|
Originally Posted by OpieTaylor
(Post 3617686)
I wouldn’t worry, its pretty socialized. If you remarry every 10 years all of your ex wives still get paid if you were to die. Even if it’s 5 of them, none would have had to ever have a taxable job.
Again, don’t worry the benefit that you paid your entire adult life differently apparently than everyone else somehow, will yield 5 payouts not to be confused with 1 payout split 5 ways. Fairly certain if a system pays 5 women for only 1 guy paying in, we’re a long long ways away from telling anyone they only get what they paid in. |
Originally Posted by OpieTaylor
(Post 3617403)
For every hardship case there are plenty of women drawing spousal SS who are sitting on a million dollar estate, and their husband drew for 10+ years before dying. I am not even saying take them off, I am just saying take it out for young people to plan on. Maybe mine is skewed the other way as I will probably be the first person in my family ever to have a net worth over $1M and even as a mid 40s Delta NB captain I'm not quite there yet (excluding insurance policy) if you count the balance of my 401k and equity in my house, but I'll be there eventually. But based on my family and most others where I grew up, I am a 95th or higher percentile outlier on the right side of the income/assets bell curve. My goal was to never go back to poverty. Been there, done that. Was homeless as a child when my dad got sick and couldn't work for 6 months. But a hell of a lot more Americans live closer to the poverty line than 2nd year FO pay at any major. I seriously doubt there are two millionaires for every person in the situation my mom is (collecting SS based off my dad's earnings) or my cousin will be. |
Originally Posted by OpieTaylor
(Post 3617361)
The rest of couples in America with kids still both work.
|
Originally Posted by Wingtip220
(Post 3617586)
I know, they tried to raise the retirement age to 67 as well but every time momentum began to build everybody that wanted it died when they reached 40.
Life expectancy has gone up a whole lot. |
Originally Posted by TransWorld
(Post 3617769)
Another piece of history. In 1900, the average male in the US died at age 46. Feel free to look it up, if you do not believe me.
Life expectancy has gone up a whole lot. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 3617772)
Small point but those stats are skewed by infant mortality. If you made it to 6 you probably would make it to 70. 16% of infants died in those days before vaccines and other improved medical care became available.
On another subject I keep seeing Pilots post age 60, 65, 67, is discrimination. Well it is, but there is a difference between discrimination and illegal discrimination. Any age related requirement by definition is discriminating. If it is codified in law, by definition it is legal discrimination. Think 18 to vote, 21 to purchase alcohol etc - plenty of legal discrimination. I have said it before and will repeat it - I am agnostic on the age rule. I don't see it making a big difference either way. Age 65 hit subsequent to DBs being cancelled along with huge pay cuts so many were financially compelled to continue working - I don't see that here. Scoop |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 3617772)
Small point but those stats are skewed by infant mortality. If you made it to 6 you probably would make it to 70. 16% of infants died in those days before vaccines and other improved medical care became available.
In 1900 the top three leading causes of death in the US were the flu, TB, and diarrhea. As improved medical care reduced them, and people lived longer, heart and cancer emerged as the leading causes of death. |
Originally Posted by TransWorld
(Post 3617769)
Another piece of history. In 1900, the average male in the US died at age 46. Feel free to look it up, if you do not believe me.
Life expectancy has gone up a whole lot. Lose those, and the mortality rate skyrockets again. |
Originally Posted by TransWorld
(Post 3617769)
Another piece of history. In 1900, the average male in the US died at age 46. Feel free to look it up, if you do not believe me.
Life expectancy has gone up a whole lot.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 3617772)
Small point but those stats are skewed by infant mortality. If you made it to 6 you probably would make it to 70. 16% of infants died in those days before vaccines and other improved medical care became available.
Yes, I seriously doubt, without even trying to google it, that the majority of males died in their mid-40's. If you survived early childhood, you had the potential to to live to a ripe old age. They also benefited from healthy living... organic food, lots of exercise. Yeah they had booze and tobacco but so do we. If you're looking for actual life expectancy of 40-something, you need to go back to 10,000+ years to the hunter-gatherer era. |
Originally Posted by Lou Reed
(Post 3617450)
To make our class I medicals "robust," so as to at least make this age 67 discussion feasible, the FAA needs to make them like how other countries administer them. I have double nationality, and for a few years worked for a small airline. These medicals were no joke! Yearly chest X Rays, hearing test, blood drawn, dental check, a motor skills challenge where this gizmo would beep loudly if you went outside the lines, yearly EKG (any age) plus a bi annual psychological evaluation and bi annual probes attached to the noggin. This was performed at the Aviation Authority's building with their own staff, and needles to say took hours. But at least you came out of it feeling like you were indeed healthy.
And the best part, flight attendants needed a yearly medical as well. Of course, nowhere near as grueling as ours. As you can imagine, way less geriatrics. With something like this implemented here, I don't think the 60-65 would have ever happened, but I digress. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:24 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands