Medigap premiums are equal to Medigap loss payments plus admin expenses and a small profit margin as a % of premiums. However much is saved by having participants pay say $800 more in medical expenses each year will directly reduce premiums. Individual impacts will vary depending on how much less an individual has to pay in premiums vs. how much more they pay in medical expenses.
The number of workers supporting each retired person continues to decline. With AI potential impact making this problem worse. SS as a system was originally sold to the population and seems more acceptable when everyone who pays can also collect. Once you begin doing things like reducing the COLA for those with higher income, you are eroding this rationale. If the country can't fund the system through taxing current workers wages, then something will have to give. If your assets in retirement are sufficient to cover your expenses without the receipt of SS benefits, you should look forward to the day when they will have to.
A few years ago, this same group had the idea that Plan F, which even paid for the Part B deductible, was a problem because of paying for the deductible. So, we switched to Plan G. Our monthly premium over the year declined more than the amount of the deductible. If they go this way, I predict that our monthly premium (community rating state) will decline and offset the change. In most years, our benefits under Plan G are less than the premiums. It is only when we have some significant medical event that we get more in benefits than we pay in premiums. What Plan G does is even out the costs of medical care via monthly payments rather than lumpy actual costs. There is no part of receiving medical care that is enjoyable. A more effective way to reduce Medicare expenses would be to change from 80-20 to 75-25 reducing the govt's share of the expense by 5%. Medigap premiums would increase, Medicare Advantage plans would have to charge more. Fiddling with Medigap won't change how much paying for senior healthcare costs the government.
Community Property is a very important concept in the states where it is the law. Unfortunately, to gain the benefits a home must show this in the recorded title. And, in some states there may be nuances. Our home in WA shows our names and Community Property. Our AZ home shows our names and then Community Property Right of Survivorship. Generally, this is the kind of thing that your lawyer will examine when you update your wills etc.
Perhaps you are asking the wrong question......Rather than framing this as how much information to share and with which of your children, consider the purpose of such sharing first. Several years ago when my spouse was first diagnosed with dementia, while I had my own health concerns, it became obvious to me that if I became unable to manage our finances, even temporarily, we would need someone immediately prepared to step into my shoes and carry on our affairs. This is a different problem than merely dealing with an estate after both parents have died. Whoever filled this role would have to be read-in on everything, and would have to be able to use my phone, IPad, and PC as if I was doing the work. They would have to understand how we were financing and paying substantial sums for memory care. They would need in depth understanding of our plans. Earlier in your retirement, while both of you are hale and hearty, and the path ahead seems endless, thoughts about keeping knowledge of your finances private might be okay. From reading the responses to this Forum post, there are some of you who are as prepared as I am. That is good. Those of you who have an uninterested spouse and don't have detailed plans might consider how your bills would be paid if you fell and broke your hip? Once the ambulance delivered you to the hospital, you are going to be out of action for quite a while..What will your spouse do? I am fortunate to have two sons both of whom could do this. I asked them to discuss the situation with each other and decide who wanted to do it. The one who didn't would then have to handle our estate. Both of these roles are very important, and both will take some of their valuable time to handle. After they decided who would do what, we had our documents redone and took steps to get the one doing the quick replacement tasks equipped with what he would need to do the job. If one or more of your children wouldn't be up to doing the work, you have to be tough minded enough to exclude them from consideration. After all, dealing with your immediate finances isn't a question of fairness between how children are treated.
Every college or university provides information on what the costs are for someone to attend their school. Simply google, School name cost of attendance. I think that this includes things like all the fees including their student health insurance, books, room and board etc. What is not included are things like clothing, travel, auto/parking, cell phone, Starbucks, etc. You might discuss with your student, to ask them what they are spending now, and for them to come up with a budget to include the items not covered within the school's cost of attendance. Then, you begin and make adjustments as necessary.....
Like most other problems in life, I don't think that there is a one-size fits all solution for elder care. And while I think that having family to help (especially with monitoring delivered vs. promised care in facilities) can be a good thing, fundamentally only having sufficient economic resources to fund needed care can help assure that one can receive the type and amount of care required. Most over-55 communities where seniors own homes can develop networks in the community which help with the needs of their residents. However, these communities only serve a portion of the elder population. While around 80% of seniors own their home most are not in over -55 communities. We have owned a 2nd home in an over-55 community for 14 years. This community has the same sort of support network that you have described. Despite this, most of my neighbors who reach their older days, sell their homes and move to be nearer their families. Anecdotally, these folks will not be needing financial help from their relatives; they were all comfortable. Over 14 years 70% of the 2500 homes have sold at least once. Regardless of whether you have family available or not, planning ahead is crucial. Once you have fallen and broken a hip, it is too late to look for who will be helping you.
Like the stock market, timing and location are everything when considering a home purchase/sale. If you spoke to someone who bought during Covid and has a 3% or less mortgage, they would still be happy. This is our 47th year in our current home. Over those years, the price/value of the home has gone up, down, and been unchanged over different periods of time. With real estate, you cannot have a short term approach.... In 2006, we sold my wife's parent's 1700sf home in Albany, CA for $1M. Four years later it resold for $875k. Today, it is worth $1.7M. Just as with declines in the stock market, over time, most of those who stay invested will come out ok.
Since we are just looking at the effect of economics on the decision to have children, we early Baby Boomers faced much lower expenses than folks do today. In 1973 when our first one was born, our health insurance didn't even cover the expense. I think our family doctor (not an OB/GYN) charged $250 and the hospital was less than $1000 including a 3 day stay for my wife. Since my wife didn't work, we never had to pay for child care. Our 2500 SF home cost $99k. We didn't have to pay for cell phones, personal computers, etc. When the first child went to university, the tuition was around $8k for four years. Everything was much less expensive than today! None of the things we used with our children, from cribs, to strollers, to car seats, to clothing, would be considered safe for use with children today. And all of the newer stuff is much more expensive. I can't step into the shoes of someone who has to live in our economy today. But, there will be a profound cost in late retirement for all of the childless. Institutional care provided to older folks must be monitored by someone in the family to assure that the elder gets the care they have been promised. I will be 80 this year and I am very happy that we were able to afford bringing children into the world.
With more than half the population living paycheck-to-paycheck, your idea isn't going to work. Which households have 12% margin in their budgets? What we could do is to match your investment choice with a mandate for ALL employers to fund additional pretax compensation of say 5-7% which would be contributed to a governmental program which would invest these funds as you have suggested. Employers could increase their prices to offset the additional expense. Where ever people worked their retirement account would follow them. Employees who wish to contribute more could do so. There would be some initial angst from employers but they would adjust. When retirement funding is optional it does not occur for most of the population.
Comments
Medigap premiums are equal to Medigap loss payments plus admin expenses and a small profit margin as a % of premiums. However much is saved by having participants pay say $800 more in medical expenses each year will directly reduce premiums. Individual impacts will vary depending on how much less an individual has to pay in premiums vs. how much more they pay in medical expenses.
Post: Keep an eye on Medigap policies
Link to comment from September 27, 2026
The number of workers supporting each retired person continues to decline. With AI potential impact making this problem worse. SS as a system was originally sold to the population and seems more acceptable when everyone who pays can also collect. Once you begin doing things like reducing the COLA for those with higher income, you are eroding this rationale. If the country can't fund the system through taxing current workers wages, then something will have to give. If your assets in retirement are sufficient to cover your expenses without the receipt of SS benefits, you should look forward to the day when they will have to.
Post: Is your retirement plan counting on a Social Security COLA in the future?
Link to comment from September 27, 2026
A few years ago, this same group had the idea that Plan F, which even paid for the Part B deductible, was a problem because of paying for the deductible. So, we switched to Plan G. Our monthly premium over the year declined more than the amount of the deductible. If they go this way, I predict that our monthly premium (community rating state) will decline and offset the change. In most years, our benefits under Plan G are less than the premiums. It is only when we have some significant medical event that we get more in benefits than we pay in premiums. What Plan G does is even out the costs of medical care via monthly payments rather than lumpy actual costs. There is no part of receiving medical care that is enjoyable. A more effective way to reduce Medicare expenses would be to change from 80-20 to 75-25 reducing the govt's share of the expense by 5%. Medigap premiums would increase, Medicare Advantage plans would have to charge more. Fiddling with Medigap won't change how much paying for senior healthcare costs the government.
Post: Keep an eye on Medigap policies
Link to comment from September 27, 2026
Community Property is a very important concept in the states where it is the law. Unfortunately, to gain the benefits a home must show this in the recorded title. And, in some states there may be nuances. Our home in WA shows our names and Community Property. Our AZ home shows our names and then Community Property Right of Survivorship. Generally, this is the kind of thing that your lawyer will examine when you update your wills etc.
Post: $400,000 Mistake
Link to comment from August 1, 2026
Perhaps you are asking the wrong question......Rather than framing this as how much information to share and with which of your children, consider the purpose of such sharing first. Several years ago when my spouse was first diagnosed with dementia, while I had my own health concerns, it became obvious to me that if I became unable to manage our finances, even temporarily, we would need someone immediately prepared to step into my shoes and carry on our affairs. This is a different problem than merely dealing with an estate after both parents have died. Whoever filled this role would have to be read-in on everything, and would have to be able to use my phone, IPad, and PC as if I was doing the work. They would have to understand how we were financing and paying substantial sums for memory care. They would need in depth understanding of our plans. Earlier in your retirement, while both of you are hale and hearty, and the path ahead seems endless, thoughts about keeping knowledge of your finances private might be okay. From reading the responses to this Forum post, there are some of you who are as prepared as I am. That is good. Those of you who have an uninterested spouse and don't have detailed plans might consider how your bills would be paid if you fell and broke your hip? Once the ambulance delivered you to the hospital, you are going to be out of action for quite a while..What will your spouse do? I am fortunate to have two sons both of whom could do this. I asked them to discuss the situation with each other and decide who wanted to do it. The one who didn't would then have to handle our estate. Both of these roles are very important, and both will take some of their valuable time to handle. After they decided who would do what, we had our documents redone and took steps to get the one doing the quick replacement tasks equipped with what he would need to do the job. If one or more of your children wouldn't be up to doing the work, you have to be tough minded enough to exclude them from consideration. After all, dealing with your immediate finances isn't a question of fairness between how children are treated.
Post: Time to share our financial info with children?
Link to comment from June 8, 2026
Every college or university provides information on what the costs are for someone to attend their school. Simply google, School name cost of attendance. I think that this includes things like all the fees including their student health insurance, books, room and board etc. What is not included are things like clothing, travel, auto/parking, cell phone, Starbucks, etc. You might discuss with your student, to ask them what they are spending now, and for them to come up with a budget to include the items not covered within the school's cost of attendance. Then, you begin and make adjustments as necessary.....
Post: How much to provide a college student monthly?
Link to comment from April 26, 2026
Like most other problems in life, I don't think that there is a one-size fits all solution for elder care. And while I think that having family to help (especially with monitoring delivered vs. promised care in facilities) can be a good thing, fundamentally only having sufficient economic resources to fund needed care can help assure that one can receive the type and amount of care required. Most over-55 communities where seniors own homes can develop networks in the community which help with the needs of their residents. However, these communities only serve a portion of the elder population. While around 80% of seniors own their home most are not in over -55 communities. We have owned a 2nd home in an over-55 community for 14 years. This community has the same sort of support network that you have described. Despite this, most of my neighbors who reach their older days, sell their homes and move to be nearer their families. Anecdotally, these folks will not be needing financial help from their relatives; they were all comfortable. Over 14 years 70% of the 2500 homes have sold at least once. Regardless of whether you have family available or not, planning ahead is crucial. Once you have fallen and broken a hip, it is too late to look for who will be helping you.
Post: The Myth of the Default Caregiver
Link to comment from April 11, 2026
Like the stock market, timing and location are everything when considering a home purchase/sale. If you spoke to someone who bought during Covid and has a 3% or less mortgage, they would still be happy. This is our 47th year in our current home. Over those years, the price/value of the home has gone up, down, and been unchanged over different periods of time. With real estate, you cannot have a short term approach.... In 2006, we sold my wife's parent's 1700sf home in Albany, CA for $1M. Four years later it resold for $875k. Today, it is worth $1.7M. Just as with declines in the stock market, over time, most of those who stay invested will come out ok.
Post: The Home Ownership Gamble
Link to comment from April 7, 2026
Since we are just looking at the effect of economics on the decision to have children, we early Baby Boomers faced much lower expenses than folks do today. In 1973 when our first one was born, our health insurance didn't even cover the expense. I think our family doctor (not an OB/GYN) charged $250 and the hospital was less than $1000 including a 3 day stay for my wife. Since my wife didn't work, we never had to pay for child care. Our 2500 SF home cost $99k. We didn't have to pay for cell phones, personal computers, etc. When the first child went to university, the tuition was around $8k for four years. Everything was much less expensive than today! None of the things we used with our children, from cribs, to strollers, to car seats, to clothing, would be considered safe for use with children today. And all of the newer stuff is much more expensive. I can't step into the shoes of someone who has to live in our economy today. But, there will be a profound cost in late retirement for all of the childless. Institutional care provided to older folks must be monitored by someone in the family to assure that the elder gets the care they have been promised. I will be 80 this year and I am very happy that we were able to afford bringing children into the world.
Post: Financial regrets about parenthood?
Link to comment from April 7, 2026
With more than half the population living paycheck-to-paycheck, your idea isn't going to work. Which households have 12% margin in their budgets? What we could do is to match your investment choice with a mandate for ALL employers to fund additional pretax compensation of say 5-7% which would be contributed to a governmental program which would invest these funds as you have suggested. Employers could increase their prices to offset the additional expense. Where ever people worked their retirement account would follow them. Employees who wish to contribute more could do so. There would be some initial angst from employers but they would adjust. When retirement funding is optional it does not occur for most of the population.
Post: Perfection, enemy of good
Link to comment from April 5, 2026