- This topic has 1 reply, 12 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
[quote=”sweikert925″]Thanks for the definition of cheating but I was in no way confused about the meaning of that word, as opposed to your understanding of the word “socialist”. And I am still resentful of your accusation against me but looks like no apology is going to be forthcoming. C’est la vie.
You can question all you want the way any system is set up. But the fairness of such a system is not up to you to decide all by yourself. You are not the sole arbiter of what is fair.
Your particular situation in no way benefits me.
Funny you should bring up the ME generation because the one who seems to be concerned more with “me-ness” here is you. It’s hard not to notice that all the policy positions you push here tend to – by the merest coincidence – benefit your bottom line while most of the ones I advocate tend to subtract from mine.[/quote]
Requesting a clear and level playing field for all those in the game where the cost and rules are equally and fairly applied does not benefit my bottom line, it simply seeks to add validation, equality, clarity, and fairness to the system. To allow such a system to be gamed and manipulated or the rules to be unequally applied only adds question and resistance to those that it impacts.
[quote=”Imxploring”]1. Based on your statement Scott I’m guessing you feel the associated CAJA cost for someone with a retirement income in those ranges outweigh the benefits of residency?
2. Although declaring that kind of income might be a cheaper, and much faster (2 hours!) option than a divorce for some!!!! LOL ;-)[/quote]
1. That would be up to each person to decide… What I would be more concerned about is someone declaring a substantial income to a “government representative” in any country in central or Latin America…
[quote=”sweikert925″]Thanks for the definition of cheating but I was in no way confused about the meaning of that word, as opposed to your understanding of the word “socialist”. And I am still resentful of your accusation against me but looks like no apology is going to be forthcoming. C’est la vie.
You can question all you want the way any system is set up. But the fairness of such a system is not up to you to decide all by yourself. You are not the sole arbiter of what is fair.
Your particular situation in no way benefits me. [/quote]
Au contraire, Steve. It will benefit you. Folks paying more for CAJA (for the same product) are subsidizing those paying less.
[quote=”sweikert925″]Funny you should bring up the ME generation because the one who seems to be concerned more with “me-ness” here is you. It’s hard not to notice that all the policy positions you push here tend to – by the merest coincidence – benefit your bottom line while most of the ones I advocate tend to subtract from mine.[/quote]
Steve, what you’ve been doing is “predicting” how you’ll respond to some future situation. Only time will tell how you will actually respond. Save your claim of non-“me-ness” to when you actually make that subtraction.
As for fairness, my mother always told me “life isn’t fair” but we each can determine what we consider to be fair and live our lives accordingly. It’s my opinion the current method of calculating CAJA resulting in such extreme cost differences for the purchase of the same product … it’s my opinion it’s an unfair policy. As a result I won’t apply for residency and with the money I would have paid CAJA I’ll use it for 72 hours trips every 90 days and to self insure … and I’ll still have more than enough unspent to pay for a flight to a US hospital in the event I’ll need one.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”pixframe”]Save your claim of non-“me-ness” to when you actually make that subtraction.[/quote]
I have been making that subtraction all of my adult life.Things I support as matters of public policy have affected me in the form of higher taxes and I won’t be changing that attitude when I arrive in CR. Imxploring’s income level may mean a higher CAJA assessment than mine, but mine will undoubtedly be higher than others’. I am not complaining about that, imxploring is. You righties are the one who insist on paying less in taxes – which directly benefits you. I am in favor of programs which result in my paying more. The equation is pretty simple.[/quote]
Another adage of my mother’s was “when you’re young you can do without but when you’re old you shouldn’t have to”. You don’t know the “back story” of any of us here. The reason many of us have our “bundle” is because we did without, made sacrifices, and saved in order to produce an income for ourselves in retirement. (I for one have no pension. I receive social security and the interest on my savings. My 401k, had no employer contributions, and IRA … I don’t consider them “pensions”. They were just different forms of savings to produce an income for me).
Of course you don’t mind paying more than others for CAJA. You estimate, at the most, you’ll be paying $130/month, the lower end of the fee scale … and for comparative purposes about $25 more than what the purchase of an all inclusive Medicare part B Advantage (HMO) plan would be. For $25 a month it’s easy being “the sport” saying you don’t mind paying more than others.
This is not a “rightie” or “leftie” issue. It’s a matter of fairness and there’s no fairness in some people being charged two, three, four or even more times more than what others are being charged for the same product. Why should those paying less for CAJA be the beneficiary of the years of sacrifices made by others instead of the children and grand children of those who made the sacrifices being the beneficiaries of those sacrifices?
