Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FW: If We LET Them, They'll Work Us TO DEATH While Making Us PAY for the "Privilege"

Expand Messages
  • Kris Millegan
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      FW: If We LET Them, They'll Work Us TO DEATH While Making Us PAY for the "Privilege"
      ------ Forwarded Message
      From: "DasGOAT@..." <DasGOAT@...>
      Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:21:32 EST
      To: Robert Millegan <ramillegan@...>
      Cc: <EMael0@...>, <jusb@...>, <jim6263@...>, <christian.ream@...>
      Subject: If We LET Them, They'll Work Us TO DEATH While Making Us PAY for the "Privilege"

      Average age at death by Age at retirement



       

      Dr. Ephrem (Siao Chung) Cheng study (http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa... <http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa> )


      This is something we all would like to believe is true -- that there is an inverse relationship between the age we retire and the age that we expect to die. According to a study conducted by Dr. Ephrem, based on data of pensioners from Boeing Aerospace, the earlier we retire, the longer our life span is going to be.   For example, if we retire at around the age of 50, we would expect to live to age 86, another 36 years old.    In contrast, if we retire later at age 65, we would expect to live only for another 2 years.  Normal  retirement age is 65, and yet this study <of Boeing employees> supports only another 2 years of life span.   However, we need to understand the biases [reflected] by this result -- this experience is based on one particular group and may not apply to everybody in the broadest sense.  But it seems to make sense that if we do retire early, we could escape from the pressure of work and could expect to live longer. Just as with any other results of experience data, we have to be cautious.
       

      ---------------------------------
       
      http://www.babyboomercaretaker.com/retirement/early-retirement/Study-On-Life-Expectancy-Based-On-Early-Retirement.html
       

      Study On Life Expectancy Based On Early Retirement

        
        
      Earlier it was believed that  people who took early retirement ended up having longer life  expectancy compared to people who retired at normal age of  retirement. However, this belief has now been proven wrong after  researchers conducted a study on life expectancy based on early  retirement.

      The study on life expectancy based on early retirement was conducted in Texas over a period of 26 years. More than 3,500 employees of Shell Oil were studied during this period. The researchers studied the lives of employees who retired at the ages of 55, 60 and 65 and they also studied employees who continued working at the ages of 55 and 60. The employees came from all grades.

      During the course of the study, researchers found that early retirement was not at all connected to higher or increased life expectancy. In fact, it was discovered that employees who retired early, at age 55, were more likely to die before those who continued to work.  The study found that mortality rate was twice as high in the first ten years after retirement at the age of 55.

      Unfortunately the study could not calculate the average life expectancy of the workers <!> because many of them were still alive [after retiring] when the study concluded.

      ---------------------------------

      Retirement Age vs Life Expectancy:
      Why Social Security Is Going Broke
      http://www.tommcmahon.net/2009/05/retirement-age-vs-life-expectancy-why-social-security-is-going-broke.html
       
       <http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/04/chart-of-day-retirement-age-v-life.html>  
       
      -------------------------
       
      You can have healthcare, to keep you alive, or Social Security, to cover the bare-minimum cost of living, but NOT BOTH.  Take your choice.  Very soon all the bankers, insurers and accountants who like to call themselves "your government" will FORCE you to make a choice.  Object and you won't get EITHER!

       

      Their logic is as simple as the math.  If government is allowed to raise the age of retirement to the age of life expectancy --age 77 as of 2010-- that big chunk of cash they've taken out of every paycheck, picking your pocket in the guise of deductions for Social Security, is 100% profit for THEM -- not a single penny will ever return to YOU as promised.  
       
      What the governmen will tell you, of course, is that (like any Ponzi scheme) the money you never got will go "back into the System" to "replenish" the general fund, in order "to provide  Social Security for OTHERS when THEY retire."  However, keep in mind that NO ONE ELSE who waits until age 77 to retire will live long enough to see that money EITHER!
       
      So where does all the money you've *involuntarily* "entrusted" to the government to save for YOUR retirement GO?  To the government, who spends it as fast as you give it to them, for the sheer pleasure of it, without a care in the world, no thought of tomorrow.  And why not, when millions of Americans keep on giving them blank checks like this?

      In pure and simple terms, Social Security is not 'your' "savings," it's your LOSS -- it's the old wolf of INCOME TAX in sheep's clothing, government's best friend.

