"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> On 5/16/2015 11:36 AM, Gary wrote:
>> > jmcquown wrote:
>> >>
>> >> You think 54 is "elderly"?
>> >
>> > Jill....100 years ago, a girl over age 17 was considered a spinster
>> > and an old maid. hahahahaa
>> >
>> > Yes....even these days, for men AND women, 54 is elderly!
>> > Only us "elderly" are in denial to think that it's not. ;-D
>> >
>> Yeah, but this isn't 100 years ago. Just because AARP tries to grab you
>> at age 50 doesn't mean a thing. I'll be "elderly" when I'm old enough
>> for Medicare. LOL
>
> I subscribed to AARP when I turned 50 just to see what they offered.
> Completely worthless to me at the time. Most discounts were restaurant
> and hotel based things. I did not resubscribe.
>
> I could actually retire (as far as SS is concerned) next month at age
> 62 but I won't. (It *IS* a bit disturbing to me that I could if I
> chose to. GDammit, I really have turned old!)
>
> I need to work 4 more years to get to full retirement and Medicare
> qualifying. Meanwhile, I am still fine and full of energy....as long
> as my health is fine, I plan to officially retire at age 70 so I can
> receive the maximum monthly SS check each month for the rest of my
> (worthless) life.

I did the AARP thing too. Mainly because my daughter's school was selling
magazines and I really didn't want any. But they did have that. So I got
it. Hated the magazine. I felt that they were talking down to us and
implying that we were stupid, especially when it came to things like
technology. Their freebie items were not things I'd ever use and their
discounts were for places I never go.