The fairness of the new CAJA rates policy is the issue of this thread and I still maintain it’s an unfair policy.
[quote=”Imxploring”] CAJA participation as a REQUIREMENT and based on a percentage of income is neither fair or equitable.[/quote]
Ahh yes, a requirement. Now we are down to the real issue, aren’t we.
[b][u]The CAJA is a national single payer medical system into which everyone who lives in Costa Rica and has an income pays into the system based on their income.
[/u][/b]
My payment to CAJA is far below any medical insurance coverage available here or in the US by orders of magnitude and the care that I receive is equal to the care that I received in the US. The care that you receive in either case is the same. The difference is that with private insurance you can have a private room in a hospital where I will be in a dormitory. Having experienced both I prefer the camaraderie of the dormitory.You have the same choices that I had. [b][u]You will pay the fees that CAJA charges[/u][/b] and you can pay the exorbitant cost of private insurance in addition if you wish.
If you think that the cost of private insurance does not increase you are living in a fantasy world.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”pixframe”]The reason many of us have our “bundle” is because we did without, made sacrifices, and saved in order to produce an income for ourselves in retirement[/quote]
Very commendable – and that pretty much sums up my situation too (though I wished I started saving 10 years earlier than I did).
But what you imply is that everyone who winds up with “a bundle” got there as a result of hard work and frugality and those who wound up poor didn’t work hard or save.[/quote]
No, Steve, there was no such implication.
[quote=”sweikert925″]That hasn’t been my experience of life. If being wealthy was purely a result of hard work then hotel chambermaids would wind up wealthier than bank vice-president, and, of course, they don’t. In my experience luck (and, sometimes, a willingness to cheat and steal) have more to do with how rich you wind up being than playing by the rules. Not that I am accusing you of the latter, but you can’t deny that some do get rich that way. [/quote]
Rich is a very subjective term. And, sometimes, a willingness to cheat and steal, is why some people are poor
too. Regardless of how folks managed to put together their bundle (work, smart investment decisions, inheritance, hit the lottery … whatever) … having it doesn’t mean they should be charged more for CAJA than folks who have less.[quote=”sweikert925″] At the end of the day though, the way taxes are imposed is merely a matter of practicality. If everyone paid the same then the rich would have a much easier load to bear – and the poor would have a much harder one. Seeing as they are already poor, why make them even poorer? Is that REALLY fair? [/quote]
Honestly … YES! It’s unfair for a government to impose their definition of rich upon us and decide how much those they define as rich … how much they need and how much they can do without in order to pass their wealth on to others of lesser means. That is very unfair!
[quote=”sweikert925″] It is easier to collect taxes from people who have means than those who don’t. Of course in your case the amount you wlll be paying for CAJA will be exactly $0.00 since you’ve already said you are going to forego residency and take the perpetual tourist route. [That’s something imexploring might call cheating or “gaming the system”, so be prepared to hear from him about that].[/quote]
First, please don’t speak for others or hint at what others may or may not be thinking. Let imxploring speak for himself. Yes, the perpetual tourist route is the route I’ll take. As I said before, the money I would have paid in to CAJA I’ll use to self insure … and in the event I require medical services while in Costa Rica I’ll pay for them.
I tend to believe you’re not seeing the big picture, Steve. What we’re discussing is the new CAJA policy. But, the big picture says this is the beginning … the tip of the iceberg! And, as time passes and the Costa Rican government’s need for more and more money to fund itself grows and they expand their definition of rich to include you … let’s see what you’ll be saying then.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”pixframe”]And, as time passes and the Costa Rican government’s need for more and more money to fund itself grows and they expand their definition of rich to include you … let’s see what you’ll be saying then.[/quote]
[quote=”sweikert925″] Their definition of rich undoubtedly already includes me since the median income in Costa Rica is something like $6000/year and per capita GDP is about $13,000/year. My retirement income will be many times either of those figures.[/quote]Wishful thinking, Steve … lol. Based on your guesstimate of what you’ll be paying in to CAJA, the rate you’ve applied is not the top rate on the scale. So, NO, you’re still not there.
[quote=”sweikert925″]Now if you’re saying that there may come a point where they jack up the assessments to an intolerable level then I agree, that is certainly possible.[/quote]
BINGO! Apparently you have a higher threshold for pain … lol. So, you’re saying when the level becomes intolerable for you (when it puts a squeeze on your lifestyle) you agree … but until then … while it’s become intolerable for others now it’s perfectly OK because it hasn’t yet effected you personally.
