Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Poll of my readership

This past week, I received my third invitation in as many years to become a member of the AARP. Now, for those of you who don't know me, I'm only about halfway to the 50-plus mark and don't plan on retiring any time soon. However, the little brochure that came with my "temporary membership card" does say something about fighting age discrimination, so they can't possibly deny me membership just because I'm young, right?

So the question I pose to my readership: should I pay the $12.50 just to be part of the most powerful PAC in America, and see what hilarity ensues?

Song lyric of the day:
"People try to put us down
Just because we get around
Things they do look awful cold
I hope I die before I get old"
- the Who, My Generation

9 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since the AARP's reason for being is to unsustainably tax young people and give their money to old people, I wouldn't advise giving them any money at all. In fact, I'd recommend stuffing the envelope with as heavy an object as possible so that they have to pay the postage on it.

May 27, 2008 2:12 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

It's precisely for that reason that I was hoping to bring them down from the inside.

May 27, 2008 4:08 PM  
Blogger Ben said...

Only if it's part of a brilliant plan to become their inexplicably young national spokesman and embarass them on national television.

May 27, 2008 4:40 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

May 27, 2008 11:37 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

No, especially since I'm allergic to them.

But anyway, as Jacob says, I've already indirectly given the AARP a lot of money unwillingly. I'm mostly curious how they'd react to getting a returned form from a 26-year-old. What do y'all think would happen?

May 28, 2008 8:52 AM  
Blogger Ben said...

2 possibilities:

1) Somebody sees the form and notes your age (is there a way for them to note your age?) and rejects your membership.

2) Nobody really notices, you become a full-fledged member of the AARP, and your evil plot begins. (Or, they use your $12.50 to advocate taking more money from you, as Jacob said.)

I think (2) is a strong possibility. As with many large organizations that handle a lot of paper, people aren't always paying attention to the details. Heck, not even large organizations. Let's not forget that it took me a year to get off of Vanderbilt Hillel's mailing list despite the fact that I'm not, technically, Jewish.

May 28, 2008 9:46 AM  
Blogger The Original Rocker said...

I've always advocated a national (or at least a NC law) stating that anyone over the age of 60 needs to have their drivers license renewed at least every 2 years, instead of 5 to 7 years. But why put for the effort when the AARP thinks everyone over the age of 60 are the best drivers on the road....

May 29, 2008 4:38 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

Every 2 years? Why not every year? I agree with that completely (though as you might guess, I would argue for state-by-state laws). Additionally, it needs to be more than just an eye exam. There should also be tests for reaction time and (frankly) sanity. 60 might be a little young, but something like this is necessary. If I thought there were any chance I could convince the AARP of this, that alone would easily be worth $12.50.

May 30, 2008 9:06 AM  
Blogger The Original Rocker said...

definetly must include a driving test, and not just yon country road. Lets see them handle the highway. Can they drive at posted speed limits? Can they drive near farmers markets without mistaking the gas for the brake and taking out a few people?

June 01, 2008 10:07 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home