Ungrateful Greedy Geezers

Sometimes people bug me. Today I’m going to share some recent email exchanges I had with two people who bothered me. They both were spouting the same “get the government off my back” and “the government is out to squeeze every last nickel out of us” rhetoric, but neither of them realized how hypocritical their complaints were.

I’m going to call the first guy “Ungrateful Greedy Geezer.” Our email exchange went something like this. (Before I share the dialogue, I must point out that we were talking about the Medicare Part B program. There are two main parts to Medicare. Part A is hospital coverage. It’s paid for out of a payroll tax -- currently 1.45% -- so it is free once you reach age 65. Part B covers doctor’s visits, lab tests, etc., and is paid for by monthly premiums usually deducted from a Social Security recipient’s monthly benefits.) ***

UGG: I am 75 years old. I had a good year financially last year as some investments paid off in seven figures. So, imagine my shock when I learned that because I invested wisely, I will be paying much higher Medicare premiums this year. It just really ticks me off that the government has an unquenchable desire for more and more money. What can I do about this?

ME: I’ll answer your question in a minute, but first let me make this point. If the government has an “unquenchable desire for more and more money,” it’s because the American public has an unquenchable desire for more and more government programs and services that they are not willing to pay for (thus the annual federal budget deficit).

UGG: I agree. And as soon as we get rid of foreign aid and food stamps and all the welfare queens, we can get the country back on track!

ME: I wasn’t thinking about welfare queens, I was thinking about people like you.

UGG: (I can’t share what he wrote next, but it’s something you normally wouldn’t say in a polite discussion!)

ME: Well, let me explain. For ten years now, you’ve been riding for next to nothing on the government Medicare Part B gravy train. The premium was about a hundred bucks a month ten years ago and is $164.90 in 2023. (And by the way, that’s about five bucks less than the 2022 premium.)

OK, so $164.90 per month is not really “next to nothing,” but when you hear the rest of my explanation, you’ll see that it was and still is a pretty good deal. Most senior citizens don’t realize this, but that monthly Part B premium only covers 25% of the costs of the program. The taxpayers pick up the other 75%. So, for ten years now, you and other current seniors on Medicare have gotten quite a huge subsidy from the American taxpayer. (Actually, that subsidy has been in place the entire 58-year history of the program.)

And for a long time, it had been argued that senior citizens should pick up more of the tab for their Medicare Part B coverage. So, back in the mid 2000s, President George W. Bush and Congress ironed out a deal. They decided that most seniors would still only pay the 25% premium rate, but that wealthy seniors should pay a higher percentage. I’m not going to get into the nitty-gritty of the premium rates for wealthy people, but I’m pretty sure someone with your seven-figure income will pay about $400 per month for Part B coverage.

UGG: Well, I still think it’s too much and the government is ripping me off. And by the way, I don’t like your references to me and the gravy train. That’s quite a stretch coming from a guy who is a retired federal employee with free health care coverage!

ME: It will surprise you to learn that the supposedly “free” health care coverage I get as a retired fed costs me about $525 per month! Anyway, if you’re bound and determined to fight this Part B premium increase, you can file an appeal. Just do a Google search for the pamphlet called, “What you can do if you think your Medicare income-related premium is incorrect.” ***

And then there was this email exchange with another ungrateful greedy geezer. Although in this guy’s case, I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he is uninformed rather than ungrateful. He was asking questions about benefits for his wife, so I’ll call him the “Uninformed Greedy Husband,” or UGH.

UGH: I am 68 and get Social Security retirement benefits. My wife is 66 and spent most of her career as a teacher in Texas, which means she never paid into Social Security. So, she gets a teacher’s retirement pension in lieu of Social Security. I was shocked to recently learn that if I die first (which is likely), my wife will not be eligible for any widow’s benefits on my record whereas all other women in this country can get their husband’s Social Security after his death. It’s called the Government Pension Offset. I know there are bills in Congress to repeal this unfair law, but my guess is Congress will just keep handing out unwarranted benefits to deadbeats on disability and illegal immigrants and do nothing for hard-working people like me and my wife!

ME: People living in the country illegally cannot get Social Security benefits. And almost everyone getting a Social Security disability benefit has a severe mental or physical condition that keeps him or her from working. Also, “all other women” do not necessarily get widow’s benefits. So, it may surprise you to learn that you are the one clamoring for “unwarranted” Social Security benefits.

The GPO law says that an amount equal to two thirds of your wife’s teacher’s pension must be deducted from any widow’s benefits she might be due. Let’s say you get $3,000 from Social Security. And to keep things simple, I’ll say your wife is getting $3,000 per month in a teacher’s pension. If you die, two-thirds of $3,000, or $2,000, must be deducted from her widow’s benefits. So, she will get $1,000 in Social Security widow’s benefits as well as her $3,000 teacher’s pension.

Now compare that to another couple where both husband and wife paid into Social Security. For comparison purposes, let’s say they are each getting $3,000 in Social Security retirement benefits. If that husband dies, his wife won’t get a nickel in widow’s benefits because her entire Social Security retirement benefit is used to offset any widow’s benefits.

As a teacher, your wife already has a great deal, because she only has a two-thirds offset whereas Social Security recipients have a 100% offset. And you want Congress to repeal the GPO law so that your wife would get both a $3,000 teacher’s pension AND a $3,000 widow’s pension -- something no other woman in this country can get. I hope you see what I mean when I say you are the one trying to get “unwarranted” benefits.

* * *

If you have a Social Security question, Tom Margenau has two books with all the answers. One is called “Social Security -- Simple and Smart: 10 Easy-to-Understand Fact Sheets

1. The book of Nahum is in the a) Old Testament b) New Testament c) Neither a) Mark b) John the Baptist c) Simon d) John a) Esther b) Delilah c) Miriam d) Rachel

2. From Matthew 11:18, who was accused of "having a devil" because he did not drink?

3. In Exodus 15:21, who sang a patriotic song after the crossing of the Red Sea?

4. From Judges 1:23-25, which Canaanite city did spies find the entrance to? a) Ai b) Bethel c) Sardis d) Jericho

5. In Acts 12:21-23, what ungodly ruler was struck down by an angel? a) Herod b) Ehud c) Jehu d) Pilate

6. Who was scolded by a talking donkey for beating him with his staff? a) Elihud b) Eliab c) Balak d) Balaam

Sharpen your understanding of scripture with Wilson Casey's latest book, "Test Your Bible Knowledge," now available in stores and online.

(Answers on page 16)

For comments or more Bible Trivia go to www.TriviaGuy.com

That Will Answer All Your Questions About Social Security.” The other is “Social Security: 100 Myths and 100 Facts.” You can find the books at Amazon.com or other book outlets. To find out more about Tom Margenau and to read past columns and see features from other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Inc.

Inc.

How to Avoid Calcium While Taking Thyroid Medication

ANSWER: I have rarely seen a person allergic to so many classes of medicines, but it can occasionally happen. It’s unfortunate, but I certainly agree with you that an opioid (the term narcotic isn’t used any more) is too powerful a medication to use lightly.

There are serious side effects that can happen with tramadol, like any other opioid, and even appropriate use of opioids can lead to opioid use disorder. Misuse of prescription drugs is a huge problem in North America, and not prescribing them in the first place is a good way to prevent problems. (People who misuse opioids commonly get them from a friend or relative.)