively, that his investing all those saving for all those years could not have reached $200,000?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Dec 8 2013, 11:12 PM
colo_crawdad
Dec 8 2013, 10:48 PM
Speaking of Pat and payments to Medicare. Remembering when those very small taxes were taken out of payroll, I rather image that if truth were told, Pat', hip replacement more that used up significantly more than Pat ever paid into Medicare. That " return on investment" had to be in the rather high double figures. I don't fault Pat for claiming he could have gotten a much higher return on the relatively few dollars paid into Medicare, I just doubt he could have gotten a higher yield on his investment that he, in fact, received.


But don't you think that Pat's $2.5 million would have covered the hip replacement; or the more than likely... hood, that he would have purchased some private health insurance with that money in his 60s and still be way far ahead. And don't you think that there is a great possibility that before his Medicare years that his employer would have covered him as a benefit of employment which was very common.

Your last sentence is where the speculation really lies (IMO), are you saying that over the entire time period that Pat paid into SS and Medicare, a period which could very well have been over a 50 and 40 year period respectively, that his investing all those saving for all those years could not have reached $200,000?
Nobody knows, so arguing about it is silly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
So why did you?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Neutral
Dec 8 2013, 11:42 PM
So why did you?
Because I wanted to, asshole.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Says the same guy who just posted this:
"Nobody knows, so arguing about it is silly."

Lay off the junk for awhile.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Neutral
Dec 8 2013, 11:58 PM
Says the same guy who just posted this:
"Nobody knows, so arguing about it is silly."

Lay off the junk for awhile.
It was silly. Have you never been silly? Oh yeah, you always are.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Mountainrivers
Dec 8 2013, 11:36 PM
Banandangees
Dec 8 2013, 11:12 PM
colo_crawdad
Dec 8 2013, 10:48 PM
Speaking of Pat and payments to Medicare. Remembering when those very small taxes were taken out of payroll, I rather image that if truth were told, Pat', hip replacement more that used up significantly more than Pat ever paid into Medicare. That " return on investment" had to be in the rather high double figures. I don't fault Pat for claiming he could have gotten a much higher return on the relatively few dollars paid into Medicare, I just doubt he could have gotten a higher yield on his investment that he, in fact, received.


But don't you think that Pat's $2.5 million would have covered the hip replacement; or the more than likely... hood, that he would have purchased some private health insurance with that money in his 60s and still be way far ahead. And don't you think that there is a great possibility that before his Medicare years that his employer would have covered him as a benefit of employment which was very common.

Your last sentence is where the speculation really lies (IMO), are you saying that over the entire time period that Pat paid into SS and Medicare, a period which could very well have been over a 50 and 40 year period respectively, that his investing all those saving for all those years could not have reached $200,000?
Nobody knows, so arguing about it is silly.

I'm sure there are plenty of investment experts (councilors) and brokerage firm people who could cite many cases where such funds (of any source) equal to Pat's scenario have increased to $200,000 over a 40 to 50 year period.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Dec 9 2013, 12:09 AM
Mountainrivers
Dec 8 2013, 11:36 PM
Banandangees
Dec 8 2013, 11:12 PM
colo_crawdad
Dec 8 2013, 10:48 PM
Speaking of Pat and payments to Medicare. Remembering when those very small taxes were taken out of payroll, I rather image that if truth were told, Pat', hip replacement more that used up significantly more than Pat ever paid into Medicare. That " return on investment" had to be in the rather high double figures. I don't fault Pat for claiming he could have gotten a much higher return on the relatively few dollars paid into Medicare, I just doubt he could have gotten a higher yield on his investment that he, in fact, received.


But don't you think that Pat's $2.5 million would have covered the hip replacement; or the more than likely... hood, that he would have purchased some private health insurance with that money in his 60s and still be way far ahead. And don't you think that there is a great possibility that before his Medicare years that his employer would have covered him as a benefit of employment which was very common.

Your last sentence is where the speculation really lies (IMO), are you saying that over the entire time period that Pat paid into SS and Medicare, a period which could very well have been over a 50 and 40 year period respectively, that his investing all those saving for all those years could not have reached $200,000?
Nobody knows, so arguing about it is silly.

I'm sure there are plenty of investment experts (councilors) and brokerage firm people who could cite many cases where such funds (of any source) equal to Pat's scenario have increased to $200,000 over a 40 to 50 year period.
Has anybody said it was impossible? NO! What we've said is it's unlikely.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I do hope all realize that when Medicare came into being in 1966 the payroll tax was 0.35%, payable by both the employee and employer on the first $6,600 of the employee's wages.

Do the math and tell me how much anyone has paid into Medicare over the last 41 - 50 years.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Dec 9 2013, 12:14 AM
I do hope all realize that when Medicare came into being in 1966 the payroll tax was 0.35%, payable by both the employee and employer on the first $6,600 of the employee's wages.

Do the math and tell me how much anyone has paid into Medicare over the last 41 - 50 years.
A little research indicates that the maximum amount on which one could have paid into SS and Medicare since their inception is $$2,380,100. At the current rates, that person would have paid in $364,156. However, for most of the time since inception, the rates were much lower, so it's hard to say whether or not someone actually paid in $250,000. Maybe someone else is interested enough to look up the appropriate rates and assign them to the total amount that could have been contributed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis