jillio

Right. But they would just keep shifting you from temp position to temp position to maintain the appearance of keeping you employed.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

Reba

Ask someone in civil service about RIFs.

Hypocrisy is saying one thing and doing another. Someone criticizing unearned benefits but receiving earned benefits is not hypocrisy.

Ever since I've drawn a paycheck, a portion has been deducted, or I've paid directly into the Medicare fund, whether or not I wanted to. Of course, I expect someday to get back something for all that money I've paid in. If I had never paid in anything, I wouldn't expect to get anything back.

Do you really believe that people who get Medicare after decades of employee "contributions" are getting something they didn't earn?

rolling7

Xxx

rolling7

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

"It is incumbent on every generation to pay it's own debt as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world."

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent government from wasting the labor of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

Thomas Jefferson

jillio

Exactly. And that is exactly what the poster has done. Say one thing and do another.

No, and you are missing the point of the "keep your hands off my Medicare" analogy. The Tea Partiers were ranting about government run insurance programs being unnacceptable, but their Medicare is a government run insurance program. They want it to continue, but they don't want government options for anyone else. That, again, is hypocritical.

jillio

And these quotes would apply how?

Reba

They want it to continue because they paid so much money into it. If the government could return those "contributions" so they could pay for commercial health insurance, maybe they wouldn't have to "rant."

The problem is, you can't compare government option insurance with Medicare because Medicare is NOT optional.

jillio

Yes, you can compare the two. Especially when a fringe group is opposed to any government run health care insurance, but demand that their own be left alone. Like I said, perfectly willing to take for themselves, but not willing to allow others to have the option. If the contributions made over the years were refunded, there is no way it would be sufficient to purchase private insurance with the same degree of coverage. Why? Because of the very fact that this is government run insurance program, and therefore, much, much more inexpensive than private coverage. The amount paid in contributions is minor when compared to the cost of any other private plan. Even the lousy coverage of an HMO is more expensive.

Reba

Medicare recipients don't "take" for themselves--they pay for it.

Medicare is NOT an option.

jillio

Like I said, it is a benefit to living in the U.S. and having government run insurance available at retirement age. You could not take everything paid in Medicare contributions over your entire work history and purchase private insurance with even remotely close coverage. In fact, most private carriers would not even sell you a policy at retirement age. Too big a risk of you actually filing claims they would have to pay out. You are guaranteed coverage as the direct result of a goverment run insurance.

TXgolfer

You can twist it all you want but you said this....

Which is wrong. He wasn't supported by the government, he earned his living and his benefits by working for the them. He has every right to complain that the same government he did back breaking labor for, in extreme conditions, is giving money away others. Nothing hypocritical about that what so ever.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

Reba

You're presuming that workers would wait until retirement age to get medical insurance. If they had used the Medicare "contribution" during their working years to get medical insurance early on, they could just continue with that insurance after retirement.

Also, neither Medicare nor private insurances survive on just the premiums paid. The carriers invest those premiums into other funds.

If Medicare is so great, why do most retirees also get Humana, Blue Cross, etc., as Medicare supplements? I have VA health care, and I will be eligible for Medicare someday, and I still pay now over $200/month for long-term care insurance for TCS and me.

You are also at their mercy for coverage, services, and availability.


Of course, Medicare is available to not just civil service employees.


When you (specific you, not generic you) are eligible for Medicare, will you accept it?


Online NewsHour: The Medicare System | Financing | PBS

jillio

No twisting necessary. He has taken advantage of the benefits of government employment for 38 years, is now enjoying the benefits of governement retirement, and government sponsored insurance, all the while complaining that anyone else is not "earning" their benefits, but being given entitlements. It doesn't surprise me that you fail to see it. Your mindset appears to be pretty much the same. You apply a whole different set of rules to yourself than you do to others.