      Social Security is the GOVERNMENT's own retirement plan --
      it "retired" long ago on it, so why should it WORK for YOU?  


      ------ End of Forwarded Message
    • michael1@midcoast.com
      The good news: One characteristic of longevity is (quote) ...keen interest in current events... This is from a study done by my grandfather, one of the
      Message 2 of 3 , Mar 2, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        The good news:
        One characteristic of longevity is (quote) "...keen interest in current
        events..." This is from a study done by my grandfather, one of the
        founders of psychiatry in the US, Dr. Stephen P. Jewett.
        His studies are now being quoted by new age writer Deepak Chopra.
        The links are funny on this, tested and did not work.
        But if you google <"Deekpak Chopra" and Jewett> it comes up first.
        m

        >
        > ------ Forwarded Message
        >> From: "DasGOAT@..." <DasGOAT@...>
        >> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:21:32 EST
        >> To: Robert Millegan <ramillegan@...>
        >> Cc: <EMael0@...>, <jusb@...>, <jim6263@...>,
        >> <christian.ream@...>
        >> Subject: If We LET Them, They'll Work Us TO DEATH While Making Us PAY
        >> for the
        >> "Privilege"
        >>
        >
        >> Average age at death by Age at retirement
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> Dr. Ephrem (Siao Chung) Cheng study (http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa...
        >> <http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa> )
        >>
        >> This is something we all would like to believe is true -- that there is
        >> an
        >> inverse relationship between the age we retire and the age that we
        >> expect to
        >> die. According to a study conducted by Dr. Ephrem, based on data of
        >> pensioners
        >> from Boeing Aerospace, the earlier we retire, the longer our life span
        >> is
        >> going to be. For example, if we retire at around the age of 50, we
        >> would
        >> expect to live to age 86, another 36 years old. In contrast, if we
        >> retire
        >> later at age 65, we would expect to live only for another 2 years.
        >> Normal
        >> retirement age is 65, and yet this study <of Boeing employees> supports
        >> only
        >> another 2 years of life span. However, we need to understand the
        >> biases
        >> [reflected] by this result -- this experience is based on one particular
        >> group
        >> and may not apply to everybody in the broadest sense. But it seems to
        >> make
        >> sense that if we do retire early, we could escape from the pressure of
        >> work
        >> and could expect to live longer. Just as with any other results of
        >> experience
        >> data, we have to be cautious.
        >>
        >> ---------------------------------
        >>
        >> http://www.babyboomercaretaker.com/retirement/early-retirement/Study-On-Life-E
        >> xpectancy-Based-On-Early-Retirement.html
        >>
        >> Study On Life Expectancy Based On Early Retirement
        >>
        >>
        >> Earlier it was believed that people who took early retirement ended
        >> up
        >> having longer life expectancy compared to people who retired at normal
        >> age of
        >> retirement. However, this belief has now been proven wrong after
        >> researchers
        >> conducted a study on life expectancy based on early retirement.
        >>
        >> The study on life expectancy based on early retirement was conducted in
        >> Texas
        >> over a period of 26 years. More than 3,500 employees of Shell Oil were
        >> studied
        >> during this period. The researchers studied the lives of employees who
        >> retired
        >> at the ages of 55, 60 and 65 and they also studied employees who
        >> continued
        >> working at the ages of 55 and 60. The employees came from all grades.
        >>
        >> During the course of the study, researchers found that early retirement
        >> was
        >> not at all connected to higher or increased life expectancy. In fact, it
        >> was
        >> discovered that employees who retired early, at age 55, were more likely
        >> to
        >> die before those who continued to work. The study found that mortality
        >> rate
        >> was twice as high in the first ten years after retirement at the age of
        >> 55.
        >>
        >> Unfortunately the study could not calculate the average life expectancy
        >> of the
        >> workers <!> because many of them were still alive [after retiring] when
        >> the
        >> study concluded.
        >>
        >> ---------------------------------
        >>
        >> Retirement Age vs Life Expectancy:
        >> Why Social Security Is Going Broke
        >> http://www.tommcmahon.net/2009/05/retirement-age-vs-life-expectancy-why-social
        >> -security-is-going-broke.html
        >>
        >> <http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/04/chart-of-day-retirement-age-v-life.html>
        >>
        >> -------------------------
        >>
        >> You can have healthcare, to keep you alive, or Social Security, to cover
        >> the
        >> bare-minimum cost of living, but NOT BOTH. Take your choice. Very soon
        >> all
        >> the bankers, insurers and accountants who like to call themselves "your
        >> government" will FORCE you to make a choice. Object and you won't get
        >> EITHER!
        >>
        >>
        >> Their logic is as simple as the math. If government is allowed to raise
        >> the
        >> age of retirement to the age of life expectancy --age 77 as of 2010--
        >> that big
        >> chunk of cash they've taken out of every paycheck, picking your pocket
        >> in the
        >> guise of deductions for Social Security, is 100% profit for THEM -- not
        >> a
        >> single penny will ever return to YOU as promised.
        >>
        >> What the governmen will tell you, of course, is that (like any Ponzi
        >> scheme)
        >> the money you never got will go "back into the System" to "replenish"
        >> the
        >> general fund, in order "to provide Social Security for OTHERS when THEY
        >> retire." However, keep in mind that NO ONE ELSE who waits until age 77
        >> to
        >> retire will live long enough to see that money EITHER!
        >>
        >> So where does all the money you've *involuntarily* "entrusted" to the
        >> government to save for YOUR retirement GO? To the government, who
        >> spends it
        >> as fast as you give it to them, for the sheer pleasure of it, without a
        >> care
        >> in the world, no thought of tomorrow. And why not, when millions of
        >> Americans
        >> keep on giving them blank checks like this?
        >>
        >> In pure and simple terms, Social Security is not 'your' "savings," it's
        >> your
        >> LOSS -- it's the old wolf of INCOME TAX in sheep's clothing,
        >> government's best
        >> friend.
        >>
        >> Social Security is the GOVERNMENT's own retirement plan --
        >> it "retired" long ago on it, so why should it WORK for YOU?
        >>
        >>
        >> ------ End of Forwarded Message
        >
        >
      • muckblit
        Wonderful. I will read more discarded newspapers than I used to read home-delivered subscribed newspapers. -Bob ... current ... PAY ... there is ... span ...
        Message 3 of 3 , Mar 3, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Wonderful. I will read more discarded newspapers than I
          used to read home-delivered subscribed newspapers.

