Reply
Newbie

Share your concerns about Social Security

1)     In the article,  Social Security Fears, many Social Security myths are addressed. What concerns you the most about Social Security? 

43,800 Views
328
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@wbrummett wrote:

 I am a disabled worker and I want to know is my ssi benefit going to be reduced when I turn 65 and have to go off of disablity benefits.

________________________________________________________________________

You said SSI but did you mean SSDI ????

SSDI (Social Security Disability Insurance Program)

SSI ( Supplemental Security Income) - the welfare (general fund)ability program for those who are not vested much into the Social Security program

 

If you are talking about SSDI rather than SSI then the answer is NO.

 

If you are talking about SSI then the answer is probably still NO. 

 

The SS (old age / survivors benefit) might be larger because it will depend on how much you have paid into & how long you paid into the Social Security system while working and if all the places you worked participated in the SS system by which there is a calculated offset.

 

Contact SSA by phone, your SS online account or at their local office, they can tell you for sure what will happen in your own particular case.

 

 

 

 

 

0 Kudos
890 Views
0
Report
Newbie

That the purpose for which Social security was founded will be eroded so much that seniors will fall easily into a poverty stricken existence.
0 Kudos
1,186 Views
0
Report
Newbie

I began receiving Social Security at 65.  I have since been deemed completely and permanently disabled due to several medical problems the worst of which is degenerative disc disease in my spine.  I would like to have my status changed to show I am disabled.  Why am I being told that is impossible as you have only one opportunity to declare this and that is when you first sign up?  Caroline Miller

0 Kudos
1,586 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

kayleerae wrote
I began receiving Social Security at 65. I have since been deemed completely and permanently disabled due to several medical problems the worst of which is degenerative disc disease in my spine. I would like to have my status changed to show I am disabled. Why am I being told that is impossible as you have only one opportunity to declare this and that is when you first sign up? Caroline Miller
==================================================
I'm kind of confused here . . . . .
What difference would it make since you are already 65 years old ?

0 Kudos
1,583 Views
0
Report
Contributor

My major concern is that Congress will not fix Social Security until it becomes a true train wreck and becomes "unfixable".  For years they could have taken the limit off earnings to gain more income.  They could also make sure everyone pays in--all government workers and teacher organizations, etc.

They could reduce "future" cost of living raises--this is not a decrease in benefits as described by some.  

0 Kudos
1,672 Views
0
Report
Newbie

Will they ever pay back the money they use out of Social Security for other reasons? That is like stealing our money that was suppose to support our retirement. If they would return that sum of money social security would be in great shape. By the way I work for over 40 years and paid all my taxes and they still would take care of foreign and welfare people before seniors would have work there whole life.
0 Kudos
1,670 Views
0
Report
Periodic Contributor

Social security is under attack by Republicans who object to it on ideological grounds. They are not going to stop their attack and the only thing keeping them from bringing it down is that they do not control either the senate or the executive office.

But they have convinced large numbers of people the it is "broken" and headed towards bankruptcy - even though neither of those allegations are true. But, they use their lies to convince people that the current system needs to be scrapped.

If they succeed, the people of this country are in trouble.
Contributor

George -

 

You are absolutely right about this. I wholeheartedly stand against Fred Griesbach's efforts (along with those of "The Can Kicks Back" the "Balanced Budget Amendment" and the like). The idea that a country with a fully fiat currency like the US Dollar might need to "cut SS to save it" is utter nonsense. If people understood how their own national currency works, Fred would not be able to mount this attack on Social Security. When we were on the edge of the Great Recession, the Gov't could have afforded to suspend payroll taxes (while making up the difference to the OASDI Trust Funds itself) and raise the minimum SS pay to $2,000/mo. 

 

When a country uses a fully fiat currency that floats on the foreign exchange, the question is never about it's ability to leave enough of that currency in the private sector to support a brisk economy, rather it's a question of whether or not we have enough REAL goods and services to go around. The Federal Government should point it's efforts towards balancing the economy, not "the budget". Balancing the budget is for individuals, biz and local governments (i.e., users of the national currency). Not for the sole net issuer of the national currency.

0 Kudos
1,282 Views
0
Report
Regular Contributor

That organizations like AARP, who are supposed to advocate for seniors, are allowing legislation like Government Pension Offset (GPO) and Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) rob hard-earned retirement income from middle class Americans. AARP always talks the talk about protecting Social Security, but when it comes to GPO & WEP, they certainly don't walk the walk.
Trailsnet is a huge fan of trails: trail travel, trail commuting, trail recreation & trail building.
0 Kudos
1,386 Views
0
Report
Periodic Contributor

Due to funding issue, social security benefits would almost certainly be cut down the road.  This is a major concern.  This would put more financial burden on younger Baby Bommers and the generations that follow.  This means we must be more intelligent on investing for our retirement down the road.  Unfortunately, many people are not ready in the position to accept the challenge. 