[quote=”sweikert925″]But they are selling a product – residency in Costa Rica – and they have to price it based on what the market will bear. They are most probably aware that if they increase the CAJA assessments too much the expatriates will stop coming, and it obviously in their interest to prevent that situation.
Incidentally, are you aware that Costa Ricans currently contribute to CAJA at higher percentages than do expatriates that apply for residency there? For a Costa Rican the contribution rate is about 23%, with employers responsible for about 15% and the worker responsible for about 8%. (For the self-employed the CAJA assessment is between 10.5% and 13.5%). And bear in mind they have been paying that for their entire working lives, while US citizens landing in Costa Rica can, the day after their residency has been approved, start making use of CAJA services even though their contribution is at that point nearly nothing.[/quote]
Percentages? Let’s talk dollars … colones! Same product should have the same cost for ALL. And, as for paying in all their working lives … it’s a universal medical system. It’s not Medicare which one pays into all their working lives and only reap its benefits when they reach 65. They’ve been paying in all their working lives and have been utilizing it’s services all their working lives too.
I’ve discussed this subject long enough. Time for me to move on …
Seems like places such as Ecuador,Uruguay, Panama etc. merit further consideration. Perhaps the allure of Costa Rica is beginning to run its course.
[quote=”bogino”]Seems like places such as Ecuador,Uruguay, Panama etc. merit further consideration. Perhaps the allure of Costa Rica is beginning to run its course.[/quote]
CR is still a beautiful place and should be considered.The problem is a bonehead government that has adopted the attitude that all expats are nothing more than money trees.
The CAJA issue is but the latest in a list financial moves they’ve made that have leveled the playing field with less attractive retirement havens and made CR less attractive.
We can all remember the revamped traffic fines plan they hatched with the $600 fine for passing a speed camera….something that not only impacted expats but Ticos alike. Did they really think that was going to work?
Taxes, fines, and fees that are seen as unreasonable (a subjective term) are often not complied with, avoided, or subject to manipulation. And as any long term member that has been in CR for any period of time… working around taxes and fees is considered a national sport by Ticos in CR…. right behind soccer.
The CAJA issue is a big money machine for CR, but let’s see how it works out!
[quote=”waggoner41″]
If you think that the cost of private insurance does not increase you are living in a fantasy world.
[/quote]The cost of everything goes up as the quote I provided pointed out…. inflation is how government confiscate the wealth of their citizens… or in this case residents. The big difference is that with the vast majority of products I purchase (in fact all that I can think of) they are NOT based on a percentage of my income. The question then becomes when the cost of CAJA goes up so high that it makes it impossible for you to live comfortably in CR… what then? Will you have the resources to relocate elsewhere? Return to the US? Shift to the perpetual tourist plan?
For younger folks looking to retire in CR this will become a major issue. With the direction the US is headed the exodus may only increase very soon.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”pixframe”]Apparently you have a higher threshold for pain.[/quote][/quote]
Seems my little joke went flat since you omitted my “lol” at the end of that sentence.[quote=”sweikert925″] Well, I suppose that’s one way to look at it but I prefer looking at is as having a more generous nature. [/quote]
As I mentioned before, you don’t know the back story of any of us and most definitely you don’t know mine. Generous? I doubt you even come close to the spending I’ve done and still do to help others. I do it voluntarily (and to no benefit to myself … not even taking tax deductions)… all my decison to do so … and not the decision of any individual, group of individuals or governments dictating I do so and by how much!
[quote=”sweikert925″]Your bottom line is that everyone should pay an equal amount because that would be much better for you, and to hell with anyone else for whom paying that same amount would be a burden. [/quote]
No, I believe everyone paying the same for the same product, CAJA, is what is FAIR!. Why do you have difficulty understanding that? I take back the question, since I’m finished with discussing this matter there’s no need for you to reply to it.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”pixframe”]while it’s become intolerable for others now it’s perfectly OK because it hasn’t yet affected you personally[/quote]
[quote=”sweikert925″] If the assessment reaches my previously stated pain point of $500 (about 45% of my initial fixed retirement income) it would affect a lot more people than just me. Your pain point, or the level at which you find the CAJA assessment intolerable is, apparently, $0.004 (4 tenths of a cent, or 2 colones) as long as someone, somewhere was paying 1 colon.
