What was he thinking...?

08-May-2005 | Ron Pickrell

[GoLightly]

Regarding your situation, I don't know of anyone who has proposed a "balance sheet" means test. Your assets, balanced against your liabilities, are totally your business. What has been proposed, in several versions, is a means test of income, not net assets.

Bottom line, without a balance sheet test, the proposal is not going to be based on need. It would miss those like me, who do not need it, because we were frugal, invested well (mostly in ourselves) & saved like crazy during some highly productive times. The specifics of my situation are unique, which is why I didn't go into them.

And while arguably it would be intrusive, and generally insert the camel's nose under the tent flap, to question your assets, it will be difficult to argue that you should receive the effective FICA taxes of two young fathers sweating at the local gasoline station, but should have no obligation to disclose whether or not you receive "sideways" income by renting out several properties and having your wife or some other relative collect the rents, as an example.

There was a time when I was probably worse off than those two young fathers sweating at the local gas station. My elders had no problem living better than me on my sweat & tears during those years.

I am not evading taxes. As I said, I have no income. If I was getting rent, it would be income. I am concerned about letting that camel get his nose under the tent flap though, because I'm sure that people without little pots of money will want their "fair share" from those of us who have them. They would want to drag me back into the paying class again, despite taxes already having been paid on my little pot.

I have no interest in verbally sparring with someone who was born two years after me, being then 48 or 49, and yet who has "no income", and wishes to receive subsidy from the government.

I'm not trying to spar with you & I never said I wished to receive a subsidy. I said, under the plan you've laid out I would be eligible for it. I sure wouldn't mind getting back what I had to put in while I was a young mother, sweating every single penny, back when I was told that I would.

There are many reasons why you may have no income, perhaps injury or infirmity, or causes beyond your control.

None of that is not relevant.

Many fine men served their country and deserve much more than they get.

I agree. If you're worried that I am no longer paying my fair share, I've already paid in more than most people will over their entire lifetime.

It is not for me to opine on your condition.

You're right, it's not.

My analysis piece merely argues that IF the Social Security program is to be a "welfare" type of program designed to insure that no person reaches old age, normally considered mid to late sixties, by the way, without having an adequate income, for whatever reason, as such an adequate income may be defined from time to time, it would obviously necessitate that the "inadequate" income be tested and certified. If this seems too intrusive, you are obviously welcome to upbrade the ones who are tasked to implement the system, should it be enacted as the law of the land.

As long as no one tries to convert assets to income, tinker around all you want. Do a lifetime income average. I still might be missed, thus eligible, because of plenty of early, very lean years.

As for calling for your early demise, perhaps you have reason to feel slighted or badly treated. On this, I have no help to offer you.

LOL No, it was just a response to things I've seen coming out of some genXers who resent boomers. They have it in for you too.

Frankly, I don't know you. If my analysis gives offense, I stand convicted.

I'm not in the least little bit offended & think your analysis was very well thought out.

But I wouldn't place all of my hopes on some new magic technology that will re-enable us to spend money like spoiled teenagers.

I agree, least not in my lifetime. I am concerned about inflation, because I've seen how that can devalue savings. It usually comes at the same time as flat markets.

I think a better solution will be for us all to grow up and pull our share of the wagon, and keep a tight grip on the IOU's we write on our grandchildren's futures. But then, that's just me.

I'm in agreement with you there as well, so it isn't just you.