The Economy - page 68

by Tweety

21,041 Views | 780 Comments

Things were so bad the last four years, that any improvement is actually still not good. But a little good news is still good news. I've noticed my retirement funds are growing and I'm happy about that. I hope things continue... Read More


  1. 0
    [QUOTE=Tweety;6839661

    People want the best of both worlds and want the option of their citizenship. I understand, because if I lived abroad, I'd be loathe to give up the option of returning to the US as a citizen, especially in old age.[/QUOTE]

    Why? Given the current state of SS, Medicare, and the high cost of healthcare, what is the advantage of growing old in the U.S.?
  2. 0
    Quote from Jolie
    Why? Given the current state of SS, Medicare, and the high cost of healthcare, what is the advantage of growing old in the U.S.?

    Some people long to return to their birth home in their old age. Immigrants feel that way all the time. I know many Cubans that long to return home, and many Filipinos that do exactly that when they retire from the US. Whether or not a lot of them do or not, doesn't mean they don't want to. Plus if they aren't a citizen where they are abroad and they aren't rich, it's still better to come home.

    But you're right, in some countries with socialized care like Canada, Australia and northern Europe it's definitely better to stay put and renounce citizenship.
    Last edit by Tweety on Aug 19, '12
  3. 1
    Quote from Jolie
    Why? Given the current state of SS, Medicare, and the high cost of healthcare, what is the advantage of growing old in the U.S.?
    I love my country.
    No matter how wealthy i became i would continue to love my country.
    No way would I want to renounce my citizenship for financial gain.

    Maybe I'm not the only one.

    You seem as though you may not agree with me that the united States is an excellent country. So far WE have increased freedom and justice for all in spite of setbacks.
    tewdles likes this.
  4. 3
    Quote from herring_RN
    I love my country.
    No matter how wealthy i became i would continue to love my country.
    No way would I want to renounce my citizenship for financial gain.

    Maybe I'm not the only one.

    You seem as though you may not agree with me that the united States is an excellent country. So far WE have increased freedom and justice for all in spite of setbacks.
    I do agree, herring. And I can't imagine a scenario in which I would renounce my citizenship for any reason.

    I was directing my rhetorical question to those who consistently bemoan the state of affairs in the U.S. on subjects such as taxation, quality, access, and cost of healthcare, who attempt to demonize those who propose ideas to extend the life of safety-net programs such as Medicare and Social Security (which will not survive financially until most of us reach retirement), who preach about how other nations do "it" so much better than we do, and yet ironically look down on individuals who renounce their citizenship to take advantage of the "better" state of retirement somewhere else.

    Puzzling.
    Last edit by Jolie on Aug 19, '12
    tewdles, Kornhonk, and herring_RN like this.
  5. 4
    Quote from Jolie
    I do agree, herring. And I can't imagine a scenario in which I would renounce my citizenship for any reason.

    I was directing my rhetorical question to those who consistently bemoan the state of affairs in the U.S. on subjects such as taxation, quality, access, and cost of healthcare, who attempt to demonize those who propose ideas to extend the life of safety-net programs such as Medicare and Social Security (which will not survive financially until most of us reach retirement), who preach about how other nations do "it" so much better than we do, and yet ironically look down on individuals who renounce their citizenship to take advantage of the "better" state of retirement somewhere else.

    Puzzling.
    Disagreeing on facts and/or solutions to problems is not demonizing the other person.
    I disagree that there is no way we can ensure the Current Medicare and Social Security for all Americans. I think WE can come up with a solution. I think we CAN learn to work together.
    I haven't read any post looking down of those who renounce their citizenship. If they don't want to be United States citizens then their priorities are what they are.

    There are things we can learn from how other countries do something Even Mitt Romney said while in Israel, "When our health care costs are completely out of control. Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the GDP in Israel? 8 percent. You spend 8 percent of GDP on health care. And you’re a pretty healthy nation." ( Whiplash-Mitt Romney Lavishes Praise On Israel's Socialist, Government Controlled Healthcare System - Forbes )
    tewdles, mediajunkie650, Jolie, and 1 other like this.
  6. 0
    Quote from herring_RN
    Disagreeing on facts and/or solutions to problems is not demonizing the other person.
    I disagree that there is no way we can ensure the Current Medicare and Social Security for all Americans. I think WE can come up with a solution. I think we CAN learn to work together.
    I haven't read any post looking down of those who renounce their citizenship. If they don't want to be United States citizens then their priorities are what they are.

