Early retirement and health care for boaters

[evm1024]

Originally Posted by Budawang

Australia's average life expectancy is about four years more than the United States despite all the deadly wild life. That's a huge difference. The States might be a great place for one percenters but I know where I would prefer to have medical issues.

Credit Suisse Research Institute’s 2018 Global Wealth Report found that
to be among the global top 10 percent, you don’t even need six figures.
A net worth of $93,170 in the U.S. is actually enough to make you richer
than 90 percent of the population around the world. However, to join the
global one percent in America, it takes a net worth of $871,320.


How many of us are 1%ers ?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by cyan

Mike, I don't think the news source matters here. The left-center Canadian Global News had a similar story:
[URL="https://globalnews.ca/news/3251833/canada-has-some-of-the-longest-wait-times-to-see-doctors-specialists-report/“]

First time I’ve ever heard anyone call Global News a left of centre organization. We don’t have the same kind of polarization of new sources that you seem to have in the USA.

But yes, as I said, Canada is far from the best example of a good healthcare system. The best are to be found in the northern European countries where they get the best outcomes for the least cost.

Originally Posted by cyan

Cruisers can have a happy surprise when they find that quite decent medical care is available for relatively small amounts of money in places like Mexico. Dental care is quite affordable in other places too. I can tell you first hand that the same dental braces that cost $6000 in the US are $600 in the Philippines.

[Ex-Calif]

Getting back to the topic at hand - I just found out (after 37 years with this company) that I can continue my (very good) company health care after retirement for about a kick up in premium of about $40 a month. This would put health care at about $8k a year for as long as I want to pay and better yet can start as early as 55 y/o.

One of my main retirement planning issues has now basically become a non-issue - Yay!

OK - and FWIW for one of the richest countries in the world to not offer at least basic single payer health care to every citizen is ridiculous. It's all about big business here south of the border.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

First time I’ve ever heard anyone call Global News a left of centre organization. We don’t have the same kind of polarization of new sources that you seem to have in the USA.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-news/
I suppose polarization it's just a sport down here these days.
I find it all a bit silly, but then I played along too. (guilty)

It does seem that both Canada and the US(medicare 65+) limit their government healthcare coverage to their own borders, so after age 65 things seem very similar. I think the OP was addressing the "gap" in coverage that early retirement can cause in the US, so this might be another topic.

Regarding the "borders", it would seem that US medicare is active in US "territories" such as American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas, and Puerto Rico...

[sailorboy1]

[QUOTE=Ex-Calif;2761554This would put health care at about $8k a year for as long as I want to pay and better yet can start as early as 55 y/o.

One of my main retirement planning issues has now basically become a non-issue - Yay!
.[/QUOTE]

That's a LOT. I'm 58 and paying $22/mo

have you read this thread or just the last page?

[Budawang]

Originally Posted by evm1024

Credit Suisse Research Institute’s 2018 Global Wealth Report found that
to be among the global top 10 percent, you don’t even need six figures.
A net worth of $93,170 in the U.S. is actually enough to make you richer
than 90 percent of the population around the world. However, to join the
global one percent in America, it takes a net worth of $871,320.


How many of us are 1%ers ?

Interesting you should mention the global wealth report which shoes wealth has been growing in the US over the last couple of years due to a stronger currency and asset prices. Closer inspection shows that the distribution of wealth in the US is extremely unequal. Where average wealth in Australia is only slightly higher than the US, median wealth is about three times higher in Australia. In other words Australia's one percenters are less wealthy than American one percenters, but Australia's middle class is significantly wealthier.

This difference in equality (and social mobility) may explain many of the differences between these two great nations, including attitudes towards universal health care and social cohesion to name just two.

[evm1024]

Originally Posted by Budawang

Interesting you should mention the global wealth report which shoes wealth has been growing in the US over the last couple of years due to a stronger currency and asset prices. Closer inspection shows that the distribution of wealth in the US is extremely unequal. Where average wealth in Australia is only slightly higher than the US, median wealth is about three times higher in Australia. In other words Australia's one percenters are less wealthy than American one percenters, but Australia's middle class is significantly wealthier.

This difference in equality (and social mobility) may explain many of the differences between these two great nations, including attitudes towards universal health care and social cohesion to name just two.

It would be interesting to see how well the "wealth" distribution in each country fits a gaussian curve.