          -Bob

          --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, michael1@... wrote:
          >
          > The good news:
          > One characteristic of longevity is (quote) "...keen interest in
          current
          > events..." This is from a study done by my grandfather, one of the
          > founders of psychiatry in the US, Dr. Stephen P. Jewett.
          > His studies are now being quoted by new age writer Deepak Chopra.
          > The links are funny on this, tested and did not work.
          > But if you google <"Deekpak Chopra" and Jewett> it comes up first.
          > m
          >
          > >
          > > ------ Forwarded Message
          > >> From: "DasGOAT@..." DasGOAT@...
          > >> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:21:32 EST
          > >> To: Robert Millegan ramillegan@...
          > >> Cc: EMael0@..., jusb@..., jim6263@...,
          > >> christian.ream@...
          > >> Subject: If We LET Them, They'll Work Us TO DEATH While Making Us
          PAY
          > >> for the
          > >> "Privilege"
          > >>
          > >
          > >> Average age at death by Age at retirement
          > >>
          > >>
          > >>
          > >> Dr. Ephrem (Siao Chung) Cheng study (http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa...
          > >> <http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa> )
          > >>
          > >> This is something we all would like to believe is true -- that
          there is
          > >> an
          > >> inverse relationship between the age we retire and the age that we
          > >> expect to
          > >> die. According to a study conducted by Dr. Ephrem, based on data of
          > >> pensioners
          > >> from Boeing Aerospace, the earlier we retire, the longer our life
          span
          > >> is
          > >> going to be. For example, if we retire at around the age of 50,
          we
          > >> would
          > >> expect to live to age 86, another 36 years old. In contrast, if
          we
          > >> retire
          > >> later at age 65, we would expect to live only for another 2 years.
          > >> Normal
          > >> retirement age is 65, and yet this study <of Boeing employees>
          supports
          > >> only
          > >> another 2 years of life span. However, we need to understand the
          > >> biases
          > >> [reflected] by this result -- this experience is based on one
          particular
          > >> group
          > >> and may not apply to everybody in the broadest sense. But it seems
          to
          > >> make
          > >> sense that if we do retire early, we could escape from the pressure
          of
          > >> work
          > >> and could expect to live longer. Just as with any other results of
          > >> experience
          > >> data, we have to be cautious.
          > >>
          > >> ---------------------------------
          > >>
          > >>
          http://www.babyboomercaretaker.com/retirement/early-retirement/Study-On-\
          Life-E
          > >> xpectancy-Based-On-Early-Retirement.html
          > >>
          > >> Study On Life Expectancy Based On Early Retirement
          > >>
          > >>
          > >> Earlier it was believed that people who took early retirement
          ended
          > >> up
          > >> having longer life expectancy compared to people who retired at
          normal
          > >> age of
          > >> retirement. However, this belief has now been proven wrong after
          > >> researchers
          > >> conducted a study on life expectancy based on early retirement.
          > >>
          > >> The study on life expectancy based on early retirement was
          conducted in
          > >> Texas
          > >> over a period of 26 years. More than 3,500 employees of Shell Oil
          were
          > >> studied
          > >> during this period. The researchers studied the lives of employees
          who
          > >> retired
          > >> at the ages of 55, 60 and 65 and they also studied employees who
