AARP worth it?

[RunningBum]

This is why I won't join:
https://community.aarp.org/t5/Membe...haring-and-selling-my-information/m-p/2461867

Right now I get very little junk mail and not that many spam calls. I strongly suspect that will change if I join AARP. Not junk from AARP, but from all of the places they've sold my info.

 

[GenXguy]

This is why I won't join:
https://community.aarp.org/t5/Membe...haring-and-selling-my-information/m-p/2461867

Right now I get very little junk mail and not that many spam calls. I strongly suspect that will change if I join AARP. Not junk from AARP, but from all of the places they've sold my info.

Thanks. That's a good reason not to sign up.

I've never joined, but I seemed to be getting their mailings trying to get me to join continuously. Although, I don't seem to get as many now as I used to.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

I do not get anything other than their Magazine and NewsPaper, and we have been members for the last 15 years.

 

[CaptTom]

I, and seemingly everyone I know, got an enrollment mailing on our 50th birthday.

I think it's safe to assume they already have all our personal information, and are sharing it even if we don't join.

I agree it feels creepy. But I have to remind myself that they all do that these days. Ever donate to a charity or political party? They'll spend more than you gave them, trying to get you to give more. And they'll make up for it by selling your contact information to every affiliated or related organization they can.

 

[USGrant1962]

I do not get anything other than their Magazine and NewsPaper, and we have been members for the last 15 years.

Me too. I'm bewildered about all the AARP junk mail comments - I've never gotten any.

As to their lobbying - it is what it is. Some of it is common sense like Medicare negotiating with pharma or age discrimination protections. But when it comes to taxpayer funded senior benefits, it is protect and enhance - screw the current and future taxpayers. No balance.

 

[youbet]

I reluctantly joined just to get the United medigap plan. I find it bizarre that membership in a lobbying organization would be required to buy health insurance. !

That isn't really true EarlyandLate. You can buy health insurance, including United medigap, without joining AARP.

 

[youbet]

Me too. I'm bewildered about all the AARP junk mail comments - I've never gotten any.

.

I can't say that I get zero junk from AARP, but it's rare.

The organization that buries me with junk, both snail mail and email. is Consumer Reports. It just never ends. I'll likely be dropping my membership. Liked them a lot decades ago, but management has changed and while I find some of their data useful, their politics and their marketing rubs me the wrong way these days.

 

[Midpack]

Not for me.unless required for an insurance policy you want. I do not wish to fund the type of lobbying they do.

+5. Their positions on Soc Sec alone are reason enough to avoid them to me. YMMV

 

[RunningBum]

Right now I get very little junk mail and not that many spam calls. I strongly suspect that will change if I join AARP. Not junk from AARP, but from all of the places they've sold my info.

Repeating what I said.

 

[scrabbler1]

I signed up for one year back in 2015, when I was 52. It was to get a small tote bag as a freebie. I had no use for their discounts or their boring magazine. And I don't care for their politics. So, I paid $12 for a handy tote bag I still have and frequently use today.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

Repeating what I said.

Again, I do not find it an issue, I do not get much junk mail on the email address I use for AARP.

Anyway, how can you guarantee that the junk mail you get is from entities that have purchased/aquired your info from AARP?

EVERYONE has your info, from Amazon to Google to you name it they get it.

 

[RunningBum]

Again, I do not find it an issue, I do not get much junk mail on the email address I use for AARP.

Anyway, how can you guarantee that the junk mail you get is from entities that have purchased/aquired your info from AARP?

EVERYONE has your info, from Amazon to Google to you name it they get it.

I still get an occasional junk mail with a form of my name that I used with Dish Networks. If I ever decide to get AARP I'll use a different unique form of my name but for now I'll pass. I assume companies buy name lists because they know the address is current, or maybe it fits a profile.

 

[CaptTom]

It is interesting to see how the different name formats get passed around. We had a credit card many years ago which spelled our last name incorrectly; one wrong vowel. I never cared, and it showed up on credit reports as an "alias." Fine.

Then, years later, AARP added my wife's name to mine in their mailings. With that same misspelling.

I can't waste any emotional energy on this crap. Our identities are shared by all the big corporations, and, especially, by all of the non-profits. I make an effort not to give my name to any political party or "fringe" cause on either side of the spectrum. Otherwise I get a deluge of biased, partisan crap trying to rope me in to their cause. And, of course, give them more money.

 

[Fermion]

+5. Their positions on Soc Sec alone are reason enough to avoid them to me. YMMV

You got me curious so I typed "AARP position on SS" and all I found was that they are against cuts in benefits and are pro COLA adjustments. Am I missing something here?

 

[ShokWaveRider]

You got me curious so I typed "AARP position on SS" and all I found was that they are against cuts in benefits and are pro COLA adjustments. Am I missing something here?

Unfortunately, there are some folks that are just looking for excuses to criticize AARP. In generally they do a great job for us old farts.

 

[CaptTom]

You got me curious so I typed "AARP position on SS" and all I found was that they are against cuts in benefits and are pro COLA adjustments. Am I missing something here?

No. You're not. Your mistake is trying to bring facts into the discussion. People these days prefer to believe what they're told by their tribe's pundits.

 

[GenXguy]

You got me curious so I typed "AARP position on SS" and all I found was that they are against cuts in benefits and are pro COLA adjustments. Am I missing something here?

