My Denver Broncos lost today. No, they were whipped. No, it was even worse than that. They were humiliated. But I really don't care because before the game was officially over I found out that I have another granddaughter. No matter what else happens today, it's a good day.
What is it about grandchildren that brings such happiness to a grandparent? Proverbs 17:6 reads, "Children's children are a crown to the aged..." (NIV). That's exactly the way I feel. But why do I feel this way, and others I know don't? The difference, I think, concerns the person's children, not the grandchildren. I can love, play with, teach, and generally enjoy my grandchildren because my children love the Lord and are training up their children to love, honor and respect them and their parents. How sad to see a grandparent who can't enjoy their grandchildren because they are estranged from their children. The grandchildren may be undisciplined, disrespectful and poorly behaved, even toward their grandparents. I've known grandchildren who have taken terrible advantage of their grandparents, manipulating them for their own financial gain. I'm afraid the proverb doesn't apply in every situation.
My grandchildren are all from Lake Wobegon. They are all above average! Their excellence has nothing to do with their looks or intellect, but everything to do with their upbringing. How good of God to train up my children to be mature, responsible people of God who know how to love and nurture their offspring in spite of the many mistakes I made with them. Not that I was a horrible, inept parent. But I certainly have a list of things I would do over if I could. But I don't need to.
Someone once said, and I don't know who because several have had this quote attributed to them, "It matters a great deal down whose chimney you are dropped." Children, whether dropped down your chimney or brought to you with soot on their faces to be part of your family, are gifts from God. When their children become a blessing to their grandparents, you know that your part in training up their parents was not wasted nor ineffective.
There are way too many pronouns in this article. One must read slowly and carefully to fully understand. But if you just want the bottom line, here it is: I have been blessed again today! God is great!
I'm a former pastor, public school teacher and school principal. I enjoy writing, but like to have an audience. Thanks for humoring me.
"Never before have so many written so much to be read by so few."
I will write about anything that disturbs me, concerns me, scares me, puzzles me or makes me laugh. I hope to be able to educate regularly, and entertain most of the time.
Search This Blog
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Monday, October 11, 2010
Tired of the Tax Ripoff
Because she is receiving a retirement income from the State Teachers Retirement System (STRS), my wife cannot receive the full amount of her share of Social Security benefits. Why? It seems that Social Security pensions are intended to take from the wealthier and give to the less wealthy. It's called the Windfall Elimination Provision, "The way Social Security benefit amounts are figured, lower-paid workers get a higher return than highly paid workers. For example, lower-paid workers could get a Social Security benefit that equals about 55 percent of their pre-retirement earnings. The average replacement rate for highly paid workers is about 25 percent" (http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10045.html). Somebody's definition of "windfall" is not the same as mine. I thought a "windfall" was a bonus, a handout or an unexpected sum of money."
Here's my problem with this provision, H.R. 2145 (2009). A person works for a minimum of ten years at a job that requires payment into the SSI system. Then this person changes careers and works in a profession that requires payment into a state government pension plan. When this person retires and applies for the state pension, the full amount is paid out according to a predetermined distribution plan. But when this person applies for the funds paid into the SSI system, the amount is greatly reduced, not because the amount contributed has somehow changed, but because now there is a "windfall."
So now I'm beginning to wonder why there was such an outcry when President G. W. Bush suggested that people have the option of placing those SSI contributions into some kind of private retirement plan? "Oh, that could ruin the county because the economy could suffer a recession or depression, then the government would have to bail out all of those people who lost their pensions!" Really? The government couldn't put restrictions on how aggressive those funds could be? And since when is our government shy about bailing out anyone?! If that $700 billion of bailout funds President Obama proposed had been distributed to every man, woman and child (citizens only) in the U.S., we each would have received about $2.5 billion. Did I say, "Receive?" What I meant was "Given back."
So, the lessons to be learned here are: If you work hard and improve your economic standing in life you will be required to pay the SSI benefits for those who did not work hard and improve their lots in life. If you give up a more lucrative career in private practice in order to serve the public good by teaching, you will be punished for having contributed to a real pension fund.
Here's my problem with this provision, H.R. 2145 (2009). A person works for a minimum of ten years at a job that requires payment into the SSI system. Then this person changes careers and works in a profession that requires payment into a state government pension plan. When this person retires and applies for the state pension, the full amount is paid out according to a predetermined distribution plan. But when this person applies for the funds paid into the SSI system, the amount is greatly reduced, not because the amount contributed has somehow changed, but because now there is a "windfall."
So now I'm beginning to wonder why there was such an outcry when President G. W. Bush suggested that people have the option of placing those SSI contributions into some kind of private retirement plan? "Oh, that could ruin the county because the economy could suffer a recession or depression, then the government would have to bail out all of those people who lost their pensions!" Really? The government couldn't put restrictions on how aggressive those funds could be? And since when is our government shy about bailing out anyone?! If that $700 billion of bailout funds President Obama proposed had been distributed to every man, woman and child (citizens only) in the U.S., we each would have received about $2.5 billion. Did I say, "Receive?" What I meant was "Given back."
So, the lessons to be learned here are: If you work hard and improve your economic standing in life you will be required to pay the SSI benefits for those who did not work hard and improve their lots in life. If you give up a more lucrative career in private practice in order to serve the public good by teaching, you will be punished for having contributed to a real pension fund.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)