0 Kudos
1,352 Views
0
Report
Newbie

Keep it going!!!! Raise the limit on what is taxable. Cut out the fraud, esp. on disability claims!!!! I think you could double the limit and solve the problem. I've got to have Social Security to live in just a very few years!!!!
0 Kudos
1,249 Views
0
Report
Periodic Contributor

I'm not overly concerned about the system itself; I understand it is self-funding.  Working people pay the SS tax to keep the fund alive.  I think a concern of mine is if the younger people will not be able to find jobs that allow them to pay the SS taxes.

0 Kudos
1,105 Views
0
Report
Periodic Contributor

I'm just confused about when to take benefits and what are the penalties for taking it early. I have two questions:

 

1) If I take benefits at 62 and switch to spousal benefits (my husband) at 66, can I resume my benefits at 70?

 

2) If I take benefits at 62 and I have no income, will I still be penalized if my husband makes over the allotted amount?

 

Thanks in advance.

0 Kudos
1,143 Views
3
Report
Regular Social Butterfly

) If I take benefits at 62 and switch to spousal benefits (my husband) at 66, can I resume my benefits at 70?

 

   Answered over in the other thread. 

 

2) If I take benefits at 62 and I have no income, will I still be penalized if my husband makes over the allotted amount?

 

    Never.    Soc Sec. is not like food stamps.  Or TCA.  It doesn't go by household income.  Only the beneficiary is subject to the rules of the earnings limits;   not other members of the same household,  so no worries there  you cannot be penalized.  Also,  if your husband lavishes you with expensive gifts,  diamonds,  furs,  Rolex  -  no matter,  it is not "income",   soc. sec.  doesn't care.  As long as he didn't acquire the money for the diamonds and furs by concealing income,  lol  

 

Thanks in advance.

 

You're entirely welcome !

0 Kudos
1,157 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

"... Also,  if your husband lavishes you with expensive gifts,  diamonds,  furs,  Rolex  -  no matter,  it is not "income",   soc. sec.  doesn't care.  As long as he didn't acquire the money for the diamonds and furs by concealing income....".

   Hey, DW sometimes looks at these postings. You're a bad influence! 


"...Why is everyone a victim? Take personal responsibility for your life..."
0 Kudos
1,112 Views
1
Report
Regular Social Butterfly

Wifey asking too many questions,  eh.   Getting ideas?  

 

Here's a remedy for that.   Tell her that you have many,  many beautiful,  investment=grade Diamonds,  the most flawless,  perfect,  amazing gems that you have bought for her.  

 

Then just say that on the advice of,  er,  aarp message boards,  you put them within an IRA for the favorable tax treatment while they appreciate in value to an astounding amount.  

 

Uh oh   Better not make any jokes around here.  Over in that other thread I referenced for the poster here,  the box office is setting  records.  Went thru the roof.  Before the poster put up her new post tonite in that thread,  the views for the previous post had hit like close to 2,400.  And that post wasn't really stale,  fairly recent.    

 

Unless it is a malfunction in the count clicker  here  -  always a possibility with the site screwups here    =  that is pretty amazing to me so many people eating this stuff up. 

 

WhaddaYou  make of it.......??????

 

0 Kudos
1,128 Views
0
Report
Newbie

1. The fact that this is dated a couple of years ago says no one will read this. 

2. Disability is being decided on 1960s definitions.   Todays long term problems that disable people are things like Migraine and chronic headache that stops you from working for most of the year.  Yet is not recognized.   Lyme disease gives many disableing problems yet they are not considered.

3. They only recognize something broken and cannot be fixed for disability.  They are now being fixed. 

 

It makes no sense now if you read this in a few years you might understand our frustrations.

0 Kudos
1,044 Views
0
Report
Contributor

My biggest concern is that our government become so corrupted that Wall Street is finally successful in privatizing SS.

0 Kudos
1,071 Views
0
Report
Newbie

In my knowledge I believe that being disabled I should at least have enough money to cover all my bills, food prices, and a small bit of entertainment. On what I receive it is all gone the first day. I can barely round up enough for my medications. I am on quite a lot.
0 Kudos
1,164 Views
0
Report
Regular Contributor

I quote from the AARP article addressing survivor benefits "Widows and widowers can receive 100 percent of their deceased breadwinner spouse's full retirement benefit if they wait to claim until they reach their own full retirement age, currently 66 for people born from 1945 to 1956. However, a reduced survivor benefit can be taken as early as age 60."  However, many surviving spouses receive a nasty surprise when they find out that in order to do so they will have to give up their own retirement benefits.  Will this ever by remedied?

0 Kudos
1,134 Views
1
Report
Regular Social Butterfly

"a reduced survivor benefit can be taken as early as age 60."  However, many surviving spouses receive a nasty surprise when they find out that in order to do so they will have to give up their own retirement benefits. "

 

Not quite.   No one is ever forced to give up their own retirement (drawing on their own work record instead of spouse)  if that monthly amount is higher.  