Then I hope they are against the increased taxation of SS benefits every year due to the tax thresholds not getting indexed to inflation since 1983, because it essentially amounts to an ongoing yearly net cut in benefits:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/p...-punished-by-social-security-taxes-2019-01-07
https://www.fool.com/retirement/gen...ear-old-social-security-rule-is-wreaking.aspx
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/03/25/double-whammy-taxation-social-security-benefits.html
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/issuepapers/ip2015-02.html

 

[scrabbler1]

It is interesting to see how the different name formats get passed around. We had a credit card many years ago which spelled our last name incorrectly; one wrong vowel. I never cared, and it showed up on credit reports as an "alias." Fine.

Then, years later, AARP added my wife's name to mine in their mailings. With that same misspelling.

I can't waste any emotional energy on this crap. Our identities are shared by all the big corporations, and, especially, by all of the non-profits. I make an effort not to give my name to any political party or "fringe" cause on either side of the spectrum. Otherwise I get a deluge of biased, partisan crap trying to rope me in to their cause. And, of course, give them more money.

Back in the late 1980s, I lived for a few years in an apartment on a street called East Jamaica Avenue. But my bank at the time misspelled the street name in its records (but my monthly statements still arrived normally), calling it East Janaica Avenue.

In the few years I lived at that address, I received some junk mail from other businesses. Sometimes, the mail was addressed to me at East Janaica Avenue, so I always knew it was the bank which sold or gave away my address to the junk mail sender.

 

[CRLLS]

And some of us age out of our professions when businesses want to cut their high income staff, so we can't be working into our 60's. And it's not always physical limitations that keep you from being able to work.

I'm glad someone is out there fighting for us.

This needs to be repeated. In the tech world, if you are in your mid 50's you are more likely considered a liability than an asset to them. Try finding a job when you are downsized from a reorg or a merger. Not all of those affected find another one.

Raising the FRA age is not the answer for the general public. Too many are not prepared for a 40+ -year retirement in their mid 50's, present group excepted of course.

Getting back on topic, DW is the family AARP member, I am just a tag-along. I was a member of AARP when I was in my 40's. Yes, I really was. AARP created a mid-career affiliated organization. My parents signed me up for a 1-year subscription. About halfway thru my year, that affiliate failed, and my membership was transferred to AARP with all the benefits of AARP. I let the membership expire at the end of the year.

 

[CaptTom]

Then I hope they are against the increased taxation of SS benefits every year due to the tax thresholds not getting indexed to inflation since 1983, because it essentially amounts to an ongoing yearly net cut in benefits...

These are exactly the sneaky kinds of things politicians love to do to us. If there's no-one around to lobby for seniors (or any other group of voters) then they get away with it, and are emboldened to do more.

The problem is, when a group like AARP calls out a politician or a party for doing (or in this case, not doing) something, that entire party gets defensive. Their talking heads, pundits and apologists in the media jump all over the AARP for not being on the "right" team. Keep those voters angry at anyone but us!

 

[Midpack]

You got me curious so I typed "AARP position on SS" and all I found was that they are against cuts in benefits and are pro COLA adjustments. Am I missing something here?

Unfortunately, there are some folks that are just looking for excuses to criticize AARP. In generally they do a great job for us old farts.

No. You're not. Your mistake is trying to bring facts into the discussion. People these days prefer to believe what they're told by their tribe's pundits.

The devil is in the details, this is not a topic that can be resolved with a glib sound bite. Restoring solvency fairly is going to take generational compromise, AARP has been totally inflexible when it comes to ANY sacrifice by seniors/near seniors, putting all the burden on their children/grandchildren. Obviously benefit cuts to people already relying on SS isn’t workable, but sacrifices will be necessary across generations. You won’t find a workable solution from AARP, they just tell you at length what they’re against…and put their heads in the sand like our legislators.

But to each his/her own.

 

[scrabbler1]

The devil is in the details, this is not a topic that can be resolved with a glib sound bite. Restoring solvency fairly is going to take generational compromise, AARP has been totally inflexible when it comes to ANY sacrifice by seniors/near seniors, putting all the burden on their children/grandchildren. Obviously benefit cuts to people already relying on SS isn’t workable, but sacrifices will be necessary across generations. You won’t find a workable solution from AARP, they just tell you at length what they’re against…and put their heads in the sand like our legislators.

But to each his/her own.

+1

 

[rk911]

+5. Their positions on Soc Sec alone are reason enough to avoid them to me. YMMV

Seems I recall something about AARP supporting the ACA at the expense of seniors on Medicare and SS. I might be mis-remembering. We're not AARP members.

 

[Gotadimple]

I see, so ultimately it depends on your state.

Audrey,
It's a company decision to file plans they think can be successfully sold in a state, rather than insurance commissioner approval decision. Medigap plans are designed by CMS (that's why all 'G' plans are the same). Insurance commissioners have approval on the rate, and act in a consumer protection role. They can't make a plan change the design of the benefits.

- Rita

 

[PatrickA5]

The devil is in the details, this is not a topic that can be resolved with a glib sound bite. Restoring solvency fairly is going to take generational compromise, AARP has been totally inflexible when it comes to ANY sacrifice by seniors/near seniors, putting all the burden on their children/grandchildren. Obviously benefit cuts to people already relying on SS isn’t workable, but sacrifices will be necessary across generations. You won’t find a workable solution from AARP, they just tell you at length what they’re against…and put their heads in the sand like our legislators.

But to each his/her own.

I think this has to do with the fact that far more members of their 50+ membership are in a position that they can't afford to have their current or near-term benefits reduced. Sure, the rich folks on this board are willing to sacrifice money (they probably don't need) to fix the funding problem, but many more seniors can't afford to do so. For this reason, I can't really blame AARP for advocating for no benefits cuts (SS or Medicare).