Back breaking labor? Extreme conditions? Quite the dramatic flair you have there.

jillio

I am presuming nothing of the kind. And the holes in your theory are causing it to sink. Workers are generally covered under a company group plan prior to retirement. Once retired, that company group plan is no longer available, and thus the need for a low cost government run insurance plan that allows for coverage on a fixed income.

You are at a carrier's mercy regrading coverage and availability no matter what insurance company or policy you have. What makes you think that is specific to Medicare or a government run program?

Who said that insurance companies survive on just premiums paid? I don't recall anyone making that claim. It is totally irrelevent to this discussion.

Probably not. I don't intend to retire, and therefore will be eligible for insurance through my professional organization. Likewise, by the time that I am elibible for Medicare, health care reform will have been fully in place for quite some time, and therefore, other options will be available to me, and to all Americans.

Tousi

I have coverage from my company for life and Medicare is just a supplement and I don't understand half the terms.....

Reba

The money that would have been taken by the Feds during their earning years could be applied towards retirement insurance that could be a continuance/conversion of their workers' insurance, and would kick in only when the worker actually retired rather than some set-by-government age.

So that would be a wash for comparison?

I think the source of funding for insurance is relevant indeed.

Don't intend to retire doesn't mean that you will be gainfully employed up to the time you die.

Reba

Wow, that's rude. Have you worked in a post office distribution center for decades? Have you been a mail carrier for many years, in all climates?

deafskeptic

I don't see any need to do any twisting given the facts despite claims. I'm sure we can agree that Rolling has worked for the Government for 38 years.

Although rolling has not said in what capacity that he has worked for the government, it would be safe to assume that he likely either worked for a state school for the Deaf or Gallaudet University which is a public University.

If he worked at MSSD, I would assume that it is funded on a Federal level given the origins of MSSD. If he got that insurance from either Gally or MSSD, he likely got his insurance and benefits from the Gallaudet University Tax Deferred Retirement Plan though I think there has been changes to the insurance over the years. I dunno about MSSD but it would be safe they got similar benefits. There's no need to do arm twisting here. Those are the facts.
Now let's suppose that Rolling didn't work for any schools but worked elsewhere in the government. It it still quite likely he would have gotten benefits from either the Federal level or the state level.

I've worked for several different companies and as a rule if they had insurance then they had group insurance.


I can't imagine any private insurance providing coverage to retirees around age 65 because it is then that they will start having health problems that will increase the cost of covering them. I don't think many would try to dispute that.

I know of no private insurance that covers retirees at a reasonable coast in relation to fixed incomes.

So then we can only conclude that rolling and others would do well not to complain that others shouldn't get medicare..

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

jillio

It is my plan to be gainfully employed up until the time that I die, and I have spent several years getting myself in a position to insure that. Likewise, I will still have insurance available to me through my professional organization as long as I maintain my membership in that organization.There are no gurantees that anyone's plans will work out 100%. That is one of the reasons that health care reform is necessary and needed. That is one of the reasons that individuals need to have options that the Conservatives stonewalled.

jillio

How could you possibly know what his job description was any more than TxGolfer knows? Again, a flair for the dramatic in an attempt to distract from the issue that he took advantage of the benefits of government employment for 38 years, is enjoying the benefit of government sponsored pension, and is, at the same time, accusing others who are working for same benefits of taking entitlements.

jillio

Rolling has stated that he worked for the post office. He has not described his job duties, and therefore, another posters assumption that he was doing "backbreaking labor in extreme conditions" was nothing more than a dramatic attempt to justify and distract.

Exactly. There is no option available privately that will provide the same coverage for the same low cost as Medicare. Even the Conservatives realize that, as much as they want to argue against health reform and the totaly hypocrisy of taking advantage of a government sponsored insurance while giving lip service to all the sillly, illogical excuses they can dream up to oppose health care reform.