 

Here is where I think you are confused.   As you say,  a widow (er) can start drawing on deceased spouse at age 60.  If she does,  she gets like 70.5 , 71 %  (I would have to look it up to be exact) of the spouses full benefit.  Spouse's full benefit meaning what he would have gotten at his full retirement age,  65,  66. 

 

Now, let's say,  in your scenario,   a widow does this yet she continues to work herself.  Full time,  at a decent salary.  Now,  because she is going to be going over the earnings limit, she is going to have to give back a good deal of that social security check she is getting on husband's account.   But,  if this is what she wants,  fine.   The reward would come in 6 years.  She could then switch her monthly benefits from spousal to HER record,  since she herself is now at full retirement age,   and get a fatter soc. sec.  check for the rest of her life.  She was not locked in to taking spousal benefits as you seem to think.  She could make the switch if it meant more $$$

Soc. Sec.  has always allowed people to pick whichever gives the most money if a person is eligible to draw on more than one account. 

I think what you are griping about is  -  if a widow or widower starts drawing spousal benefits at their age of 60,  you seem to think when they turn 66 or 67,  whatever is their own full retirmemt age,  the benefit checks should be bumped up to 100% (maximum benefit amount)

 

Sorry,  it doesn't work that way.  

 

 

 

 

0 Kudos
1,214 Views
0
Report
Newbie

my children have been on ssi for awhile. i get the judge court order childsupport taken from my children. i have done my research on the ssi online page od children on ssi and it is not to be deemed. only people on tanf are to be deemed by ssi. i have never been on tanf at all. i have brought it to the attention of a supervisor at tge local ssi. still nothing and i have called and looked for a person to represent me or help me but i have hit a brick wall. here in texas its hard to find someone with intelligence. i struggle every month my income fluctuates to the point i cant even atend college at all. due tolack of funds.
0 Kudos
1,417 Views
0
Report
Newbie

i'm worried about congress dipping into social security to fund their wasteful spending

0 Kudos
1,423 Views
0
Report
Newbie

My fear is that Social Security, after I've paid into it all my life, will not exist or will be next to nothing by the time I retire.  I'm 45.

0 Kudos
1,470 Views
0
Report
Newbie

I started receiving SSA retirement pension when I turned 62. I went back to work afterward and I have been contributing FICA eversince. Somehow will my retirement pension increase ... if so how often.

0 Kudos
1,489 Views
4
Report
Contributor

It will only increase if your annual pay increases above the highest income year that your current benefit is now based on. So, if your highest wage was $50K per year and you're now earning more then that, you should get a benefit adjustment, not to be confused with the annual cost of living increases. Otherwise, you are set for life, which is why I did not start drawing at 62 but waited.
0 Kudos
1,049 Views
2
Report
Regular Social Butterfly


@judyz68 wrote:
It will only increase if your annual pay increases above the highest income year that your current benefit is now based on. So, if your highest wage was $50K per year and you're now earning more then that, you should get a benefit adjustment, not to be confused with the annual cost of living increases. Otherwise, you are set for life, which is why I did not start drawing at 62 but waited.

When SS evaluates your annual incomes for the years that you worked, they adjust for inflation.  In my case, my highest income year was 1968!

~~~
Start every day with a smile and get it over with.
0 Kudos
1,038 Views
1
Report
Contributor

Social Security benefits are based on your top 35 years of inflation adjusted income. If you work in retirement replaces a lower earning year, your benefits will be adjusted to reflect your higher earnings record. However, it can take up to two years for the SSA to receive and process your tax returns, so the process can take awhile. Visit http://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/question-and-answer/?ssfaq=work for more information.
0 Kudos
1,037 Views
0
Report
Periodic Contributor

I retired at the end of January 2013 after turning 68.  I worked the entire month and had, in addition, accumulated 3 years worth of banked vacation plus most of the 2012 holidays that I was unable to take due to project requirements.

 

The income received in 2013 resulted in my 1978 income being dropped from the PIA and replaced by my 2013 income.  The amount of my Social Security retirement benefit was adjusted and I began receiving it in February 2014.

 

It appears that the re-calculation of your retirement benefit occurs once a year after your previous year's earnings are reported to the IRS by your employer.

 

My wife's spousal benefit didn't change but her benefit is based on a different set of years that would have been used to calculate my PIA at age 66.

0 Kudos
1,512 Views
0
Report
Contributor

As soon as president Obama was elected to a second term, he turned against the very people who got him a second term. The older voters feel cheated from this shyster president because of his attempts to change the cost of living for Social Security and agreed with the Republicans on cutting all benefits!  Thanks for nothing Obama! I voted for him both times ONLY because I disliked Romney so much.  The elderly cannot win when they are dealing with such dishonest crooks.

0 Kudos
1,245 Views
0
Report
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Online Community Refresh

Online Community has updated the site design in our discussions area to make it easier to connect, follow a conversation and access resources.

The new look and feel will be rolled out in multiple phases starting with these initial improvements in the conversations and replies levels.

Learn more about the new design today.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png