Posted on 08/06/2012 8:32:32 AM PDT by Daffynition
**more than 46 percent of Americans die with less than $10,000 in financial assets, with many spending the end of their life strongly dependent on the government.**
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Socialist Agenda, steal from the dead to give to the worthless....
Rather than to let the dead decide who gets everything after they die via a will....
The good news is I'm ready to die anytime. :)
I call that good planning.
Life is for living. Live hard. ;)
/johnny
I doubt I will have much money left over when I die.
To quote the great philosopher Fred Sanford:
I’m gonna die owe’n!
Let this be a less on for ANYONE who wants to leave their heirs ANYTHING. Give it to them BEFORE you die otherwise Socialist Sam will take it all.
If Social Security was a 401K plan, we could give it to our children. But no, the rape us while we are working then complain we die poor. WTH?
That looks like good financial planning if you ask me.At least the government can’t steal what you don’t have.
Mission Accomplished!
This just in!
An expensive Gov’t study has found out that you can’t take it with you!
Yeah? What does it matter? Look up Mario Cuomo's involvement in subverting a will of which he somehow got to be one of the executors.
"We don't really have to abide by the will, right right judge?" "No you don't, governor..."
(Something about animals and animal shelters.)
Don’t forget that you want to give the paperboy a check for a quarter (well, it will probably be $5 by then) and have it bounce!
Are we, maybe, just getting better at hiding them?
“”more than 46 percent of Americans die with less than $10,000 in financial assets”
I call that good planning.”
Both of our sons told us, when we finally ship out. If we have zero cash/assets to pass on and have the burial expenses taken care of:
We would be toasted as good parents and masters of excellent financial planning.
The study is also a reminder of the major impact that changes to Social Security would have for many ordinary Americans. “If we were to substantially reduce Social Security benefits for those later in life, that there is a share of the elderly households for whom that would translate very directly into reduced income, because they seem to have accumulated little in the way of financial resources,” notes Poterba.
Ginning-up a groundswell for Teresa Ghilarducci and her proposal for Super-Duper-Duper Social Security
My mother received a large insurance payment when her husband passed away. She invested the money but it didn’t earn faster than the cost of living and, when she began to have health problems, costs skyrocketed. She was denied government assistance because she had too many assets so my sister (her caretaker) got her to liquidate and disperse her assets until she could claim poverty enough to receive Medicare. The government paid for her nursing home care, her operations, her meds, etc. It would have bankrupted her if it had come out of her own pocket but she had to bankrupt herself to qualify for coverage. It’s a Catch 22 for most of the middle class.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.