[quote=”pixframe”]Same product should have the same cost for ALL.[/quote] Buying an airline ticket must just about make your head explode. LOL[/quote]
If and when I require medical services in Costa Rica I will pay for them. I have no intention of putting my hand into anyone’s pocket but mine. And I would appreciate it Costa Rica and/or any other government not dig so deeply into mine.As I said earlier … I’m finished with this topic. Nothing more to be said by me on it.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”pixframe”] You don’t know the “back story” of any of us here.[/quote]
No, and neither do you. Some of the people you would prefer pay more so that you can pay less may be in that position due to no fault of their own. Some of them may even be regular participants of this message board.[quote=”pixframe”]You estimate at the most you’ll be paying $130/month, the lower end of the fee scale[/quote]
No, you need to go back and re-read my comment. What I said was that if I were to arrive in Costa Rica TODAY and had the amount of income I project that I will have in 5 years I think my CAJA assessment would be in that range. I certainly don’t expect that to be true in 5 years, particularly in light of the impending explosion of the Costa Rican elderly population that is about to happen, and which I provided some facts about [url=http://www.eclac.cl/celade/noticias/documentosdetrabajo/8/48748/CostaRica-aging.pdf]here.[/url]. I also said that even if the amount were double that it would still be a fair amount to pay.[/quote]
The demographic shift that CR will be getting hit with is nothing new! This same shift hit Japan a decade or more ago.And it’s has, with a low birth rate, caused major economic problems there. It is a serious issue facing the US right now,and something they’ve been aware of, yet has not garnered much political will to make the needed changes. Difference is in the US, unlike Japan, we have a robust birth rate… just not among folks that will be able to pull the economy out of the tailspin and crash it is headed for.
There was a great article in the NY Times on the topic a few months ago, caught some attention and was pretty scary, then the politicians went back to their usual game…. pandering to the masses, pretending everything was alright and under control, to insure their re-election! All while refusing to confront a problem.. one of many, that they are aware of but most must realize at this point is beyond fixing!
And the band plays on…. as the water rises. LOL
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”Imxploring”]And the band plays on…. as the water rises. LOL[/quote]
How ever do you manage to get through a day with the hammer of doom just about to come down on so many fronts? LOL[/quote]Easy Steve…. I wear a life vest 24/7 and have lifeboats waiting for me in a few different locations on the globe!
People don’t plan to fail… they fail to plan! Or in the case of most people these days, “reality” television has replaced REALITY and reading is something only old people do!!!! LOL
As we both know… all the information is out for folks to find, absorb, and plan life accordingly! History is not to be ignored as it repeats itself over and over. The laws of nature can’t be messed with or ignored either, yet folks seem to think that in today’s world ignorance is bliss and somehow it will all just work itself out!
[quote=”Imxploring”][quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”Imxploring”]And the band plays on…. as the water rises. LOL[/quote]
How ever do you manage to get through a day with the hammer of doom just about to come down on so many fronts? LOL[/quote]Easy Steve…. I wear a life vest 24/7 and have lifeboats waiting for in a few different locations on the globe!
People don’t plan to fail… they fail to plan! Or in the case of most people these days, “reality” television has replaced REALITY and reading is something only old people do!!!! LOL
As we both know… all the information is out for folks to find, absorb, and plan life accordingly! History is not to be ignore as it repeats itself over and over. The laws of nature can’t be messed with or ignored either, yet folks seem to think that in today’s world ignorance is bliss and somehow it will all just work itself out![/quote]
So true!
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”Imxploring”]…ignorance is bliss and somehow it will all just work itself out![/quote]
I agree that history is something we should all take into account – but ALL of history, including the parts where clever people come up with solutions for the problems that loom ahead of us. You never seem to take them into consideration when you point to the way things are headed. Things don’t “work themselves out” any more than they “work themselves in”, people create problems and people solve them.[/quote]The problem I see today Steve is that the changes (solutions) needed to change the path we’re on, and have been for a long time, require pain and sacrifice. Unfortunately today’s society is all about ease and entitlement. As the needed changes have not been made the pain will, at this point, be intolerable for most and result in major upheaval when action is forced apon those that must make that decision.
Once again reading the SSA annual report that theme and fact are echoed numerous times yet no real action has been taken to address the problems. And as time goes on the changes needed only become more draconian if we hope to salvage the system which, at this point, I feel is really impossible.
Self reliance and personal planning are more important now than any time in the recent past. The information and tools exist for people to prepare (you don’t have to be a crazed prepper) for what might very well be a very dark and difficult future.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