    There are things we can learn from how other countries do something Even Mitt Romney said while in Israel, "When our health care costs are completely out of control. Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the GDP in Israel? 8 percent. You spend 8 percent of GDP on health care. And you’re a pretty healthy nation." ( Whiplash-Mitt Romney Lavishes Praise On Israel's Socialist, Government Controlled Healthcare System - Forbes )
    You're right that disagreement on solutions is not the same as demonizing. However, ads accusing Republicans of wanting to kill Granny, and depicting Ryan wheeling an elderly person off a cliff are. These discussions have taken place on other threads.

    If you're not familiar with unnecessarily harsh comments made about those who renounce U.S. citizenship, perhaps you have not read the thread on the subject.

    I may have made the mistake of believing that those of us active on the political threads are familiar with most, if not all of them.
  7. 2
    Quote from herring_RN
    Disagreeing on facts and/or solutions to problems is not demonizing the other person.
    I disagree that there is no way we can ensure the Current Medicare and Social Security for all Americans. I think WE can come up with a solution. I think we CAN learn to work together.
    I haven't read any post looking down of those who renounce their citizenship. If they don't want to be United States citizens then their priorities are what they are.

    There are things we can learn from how other countries do something Even Mitt Romney said while in Israel, "When our health care costs are completely out of control. Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the GDP in Israel? 8 percent. You spend 8 percent of GDP on health care. And you’re a pretty healthy nation." ( Whiplash-Mitt Romney Lavishes Praise On Israel's Socialist, Government Controlled Healthcare System - Forbes )
    Should like to point something out in that not *all* Americans are eligible nor even want Social Security and or Medicare.

    FICA taxes are only imposed on employees, employers and the self-employed. Investment,rental, dividend and most if not all unearned income is not subject to such taxes and those who earn their living mainly via those means do not pay into the system, OTOH they are not generally eligible for benefits either.

    Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Recently Obamacare enacted a few new taxes to fund the ACA imposed several changes starting in the tax year 2013 to raise funds for the scheme.

    "In addition for the 2013 tax year, there will also be an assessment on unearned income for higher-income taxpayers. Unearned income includes capital gains, dividends, interest, annuities, royalties, and rents. The tax is 3.8% of the individual’s net investment income for the year or the amount of the individual’s modified adjusted gross income. What this means is that some individuals may be below the $200,000 annual compensation limit and not subject to the higher FICA tax rate, but, due to their amount of unearned income they may be subjected to the 3.8% tax either due to their net investment income or after adjusting their gross income."


    It is important to remember the only way the Democrats were able to get SS passed in the first place, was that it came with the understanding the scheme was not welfare. That is it was not supposed to be a transfer of wealth from one class to another via the tax code. In general one pays into the system and once eligible you, your spouse and children can receive benefits.

    The large problem facing both Medicare and SS is the growing numbers of the "employed" who need or will need benefits, the increasing costs of same versus the way wealth is being created for most who have it in this country today.

    From Mark Zuckerberg et al more Americans are finding themselves vast sums of money via unearned income sources rather than compensation for employment. This creates a problem as it contrasts with the idea of how and why SS/Medicare should be funded. In short should the government ask and or demand those who have no need for either programs fund them via taxes regardless.
    tewdles and Jolie like this.
  8. 2
    Quote from Tweety
    Some people long to return to their birth home in their old age. Immigrants feel that way all the time. I know many Cubans that long to return home, and many Filipinos that do exactly that when they retire from the US. Whether or not a lot of them do or not, doesn't mean they don't want to. Plus if they aren't a citizen where they are abroad and they aren't rich, it's still better to come home.

    But you're right, in some countries with socialized care like Canada, Australia and northern Europe it's definitely better to stay put and renounce citizenship.
    By and large the Phillipines is still a poor country. Filipinos leave and go the world over in search of employment and "good wages" even if they aren't considered such by local standards. However even with say 60K USD saved, a pension and or SS bennies you can "retire" quite well there and live in a house the size of Tara versus struggling in a place like NYC where your nest egg won't last very long.

