Classic example is an office mate of mine. His family is fairly well to do, and he was commenting on how it was his mom's intent to spend all of her assets before going into a nursing home and then go under Title 19. I tried to explain to my office mate that, if his favorite politician Paul Ryan has his way, that his mom's LTC bills will go to her children. He came up with the non sequitor that she lives in South Dakota and not Iowa. They honestly have no clue - who is going to pick up the bill? You can't engage them in an intellectual argument.
Another example is my friend's son. The son decided to go naked without insurance after graduating from High School. He promptly gets appendicitis. It turns out, because of the change in the law, that his son can fold under his insurance. He then complains about 26 year olds being able to access their parent's insurance (he is also a great lover of Atlas Shrugged).
You mention seniors. A third example came form a budget forum with my representative. The table with the 60 somethings joked about extending the age for retirement and said it did not impact them (they thought that was funny). I was ready to rise out of my seat and point out they obtained their Social Security in the era of much lower withholding rates and when company pensions were far more generous. It sure isn't funny to a 40 somenthing who has always been withheld at 6.2%/6.2% - they need to have some skin in the game as well. I think I might have used harsh language if I did not restrain myself.
= new reply since forum marked as read
