Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael M who wrote (71916)	1/10/2000 9:37:00 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I'm SO glad you mentioned that- I was just getting ready to post that those contributions compounded over all those years should certainly amount to more than "a year or two". Who is going to define "too wealthy" to qualify for the Social Security?-- We're talking about a group who is now at the end of life--- there is no more earning potential. They have great fear of nursing homes, and illnesses; many have saved in order not to be a burden to their children or to be forced into "real" welfare programs or dependence on others. Lizzie stated that there is a higher proportion of wealthy in the elderly population. I'd like that figure; are there really so many? DOn't tell me about the one couple across the street who spends their winter in Florida on SS. If they managed to work and save enough to do this along with their not really terribly large social security check, then more power to them. My in-laws are there now; he draws full disability for the leg he left in Europe and I sure don't begrudge them that money. And if you insist they live off their assets, then will the government pick up the very expensive nursing home tab when the assets are gone? It dones't take long to go through a small estate when faced with longterm care. Or will we expect children to care for their own parents? I worked with the elderly and I had adult children coming in trying to manipulate the system so they could get the assets in their names and then get the government to pay for their parents' care. THAT is wrong, but that was also the younger generation trying to get more more more. I don't think it's a simple case of the older generation "ripping off" the younger. It's a system that unquestioningly needs redefining, but I think punishing those who have been successful in their lives, who gave as demanded, and who have the right to have that contract with their government fulfilled, is wrong. And I have a real problem with cavalierly saying- "promises are broken all the time". They shouldn't be.