          > >> continued
          > >> working at the ages of 55 and 60. The employees came from all
          grades.
          > >>
          > >> During the course of the study, researchers found that early
          retirement
          > >> was
          > >> not at all connected to higher or increased life expectancy. In
          fact, it
          > >> was
          > >> discovered that employees who retired early, at age 55, were more
          likely
          > >> to
          > >> die before those who continued to work. The study found that
          mortality
          > >> rate
          > >> was twice as high in the first ten years after retirement at the
          age of
          > >> 55.
          > >>
          > >> Unfortunately the study could not calculate the average life
          expectancy
          > >> of the
          > >> workers <!> because many of them were still alive [after retiring]
          when
          > >> the
          > >> study concluded.
          > >>
          > >> ---------------------------------
          > >>
          > >> Retirement Age vs Life Expectancy:
          > >> Why Social Security Is Going Broke
          > >>
          http://www.tommcmahon.net/2009/05/retirement-age-vs-life-expectancy-why-\
          social
          > >> -security-is-going-broke.html
          > >>
          > >>
          <http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/04/chart-of-day-retirement-age-v-life.\
          html>
          > >>
          > >> -------------------------
          > >>
          > >> You can have healthcare, to keep you alive, or Social Security, to
          cover
          > >> the
          > >> bare-minimum cost of living, but NOT BOTH. Take your choice. Very
          soon
          > >> all
          > >> the bankers, insurers and accountants who like to call themselves
          "your
          > >> government" will FORCE you to make a choice. Object and you won't
          get
          > >> EITHER!
          > >>
          > >>
          > >> Their logic is as simple as the math. If government is allowed to
          raise
          > >> the
          > >> age of retirement to the age of life expectancy --age 77 as of
          2010--
          > >> that big
          > >> chunk of cash they've taken out of every paycheck, picking your
          pocket
          > >> in the
          > >> guise of deductions for Social Security, is 100% profit for THEM --
          not
          > >> a
          > >> single penny will ever return to YOU as promised.
          > >>
          > >> What the governmen will tell you, of course, is that (like any
          Ponzi
          > >> scheme)
          > >> the money you never got will go "back into the System" to
          "replenish"
          > >> the
          > >> general fund, in order "to provide Social Security for OTHERS when
          THEY
          > >> retire." However, keep in mind that NO ONE ELSE who waits until
          age 77
          > >> to
          > >> retire will live long enough to see that money EITHER!
          > >>
          > >> So where does all the money you've *involuntarily* "entrusted" to
          the
          > >> government to save for YOUR retirement GO? To the government, who
          > >> spends it
          > >> as fast as you give it to them, for the sheer pleasure of it,
          without a
          > >> care
          > >> in the world, no thought of tomorrow. And why not, when millions
          of
          > >> Americans
          > >> keep on giving them blank checks like this?
          > >>
          > >> In pure and simple terms, Social Security is not 'your' "savings,"
          it's
          > >> your
          > >> LOSS -- it's the old wolf of INCOME TAX in sheep's clothing,
          > >> government's best
          > >> friend.
          > >>
          > >> Social Security is the GOVERNMENT's own retirement plan --
          > >> it "retired" long ago on it, so why should it WORK for YOU?
          > >>
          > >>
          > >> ------ End of Forwarded Message
          > >
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.