    Think you are taking this whole renouncing of citizenship out of context.

    While there is no doubt there are some rich to very wealthy persons seeking to escape what they consider high American taxes (heck even the founder of Tupperware cashed in and then left the country), you also have persons with various other reasons as outlined in links I've posted above.

    A friend from high school met and married an Englishman years ago now. She has been living with her husband and raising a family in the UK for decades. It is safe to say aside from visits home to see family she has no plans to ever return to the USA to live. She is covered by the UK health, pension and other social service schemes and can access the same services as any native born Englishwoman. Depending upon her financial circumstances she and by extension her husband are now required by the federal government to file tax returns and disclose other information merely because she remains an American citizen.

    Historically hanging onto an American passport/being a citizen was a good bet against uncertain times. Lord knows when the Nazis starting rolling through France and other parts of Europe they didn't by and large mess with US citizens. You may have been told to pack your bags and get on the next ship home or face being moved to a *nice* camp, but still...

    Being as that may and even as bad as economic times are in much of Europe one does not see Germany invading anyone anytime soon. *LOL* And while it may seem extreme you probably get my drift.
    tewdles and Jolie like this.
  9. 3
    I saw these two pieces during my daily cruise around the internet - my version of reading the morning papers.

    Full disclosure: I'm exceptionally dependent on the objectivity and smarts of the authors here ... numbers tend to make my head explode and I haven't dug into either one yet to see if something's been misinterpreted or left out. IOW, I don't have a clear view of context, yet.

    Bailout Programs Return $1.5 Billion - The Daily Beast

    ...This year’s federal deficit just shrunk by about $1.5 billion. (Not so good news! That’s about one-tenth of one percent of the annual deficit.) And it had nothing to do with cutting spending or raising taxes. Rather, that’s the amount of money that TARP recipients returned to the Treasury Department last week.

    Four years after the Lehman Brothers crisis, housing finance remains a mess. But the Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP), the crisis-era measures aimed at saving the banks, stabilizing credit markets, and preventing the auto companies and the insurer AIG from plunging into liquidation, have largely succeeded. And at a very low cost to the taxpayer. By and large, the recipients of cheap government capital have returned the cash they took—and with interest. The central component of TARP was the Capital Purchase Program, in which Treasury bought interest-yielding preferred shares in banks and received warrants in return. Here is the latest daily TARP update. Between the CPP and extra aid given to Citigroup and Bank of America, Treasury put $245.1 billion into banks. So far, those recipients have returned $231.11 billion of that capital. Add in dividends ($15.2 billion), proceeds from the sale of warrants ($9.19 billion), and cash raised from selling Citigroup and Bank of America stock ($9.36 billion), and the taxpayers have received a total of $264.86 billion back. That’s a profit of nearly $20 billion.
    New Home Sales Rose Sharply in July 2012, Adding to housing Recovery - The Daily Beast

    Here comes housing—again. On Wednesday the National Association of Realtors reported that existing-home sales rose in July—up 2.3 percent from June and up 10.4 percent from July 2011. On Thursday the Census Bureau reported that new-homes sales were up by a much more significant margin.

    Sales came in at an annual rate of 372,000. That’s up 3.6 percent from June’s total of a 359,000 annual rate (which itself was revised upward from the initial report of a 350,000 rate). More important, the July 2012 figure was up a whopping 25.3 percent from the July 2011 figure. In fact, through the first seven months of this year, new-homes sales are up 21 percent from the first seven months of 2011.

    ... For each of the past 12 months, the inventory of available homes for sale has declined, while the pace of sales has been rising. At the current rate of sales there are only 4.6 months’ worth of new supply on the market; a year ago, there were 6.7 months’ worth.

    ... Month after month, even as skeptics point out that foreclosures continue and home values remain far below their peak, a steady accumulation of data is moving charts in the right direction. This year will likely go down as the first year since 2006 in which sales of new and existing homes rose and in which values bumped up.
    Tweety, tewdles, and herring_RN like this.
  10. 0


Top