Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow... well, I avoid the urine-scented Tenderloin with concentration of all the homeless mental cases, but I still find most of the city to be the most beautiful place in the world. I couldn't leave... Also, I don't think crime risk in SF is nearly as serious as in NYC.
Re CA/MA/NY being blue states, I am not sure that necessarily makes difference for your lack of tax liability and free healthcare. Although I don't quite understand how that is possible (but I am not knowledgeable about investing at all), it appears that you have zero tax liability (and therefore free healthcare) because you derive all your income from selling a % of your investments without capital gains. If that results in zero tax liability in blue states, there should be zero tax liability in red states as well - I am not aware that any state would tax you if you have no capital gains (and no other income). And I assume that you would qualify for free healthcare in every state if you do not have taxable income. As far as I know, poverty line (and eligibility for subsidized healthcare) is determined according to income, and not according to assets, in every state.
The difference between CA/MA on one side, and NY on the other, is that the really powerful welfare activists in NY would like to crucify someone like you, as a "rich privileged" person that is using what they would see a "tax loophole" to avoid paying tax and even getting a free healthcare... while CA and MA liberalisms are a different thing - both of the states are business-friendly, and it is widely understood that without investors (such as yourself) there would be no economy, so tax breaks for investors are deemed to be okay. For me personally, none of this matters financially since I am not an investor, but I do not like the current NY rabid anti-capitalism for other reasons, ie, because it is chasing the solid tax base out of the state and the city, and I am concerned that the quality of life will decline, and crime go way up, in NYC as a consequence of lost tax revenue needed to run the city properly. This has finally given me a pause with planning to have my East Coast base in NYC retirement - if the city is really going back into the 1970s urban decay, I don't want to be a part of it. Otherwise, I love NYC for its grand scale and cosmopolitanism
Regarding health insurance, my opinion is that every adult in the US should be paying a health insurance premium, the way it is done in Western Europe with mandatory contributions to national insurance system, which are required even from unemployed people. In your case, you were absurdly placed into a situation to either have to pay a doubled healthcare premium or go on MediCal, so I can't really blame you... but healthcare premiums in the US are so huge primarily because of the huge number of people who do not pay any premium. Somebody has to pay for the health care of those who do not pay anything for it, and that is why those who do pay a premium end up paying a huge amount. I was told that the health insurance premium pool in MA is determined according to the zip code, and I suspect that pretty much everyone in my Back Bay zip code pays into the health insurance pool, which keeps the premiums reasonably low. That is why I'll pay only $5,080 per year for health insurance at the age of 60, and not some ridiculous 5-digit figure mentioned in other posts. The relatively low premiums in MA are not a function of MA being a blue state (actually MA Health Connector was created by a Republican governor, ie, Mitt Romney), but of the fact that the number of MA residents who get free healthcare is relatively low compared to the number of those who pay the premium. If a larger number of people pays into an insurance pool, the amount of each individual premium goes down.
I think the vistas in SF are beautiful, ie, the distant views when there’s no fog, but the streetscape......in addition to the homeless, you get dreary fog and ugly (compared to say brownstone Brooklyn or Back Bay)architecture. But to each his own, I guess.
Not sure what you meant by the CA/MA vs NY politics.
I agree, we should have a system where everyone has skin in the healthcare game. I didn’t make the rules. Just like with the tax code, I merely try to understand the rules and use them to my benefit. Had Obamacare not doubled my premiums, I never would have researched expanded Medicaid, which is what has allowed me to have free healthcare because there is no asset test. That’s what I meant by blue states....a lot of the red states didn’t opt for expanded Medicaid...I wouldn’t be eligible in those states.
Edit to add: Qualifying for medi-cal has been easy. As a single, I can have up to 17K in AGI. Given that I only spend about 35k a year (everything is paid for...) and have virtually no dividends in taxable accounts, I would have to be selling equities that would have to be about 50% cap gains to push over the limit. I can always find a position that hasn’t appreciated that much. This game won’t last forever, but I don’t expect the ACA to either. I will probably soon be paying income taxes though, now that there is the 10K SALT limitation, the 12k standard deduction is what I use.
I think the vistas in SF are beautiful, ie, the distant views when there’s no fog, but the streetscape......in addition to the homeless, you get dreary fog and ugly (compared to say brownstone Brooklyn or Back Bay)architecture. But to each his own, I guess.
Not sure what you meant by the CA/MA vs NY politics.
I agree, we should have a system where everyone has skin in the healthcare game. I didn’t make the rules. Just like with the tax code, I merely try to understand the rules and use them to my benefit. Had Obamacare not doubled my premiums, I never would have researched expanded Medicaid, which is what has allowed me to have free healthcare because there is no asset test. That’s what I meant by blue states....a lot of the red states didn’t opt for expanded Medicaid...I wouldn’t be eligible in those states.
Edit to add: Qualifying for medi-cal has been easy. As a single, I can have up to 17K in AGI. Given that I only spend about 35k a year (everything is paid for...) and have virtually no dividends in taxable accounts, I would have to be selling equities that would have to be about 50% cap gains to push over the limit. I can always find a position that hasn’t appreciated that much. This game won’t last forever, but I don’t expect the ACA to either. I will probably soon be paying income taxes though, now that there is the 10K SALT limitation, the 12k standard deduction is what I use.
Didn't realize that red and blue states didn't have the same general Medicaid rules - I thought the only diffetence was that the income corresponding to 100% poverty line is obviously a different amount in California vs. Alabama.
Re differences between NY politics and pretty much any other politics in the US, they rest primarily on the mindboggling volume of subsidies in NY, particularly the subsidized housing. While NYC has among the most expensive land and housing in the nation, about 15% of people live in NYC for free, and more than half live in partially subsidized housing. But someone is obviously paying for that, via taxes - and those who are paying (eg, the business) are constantly publicly reviled (even though they keep everyone else afloat!), and there is a strong push against tax breaks for the business (preventing Amazon from having the secondary headquarters in NYC is just the most famous example of the trend). There is a glut of high-end properties that cannot sell despite price reductions in NYC (because of people who are leaving), and the tax revenue is dropping by billions - because major taxpayers are leaving the city and state due to the local political climate. Due to the population structure , there is also a lot of pretty strong anti-white racism, as well as major tolerance for violent crime. I am concerned about these trends, and don't particularly want to witness their full bloom that might be coming up. I immigrated from Europe 36 years ago, and politically I am socially libreral, but fiscally conservative. While I am not comfortable being surrounded by rednecks, I do want to live in a state and city with solid, sane economy, and reasonable public safety. NY is not such a state, and NYC not such a city, right now.
I'm planning to retire at 60 (spouse will be 62) and health insurance are the main driver of our financial plans. We have plenty of hard-earned money and I want to protect it from a health crisis.
We're planning to live overseas and get international policies, returning to the US when we both quality for Medicare. Re: international insurance, I got an initial quote of $6k/year from Cigna, to cover both of us. We'd be insured during visits to the US, of no more than 3 weeks each, max 60 days per year. I'm assuming this quote would double when we actually went to sign up for a policy, planning on $12k/year.
But wow, the information about Massachusetts on this thread has been extremely helpful. I had no idea that the 2006 healthcare legislation was working so well there. Maybe we should set up our US base in the Berkshires, just in case we want to cut our travels short.
I'm planning to retire at 60 (spouse will be 62) and health insurance are the main driver of our financial plans. We have plenty of hard-earned money and I want to protect it from a health crisis.
We're planning to live overseas and get international policies, returning to the US when we both quality for Medicare. Re: international insurance, I got an initial quote of $6k/year from Cigna, to cover both of us. We'd be insured during visits to the US, of no more than 3 weeks each, max 60 days per year. I'm assuming this quote would double when we actually went to sign up for a policy, planning on $12k/year.
But wow, the information about Massachusetts on this thread has been extremely helpful. I had no idea that the 2006 healthcare legislation was working so well there. Maybe we should set up our US base in the Berkshires, just in case we want to cut our travels short.
Yes, while I do have the cheapest MA Health Connector policy with the highest deductible (I have been healthy, and could easily pay the high deductible if needed), it is indeed around $5,080 for the next year (when I'll be 60). I was told that the premiums are determined according to zip codes, so I don't know what they would be in the Berkshires. You can check MAHealthConnector.org, or (since they have a horrible, unwieldy website, which furthermore normally constantly crashes at this time of the year) you can call them at 877-623-6765. They seem to prefer being called (they appear to have unlimited number of employees staffing the phones), likely because they know how bad their website is. You can pick out a nice house in the Berkshires on Zillow, look up its zip code, and ask the MA Health Connector for a quote for that zip code and your age/family size. I hope they would tell you, even though you are not a MA resident now.
Again, health insurance is the first of three reasons why I still live in MA (the second reason is the very large primary home tax abatement for my Boston condo - but I don't think that exists in the Berkshires, and the third reason is Boston Logan airport with its super convenient access from Back Bay and worldwide connections).
Hmm, a tax abatement and proximity to an airport sound pretty darn good, maybe we should consider Boston. I'm currently living in Philly in tax-abated new construction, and it is a sweet deal.
Didn't realize that red and blue states didn't have the same general Medicaid rules - I thought the only diffetence was that the income corresponding to 100% poverty line is obviously a different amount in California vs. Alabama.
Re differences between NY politics and pretty much any other politics in the US, they rest primarily on the mindboggling volume of subsidies in NY, particularly the subsidized housing. While NYC has among the most expensive land and housing in the nation, about 15% of people live in NYC for free, and more than half live in partially subsidized housing. But someone is obviously paying for that, via taxes - and those who are paying (eg, the business) are constantly publicly reviled (even though they keep everyone else afloat!), and there is a strong push against tax breaks for the business (preventing Amazon from having the secondary headquarters in NYC is just the most famous example of the trend). There is a glut of high-end properties that cannot sell despite price reductions in NYC (because of people who are leaving), and the tax revenue is dropping by billions - because major taxpayers are leaving the city and state due to the local political climate. Due to the population structure , there is also a lot of pretty strong anti-white racism, as well as major tolerance for violent crime. I am concerned about these trends, and don't particularly want to witness their full bloom that might be coming up. I immigrated from Europe 36 years ago, and politically I am socially libreral, but fiscally conservative. While I am not comfortable being surrounded by rednecks, I do want to live in a state and city with solid, sane economy, and reasonable public safety. NY is not such a state, and NYC not such a city, right now.
I didn’t realize any of this either, until I was “provoked” into research when Obamacare came in. I was lucky in that prior financial moves left me in a place where my expenses were very low and I could “turn the tables” on them, so to speak.
Hmm, a tax abatement and proximity to an airport sound pretty darn good, maybe we should consider Boston. I'm currently living in Philly in tax-abated new construction, and it is a sweet deal.
Don’t those tax abatements in Philly expire after 10 years?
Didn't realize that red and blue states didn't have the same general Medicaid rules - I thought the only diffetence was that the income corresponding to 100% poverty line is obviously a different amount in California vs. Alabama.
The rules are extremely different both for eligibility and coverage. For example, Alabama has a $3,500 per year spending cap on hospitalization. After 1 day in the hospital, either you're out on the street or the hospital has to eat all the costs. Little wonder that rural southern hospitals have been closing.
Hmm, a tax abatement and proximity to an airport sound pretty darn good, maybe we should consider Boston. I'm currently living in Philly in tax-abated new construction, and it is a sweet deal.
In Massachusetts, the cities & towns with a residential exemption are Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Arlington, Somerville, Malden, Chelsea, Waltham, and Watertown. Nantucket, too.
There are a bunch of towns with low mill rates so you don't have to live in those specific places to have a relatively low property tax bill. Most of the Cape and Islands is low.
Keep in mind that Massachusetts has a 5.05% flat income tax. They don't tax Social Security income but depending on your income sources, you could have a fairly large state and local tax burden. You kind of have to do the math for your own particular circumstances. There are an awful lot of snowbirds who declare Florida as their legal address to avoid the state income tax and excise tax (property tax) on their car.
For middle-class Americans, potential, lifetime-savings-destroying healthcare costs are probably the major reason more people delay retirement until they become Medicare eligible.
A related factor is high insurance premiums, including Cobra insurance costs. (Even 10-years ago, my early retirement, Cobra healthcare costs were $500+ per month for only myself, until I turned 65). Wife's Medicare Supplement plan also remains $200 (mine would run $300 per month if I started a Supplement plan now). I've got a pretty good 'Medicare Advantage' plan.
Another early retirement obstacle is delayed post-child rearing/college/wedding costs, leaving less time to max-out retirement savings. A large number of young people moving back home after college, has also delayed retirement for some.
Many also took a serious hit to their retirement finances in the recession 10-years ago, from which many are only finally starting to recover. While the conditions leading to that recession are unlikely to repeat themselves now, many potential retirees, are more cautious today, than they were 10-15-years ago. Meanwhile, inflation hasn't seemed to slowed much, eating-up part of that recovery.
Greater longevity and fewer solid pension plans is another deterrent to early retirement. And, while later retirement may increase one's SS payments, it also puts one closer to taxable RMD withdrawals (which reduce one's future investment account growth).
Last edited by jghorton; 11-26-2019 at 11:05 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
