What does this mean? Worried!!! [merged threads]

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

10 minutes ago, bcking said:

Lol no. We do a monthly meeting with pathology to discuss a mortality case. I get bored easily.

Hmmm.  Well,  a shot not taken is a shot wasted, eh?  I tried to trap you in your own words.

 

I watched 3 or 4 seasons of Grey’s.  I know all about those mortality meetings.  Murderous, treacherous doctors...

[bcking 3,157]

7 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Hmmm.  Well,  a shot not taken is a shot wasted, eh?  I tried to trap you in your own words.

 

I watched 3 or 4 seasons of Grey’s.  I know all about those mortality meetings.  Murderous, treacherous doctors...

Yes we are all so evil....saving lives, hardly sleeping, going into massive debt.

 

Worst kind of people really...

[-Trinity- 513]

4 minutes ago, bcking said:

Yes we are all so evil....saving lives, hardly sleeping, going into massive debt.

 

Worst kind of people really...

Well the world is upside down this days.

[Boiler 46,178]

Lots of variables and unknowns.

 

And then you have to buy into Medicare which is an unknown that far ahead but maybe $1,000 a month plus the extras.

[AshMarty 360]

10 minutes ago, Dee elle said:

Via marketplace, we purchased blue cross blue shield silver cover in MO, 12 months ago, for married couple. aged 66 and 62. Premium was 1550 per month. Deductible was 5000 each. So my calculation was I needed 1550x12 for  premiums,  plus savings of 10000 to cover  annual deductible. Total possibly needed each year until eligible for Medicare was 28000. Depending on taxable income and what happens with premium tax credit etc there could be eligibility for reduced premiums and reduced deductible, but I wouldn’t count on it   So in today’s dollars, for the two of us, I was allowing 125,000 for health costs over the five years 

I am actually really impressed you sat down and did the math and read to understand the plans. Is the plan 100% coverage after the deductible is met or is there still a % you have to cover after the deductible? 

 

I will have to say I believe you are probably on the rarer side of someone that is prepared and have the funds. I still have to explain my parents health care plans to them. 

Edited January 27, 2018 by AshMarty

[Boiler 46,178]

14 minutes ago, Dee elle said:

Yep. Fortunately we have now attained 40 quarters so will st least get Medicare basics at no cost when my husband retires 

Ahh that really helps, so many I see are clearly not going to be working, well child care if often the reason.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

So to get Medicaid benefits, one needs to have 40 quarters of work, but to get SS retirement benefits,  one needs not to have worked at all?

 

Weird.

[yuna628 9,727]

3 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

So to get Medicaid benefits, one needs to have 40 quarters of work, but to get SS retirement benefits,  one needs not to have worked at all?

 

Weird.

Medicare benefits needs the 40 quarters, not as up on Medicaid requirement. But even if you don't have the 40 quarters, or take it early, you are allowed to pay in. There's a lot of non-working housewives that get some benefits. Not 100% sure how it works, but my mom does get a little bit that's added onto dad's. Not much, but something.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Just now, yuna628 said:

Medicare benefits needs the 40 quarters, not as up on Medicaid requirement. But even if you don't have the 40 quarters, or take it early, you are allowed to pay in. There's a lot of non-working housewives that get some benefits. Not 100% sure how it works, but my mom does get a little bit that's added onto dad's. Not much, but something.

Yeah, I know nothing about Medicare nor Medicaid.   Just know that non-working spouses get 50% of the working spouse's  SS retirement benefits.  

[SkruDe 311]

I understand the point of this proposed bill.  I see what they are trying to accomplish.  I see and understand that there may be no other way to achieve the immigration reform and security the country needs to succeed into the future, I see all that.  I agree we need reform, but.... when you and your family is on the line, a lot gets thrown out the window.  Family is family.  Blood is Blood.  To tell me I can't bring my parents to live with me, when I can prove I can support them, when they speak fluent English, when they are in good health, when I need them when I start a family of my own, when they are unsafe in their current country and live in fear..... well, then it's a different story.  I disagree with the current form of the bill banning all parents.  I think it just needs to be "reformed" as promised.... NOT eliminated.  That was never the deal.  The people wanted Immigration Reform.  Not Immigration Elimination.

 

It's easy to tell other families that they are SOL.  That they can't be together.  But damn... when it's your family.  Your work.  Your waiting.  Your patience.  Your life........  It's a different story.   Okay, get rid of the diversity lottery, that is literally a luck of the draw lottery for people with no credentials, it's from a different era of US history.  I agree with that.  Build the wall along Mexico, anything to stop illegals, I agree with that.  Make immigration vetting more intense to weed out fraud, I agree with that. But let's not be so knee-jerk drastic on parents. 

 

But If this bill passes, in it's current form that is, then I feel very very sad for the heartbreak and sadness it will bring to US citizens all across our nation.  Regardless if I understand the reasoning behind it.

