BunsenBurner - omg! If I were the realtor I would have at least hired someone to move out the freezer full of spoiled meat???
Good thing to think about in terms of landlording! For a variety of reasons it’s sounding like a less desirable option as an income stream.
Conversions are treated as ordinary income, capital gains rates don’t apply.
Oops, sorry. But Austin is the 11th largest city in the country and growing faster than most so seems like a smart business move.
No doubt urban areas have more to offer in terms of restaurants, arts, cultural events, shopping, etc. simply by the size of them. However, there is often an attitude that other places outside of cities just aren’t, “worthy,” of those types of things because the people living there can’t possibly appreciate them. That, “why on earth would anyone put _______________ there???” sort of mindset that can cause bristling.
Case in point: Crystal Bridges is an American art museum built by Alice Walton. This article is seven years old now, and was published three years after its opening but she took a lot of flack for choosing to place her museum in Northwest Arkansas. Lots of art folks unhappy she was acquiring and removing pieces from cities. Additional topics about the museum are in the article as well, but within it you can read how placing her museum there caused “outrage” in the art world.
The good news is that we live a vastly diverse country, and there is something for everyone. Find what you want (whatever that is)in a retirement area that will make you happy. Do that.
Oops yes that is correct, however, we don’t have a flat capital gains rate, and they also want to raise those rates, so it could be a double whammy for people who do incur capital gains, because their earnings will push them into a higher rate, and capital gains rate are based on your income tax rate on ordinary income. For years I’ve been trying to hold/move my income producing stocks (hold them in my Roth IRAs instead) so I don’t get hit later when/if taxes go up, or in general - ie fluctuating income, inheritance tax, large capital gains, etc., but I also don’t want to eat up all my cash to pay the taxes on the conversion now and our income fluctuates since my husband is self employed which makes it even more difficult.
I directed the comment to her because she lives near me and that restaurant is owned by a restaurant group that has a ton of restaurants here and a few scattered throughout difference cities, but usually the same cities and more than 1 of their restaurants. For instance, having a bunch of their restaurants in Las Vegas. But this particular restaurant they only have 2 of - 1 here and 1 in Austin. It’s unique because Austin isn’t home to any of their other restaurants, nothing to do with Austin being one of the largest cities. Afterall, they don’t have any in NY, but do have one of their restaurants in Virginia. So, it has nothing to do with the size of the city. Sorry for any confusion.
I know artists who have great respect for Crystal Bridges, and they don’t seem to care where it is. Perhaps collectors have an issue with the location? It bugs me that the term “art world” doesn’t necessarily encompass actual artists.
That’s part of our thinking too. We are in a HCOL area, but we have so many choices of things to do, restaurants to go to, hospital systems, stores/malls, things like that.
It sounds like Medicare at 60 is still being discussed. This would be huge for those who would like to retire before 65 but do not have good health insurance options. Although I am not holding my breath…
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/dems-eye-6t-plan-on-infrastructure-medicare-immigration/
@BunsenBurner - Medicare at 60 would simplify SO many things (for me at least and probably many, many others!!).
Oh for sure. If we had a nickel for each time we’ve had happy hour beer with friends and the pre-65 medical cost topic came up… we could buy a few beers. Just not seeing how Medicare would have enough funds to expand coverage.
I don’t know the answer to this - are there issues with accessibility/networks etc once one goes on Medicare? Don’t docs get less for Medicare patients?
As much as I am tired of paying what we are paying for our coverage, I do like the coverage I have. I pay more so I have access to more.
Depends on what you choose. It’s a continuum, from open choice to HMO. You can choose Traditional Medicare, which is essentially fee-for-service which many docs take, or a more restricted network plan, all the way to an HMO-style Medicare plan.
Yes, the provider reimbursement is heavily discounted. As a result, some docs will no longer take new Medicare patients, or any Medicare patients, for that matter. (But the latter is not common.)
Something like about 72% of providers take new (traditional) Medicare patients, with an additional 21% taking (traditional) Medicare for continuing patients.
Medicare Advantage plans, of course, would be accepted as defined by the network of the specific plan.
I had one specialist who didn’t take Medicare or any insurance for that matter. What it meant was that the doctor’s office wouldn’t bill Medicare directly. How it works is that the patient pays for the services and the doctor’s office provides information that the patient has to file to get reimbursed by Medicare.
I for one would love to see an affordable Insurance plan available for retired individuals before she 65. It would certainly ease my ability to transition earlier. At what cost to taxpayers does that gone though? Obviously any lower cost plan would require even more taxpayer funds than are currently being used. The fact is the current plan is headed for a cliff in the next few years unless something drastic is done (of course it will be, too many friend on it).
The Medicare Insurance Trust Fund is expected to become insolvent in 2024. That’s under who is currently covered and with current input into the system. What would it look like for taxpayers (us, our children, etc) to not only shore up this current system but to also expand it to anyone 60 or older? There’s lots of talk about raiding taxes on corporations and high wage earners but there’s also lots of other ideas on where to spend those increased revenues. Money only goes so far. The federal debt keeps getting higher and higher. How would a plan that encompasses younger individuals actually be paid for when the current plan is quickly running out of money?
We all want cheap health insurance but ultimately healthcare costs someone. Good healthcare costs even more.
My brother and I were co-executors but we were not able to sign over rights to each other. Both of us were required for a number of things because part of the estate had to go through probate.
Our attorneys advised only one executor when we redrafted our trusts.
I was thinking the same thing. Can’t imagine what the increase in costs would be to put people on medicare 5 years earlier, especially when there are plenty of people that ARE still working and receiving insurance through work and can’t even get social security benefits until they’re 62. It just again goes to the fact that the cost of insurance for those that choose to retire early or are self employed is really the issue, not that they should be able to get medicare at the age of 60. And I say this as someone who pays an outrageous amount for insurance, has a self employed spouse and he is 62 eligible for both social security (not taking it) and would be eligible for medicare under this scenario.
The cost of insurance is certainly an issue. Does insurance cost more for a self employed person or for someone in retirement but not eligible for Medicare? Not what they have to pay but the actual cost. Doesn’t comparable insurance really cost about the same for almost everyone? Sure depending on our particular situation the cost to us varies. Those with jobs that provide great benefits pay very little of the costs as their company pays the majority. Those with lower income probably qualify for low or no cost insurance and taxpayers pay the difference. Those that work at jobs with no or lousy benefits might pay a lot up to all of the cost of their insurance. Same for self employed or those retired but not yet eligible for Medicare.
So insurance cost is certainly an issue. It would be nice to figure out a solution. Expanding Medicare to cover those 60 and over or perhaps self employed, etc doesn’t reduce the costs though, it just shifts those costs onto taxpayers and probably adds on some more cost for bureaucracy. I’m not sure what we can do.
Just for information, I’m employed where we must pick up 100% of our own health care cost so I pay A LOT for my coverage. I would certainly be thankful to pay less.
As much as I would like to see Medicare age lowered to 60, it seems to be a pipe dream at this point.
As many people who would like the age to be lowered (and I imagine that it’s a large percentage of people) there are powerful lobbies that will work and spend a tremendous amount of money to prevent it.