My father-in-law, by most standards a practical, self-made man, asked me about Medicare this weekend. More specifically, he asked me when he could sign up, what the benefits were and what it might cost him.
Of course, this conversation took place before Paul Ryan's budget proposal dropped, which prompted me to shoot him an email advising him to keep working so he could hang on to that employer-sponsored private plan just a little bit longer.
At any rate, the conversation naturally turned to Social Security, which—again—involved a discussion around the paperwork involved.
Recommended For You
Now keep in mind, my wife's family emigrated here from Panama not that long ago, so when we talk about bureaucracy, government inefficiencies and (so-called) federal benefits we really are talking about two completely different worlds. And, no, this isn't me writing about how we should raise the retirement age again—although more than a dozen other countries worldwide have woken up to the fact that we work and live longer, and plan on doing just that.
Don't misunderstand. He's a staunch Republican. He's just frustrated (to put it mildly) with where we're headed and I think he wants to figure out how to get some of his tax money back—although I think they're calling it revenue these days.
Oddly enough, the same week the donkeys and pachyderms go back and forth over the budget (when they haven't passed one since 1997), we get a glimpse of the PPACA health care application, which should send anyone running to the nearest private plan. And we're surprised by this?
It's just the latest in a series of "epic fails," as the kids say, from this legislation. First, we find out it's not really "affordable," for the budget or its would-be customers; then we find out its maybe not going to cover quite as many people as we thought. Finally, we find out it's not nearly as simple to sign up for as they made it sound. But then again, anyone who's paid a visit to the DMV, the Social Security Administration or their CPA to figure out their taxes should have known better, anyway.
Finally—and on a completely unrelated note—I sat down (metaphorically) with our editorial advisory board a couple of weeks back to hash out this year's Broker of the Year finalists. The flurry of emails and phone calls revealed a couple of things. First, the term broker might be too narrow. A lot of the nominations we received named people who couldn't technically be called brokers anymore. Do we expand the list? Do we come out with a separate one? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Oh, and one more thing (with my best Peter Falk impression): There are few things as critical to success as simply being available. Whether it's a customer, a competitor or a pesky member of the media, having something as simple as a real person answering the phone—or at least making it an option— makes all the difference in this connected, but somehow still detached, world of ours.
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