[Boiler 46,178]

3 minutes ago, SkruDe said:

I understand the point of this proposed bill.  I see what they are trying to accomplish.  I see and understand that there may be no other way to achieve the immigration reform and security the country needs to succeed into the future, I see all that.  I agree we need reform, but.... when you and your family is on the line, a lot gets thrown out the window.  Family is family.  Blood is Blood.  To tell me I can't bring my parents to live with me, when I can prove I can support them, when they speak fluent English, when they are in good health, when I need them when I start a family of my own, when they are unsafe in their current country and live in fear..... well, then it's a different story.  I disagree with the current form of the bill banning all parents.  I think it just needs to be "reformed" as promised.... NOT eliminated.  That was never the deal.  The people wanted Immigration Reform.  Not Immigration Elimination.

 

It's easy to tell other families that they are SOL.  That they can't be together.  But damn... when it's your family.  Your work.  Your waiting.  Your patience.  Your life........  It's a different story.   Okay, get rid of the diversity lottery, that is literally a luck of the draw lottery for people with no credentials, it's from a different era of US history.  I agree with that.  Build the wall along Mexico, anything to stop illegals, I agree with that.  Make immigration vetting more intense to weed out fraud, I agree with that. But let's not be so knee-jerk drastic on parents. 

 

But If this bill passes, in it's current form that is, then I feel very very sad for the heartbreak and sadness it will bring to US citizens all across our nation.  Regardless if I understand the reasoning behind it.

I have no particular problem in principle, more an issue of not becoming a Public Charge which is reasonable.

 

Now somebody coming here at retirement age has nothing saved in the system so the multipliers you see, 10x salary at 65 would be larger.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-guidelines-for-young-retirement-savers/

 

The numbers mentioned in the I864 would be totally inadequate, so perhaps a compromise, require realistic numbers?

 

[cyclone27 710]

Heart will go on and rational common sense immigration is what this country needs. 

[Unlockable 7,315]

3 hours ago, SkruDe said:

I understand the point of this proposed bill.  I see what they are trying to accomplish.  I see and understand that there may be no other way to achieve the immigration reform and security the country needs to succeed into the future, I see all that.  I agree we need reform, but.... when you and your family is on the line, a lot gets thrown out the window.  Family is family.  Blood is Blood.  To tell me I can't bring my parents to live with me, when I can prove I can support them, when they speak fluent English, when they are in good health, when I need them when I start a family of my own, when they are unsafe in their current country and live in fear..... well, then it's a different story.  I disagree with the current form of the bill banning all parents.  I think it just needs to be "reformed" as promised.... NOT eliminated.  That was never the deal.  The people wanted Immigration Reform.  Not Immigration Elimination.

 

It's easy to tell other families that they are SOL.  That they can't be together.  But damn... when it's your family.  Your work.  Your waiting.  Your patience.  Your life........  It's a different story.   Okay, get rid of the diversity lottery, that is literally a luck of the draw lottery for people with no credentials, it's from a different era of US history.  I agree with that.  Build the wall along Mexico, anything to stop illegals, I agree with that.  Make immigration vetting more intense to weed out fraud, I agree with that. But let's not be so knee-jerk drastic on parents. 

 

But If this bill passes, in it's current form that is, then I feel very very sad for the heartbreak and sadness it will bring to US citizens all across our nation.  Regardless if I understand the reasoning behind it.

This was a great post and an important one, in my opinion, because it shows the conflict people are having. In the beginning of your post you stated how you understood the logic behind the proposal of a reform. But then you went on to express that even though there is logic behind having a reform you don't want it because you have an emotional stake in the current process. The most powerful sentence in your post is...

Quote

I agree we need reform, but.... when you and your family is on the line, a lot gets thrown out the window. 

And that was why people are struggling with this. There is so much emotion involved with immigration.

 

Currently, over 70% of immigration cases per year are family based immigration. Now I don't have the data on how many of that 70% are outside of spouses and minor children. But you can see that at nearly 3/4 of the share of cases, family based immigration has the lion's share. If we want to even it out to where there are equal parts family based and work based visas, then a reform will need to happen that will cut some categories. Many people seem ok with eliminating the sibling category but want to keep the parent. If a reform is needed to bring in more working class age immigrants then how can you say it is fair to keep the parent category when they will likely be past working age? (Hypothetical question for argument sake).

 

Also, I want to touch on something I have said before that immigration is an individual benefit and not a cultural one. I see many people say that things are bad in their home country with crime, poverty, corruption, etc. Then use family based immigration to bring their family here to escape that. And that is certainly admirable as I would do the same if I was in that situation. But what about the other people in that country that are left behind? Their friends, neighbors, coworkers, etc, that don't have a family member in the US to help them escape the issues? To me those are really the ones who are SOL.

Edited January 29, 2018 by NuestraUnion

[charmander 692]

49 minutes ago, NuestraUnion said:

 Now I don't have the data on how many of that 70% are outside of spouses and minor children.

That data is available annually. Here are 2016 numbers https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Lawful_Permanent_Residents_2016.pdf

 

Of all GCs in 2016, 14.7% are parents, 4.2% are adult children, and 5.7% are siblings.

[charmander 692]

Something I learned new. I always assumed the employment-based GC numbers only cover the actual employees who are getting sponsored. I thought their spouses and children get their GCs under F2A category. I was wrong, total EB numbers include the spouses and minor children too. So, currently we are not really getting 140K high skill employees but a much smaller number around 65K.