My point was that many of us like most of my daughters friends (she is 20ish) think that the 1 percenters are independently rich (filthy rich!) but in fact having 1 million is enough to retire on ($40k/pear at 4% take out) but not rolling in money.

And taking $12K a year for healthcare is a big bite....

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by evm1024

It would be interesting to see how well the "wealth" distribution in each country fits a gaussian curve..

This is not exactly what you were asking for, but presents the same kind of data in the form of the Gini coefficient, which is a measure of wealth inequality.

The Gini coefficient is based on the comparison of cumulative proportions of the population against cumulative proportions of income they receive, and it ranges between 0 in the case of perfect equality and 1 in the case of perfect inequality.

This compares OECD countries:

https://data.oecd.org/chart/5nEc

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by cyan

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-news/
I suppose polarization it's just a sport down here these days.
I find it all a bit silly, but then I played along too. (guilty)

Interesting … was not aware of this site. Thanks.

Originally Posted by cyan

It does seem that both Canada and the US(medicare 65+) limit their government healthcare coverage to their own borders, so after age 65 things seem very similar. ...

Yes. It appears to me (an outsider) that the USA already has a functioning single-payer system.

[AKA-None]

Wait a million is a 1%er? Maybe a million a year but not net worth. Takes more than that.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Budawang

Interesting you should mention the global wealth report which shoes wealth has been growing in the US over the last couple of years due to a stronger currency and asset prices. Closer inspection shows that the distribution of wealth in the US is extremely unequal. Where average wealth in Australia is only slightly higher than the US, median wealth is about three times higher in Australia. In other words Australia's one percenters are less wealthy than American one percenters, but Australia's middle class is significantly wealthier.

This difference in equality (and social mobility) may explain many of the differences between these two great nations, including attitudes towards universal health care and social cohesion to name just two.

I'm not sure one can draw accurate comparisons in social mobility using such data when one country has 13 times the population of the other. The Australian median net worth number certainly indicates a much wealthier overall middle class than the US median number. You could also use the histogram data to say that "middle class" is relative. For instance, in Australia, there are almost 5M households with a net worth above the median, $191K(USD), while in the US there are 44M households with net worth above that number, $191K(USD), albeit in the higher few deciles.

There are many factors that don't get considered when using median net worth charts to measure wealth inequality. For instance, the US has 5 times the number of millionaires as does the next highest country, China, and this really looks obscene on the histogram. But wait, the US has something that no other country has: Apple, Amazon, and so many other super-rich companies that have been doling out stock options for years as compensation to retain employees. Thousands of those employees have joined the 1% club. (and every one of those companies is currently hiring.) If we lop off the enriching effect of these American companies, perhaps the top end wouldn't be so horrifying to the masses.

Curiously, the median US household income, US$61372, is higher than the Australian median, US$47215. One could ask, where is all the money going in the US, where the median net worth is so much lower? Do Ozzies simply save more? Are Americans spending more? (on yachts?)

Finally, what does this tangent have to do with health care for the early retirement folks?
Dunno.

[Budawang]

Considering the average Australian weekly full time adult wage is around $US 60,000 the household income number doesn't sound right. I suspect average incomes are pretty similar in both countries. I agree this has gone off topic but interesting nonetheless.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Budawang

Considering the average Australian weekly full time adult wage is around $US 60,000 the household income number doesn't sound right. I suspect average incomes are pretty similar in both countries. I agree this has gone off topic but interesting nonetheless.

6333.0 - Characteristics of Employment, Australia, August 2017

[evm1024]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

Wait a million is a 1%er? Maybe a million a year but not net worth. Takes more than that.

Shocking is it not. Total world population 7.53 billion. Number of millionaires in the the USA 17.3 million.

It is total assets not income.

The fiction is that the 1% are filthy rich....

[cyan]

Originally Posted by evm1024

Shocking is it not. Total world population 7.53 billion. Number of millionaires in the the USA 17.3 million.

It is total assets not income.

The fiction is that the 1% are filthy rich....

Yeah, it depends. 1% of what?
To be in top 1% net worth in the world, you need US$770,000
To be in top 1% net worth in the USA, you need US$10,374,000

I wonder how many sailing miles you need to be in the top 1% of cruisers?
We should be able to figure this out here.
I'm thinking about 20,000 miles? More? Less?