Cheetah

I'm confused... are you saying that there are government entitlements that are unfair? If so, which ones?

rolling7

Back Breaking Labor. Extreme conditions.
Try these

1) twelve hour days
2) seven day weeks
3) work every holiday
4) work night shift
5) no a/c and no heat
6) work in rain/snow/hurricanes
7) lift and carry 70 lbs.

I could go on (and I've not listed the dicriminations against the deaf) but unless you were there you can't understand. All postal workers earn every penny of their benefits, nothing was giving to them. They are not laughing their way to the bank but suffering in their retirement from many ills. I know because I suffer and get with others and hear about their sufferings.

Cheetah

Are you saying this was your experience??? If so, it looks like some labor laws were broken. But a smart guy like you would have known better, right?

rolling7

For the record:

I started as a distribution/LSM clerk
Then sectional center/parcel post clerk
Then FSM clerk
Then window service clerk
Then special/express delivery clerk
Then SPBS clerk
Then expitior
Finally retirement

I sued, through EEOC, the USPS for discrimination for the deaf group and won a settlement for all the deaf workers to receive ASL interpreters for all necessary communication between the deaf and management. Also sued to receive TTY and later VP. In all, I had six cases of discrimination settled in favor of the deaf group against USPS, never once did I do this for myself.
If you look above to the window service clerk, that is one where I became the first deaf to preform at position. Before all deeaf that bid on the position were denied their bid, even if they had senority. After me, several other deaf around the nation where allow to bid with qulifications and we successful in earning the position. My last year, 2009, I had three heart surgeries from all this labor and just resently I had another. Yes, I will admit I could of taken better care of myself. The hardship all postal workers go through cause errors of judgement but I do think I did well to plan for retirement and I have earned my keep.

rolling7

Yes, but there was no choice. You seem to forget that government workers are under a different standard of labor than private workers. Yes, we had a union but their hands were tied,unlike the autoworker and other privatie unions. Of course, you have to look at the times.....1970's until 2000's.....
and down through the years things did get better but it was still strictly speaking hard.

Cheetah

These things are all good. but I don't follow why they are relevant?

deafskeptic

Oh so he worked for the PO? I stand corrected then. I have him on ignore..

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

rolling7

They are relevant to show that in retirement I am not being GIVEN anything by the government but I have EARN every penny of my pension and insurance coverage.

You had ask in another post: which entitlements

The simple answer is there is no "bad" entitlement but abused entitlement.
There are those to help people in a need and, sometimes, to get back on their feet. But they are not meant to be permanent.

To give you an example:

When I join USPS we had 238 deaf that were hired under the Presidental (Nixon) Program to put people to work from governement support (as it was called then). Not only the USPS but other federal agencys hired not only deaf but others too. Now of this group that I worked with, and 99% I had never seen before because they were younger and we had no ASL social in those days, almost every one of them came from SSDI/SSI (I have already stated that in my lifetime I have nere had SSDI/SSI). In those days, it was like $300-$400 a month. Now they had the opportunity to EARN over $1000 a month. That....EARN...was the problem. They were use to having everything giving to them. Within six months, more than half had left the USPS (see the list of back-breaking reasons I posted) and within one year there were 57 of us still working. Through the years I've heard from the ones who quit early and they never looked back because they stayed on SSDI/SSI all their life. Now I'm not saying SSDI/SSI is a "bad" entitlement (yes, I do know some hearing people on them) but there are many that I know who stay on them for the simple reason they don"t care to work.....note, yes htere are those that can't work (for whatever reason) but there are many that WON'T work. Go back to some of my old post and look up CRR here in Houston. I have tried my best to help the deaf to get a meanful job but I and the staff of CRR have experienced much heartbreak because the deaf will not apply themself to learning nor to using what they learn.
Yes, I have explained using the deaf as an example but I know fully well (and so should everyone else) there in the general population of America there are many, many who are abusing the programs and, for that reason, we all must show disgust.

Beowulf

*my face a mask of disgust*

__________________
.