My personal experience with Social Security

[bleedingheart]

My dad was born in 1919, before Social Security was even around.
Back in those days there was no retirement, you either worked until you died, you saved so that you could perhaps retire but most people didn't have that kind of money...
If you were disabled or too feeble to work...well you got sent off to the state or church run institutions or you had to live with relatives who may or may not be happy to have you.

...this was the world he was born into. He worked, he fought bravely in WWII (2 bronze stars and a load of health problems)...and he worked some more...and then at the age of 60 he died peacefully in his sleep leaving two small children 10 and 9 for my mother to raise.

My parents had paid for their house, and they had some money put away but my dad was not a wealthy man. He had worked in a small mill that provided dies for the bigger mills and he never made much money...however he had paid into social security and his pensions.

So when he died, my mom got $777 a month to help raise the two kids and she was able to stay at home three more years until my brother and I were old enough to become "latch key kids". She then went off to work and eventually was working 4 jobs to help supplement our income as well as put money away for her own "retirement" as well as to help us in our education.

When my brother turned 16, her SS benefits were cut, and when he turned 18 all benefits were ended...but without it, who knows what would have happened. So having been on the receiving end of Social Security and the benefits all I can say is...

Thank you!!!

Thank you to the people who paid into the system and who voted for the politicians who created the program.

It made a difference in my life and it makes a difference to many others...

I don't think the system is broken, it works well and if anything I think that it has stood the test of time and I worry that the Bushies will destroy it.

So once again...Thank You to those who pay FICA.

Today I am college educated and well paid and I have never regretted paying my FICA. I pay into it for what I have received and for what my mother receives now that she is retired and for my future retirement. I am grateful for it.

Thank you!

[wtmusic]

1. Wow

Terrific post.

Nominated.

[Throckmorton]

32. Same here, I receive money from SS for both of my Children

Mrs Throckmorton's passing made both of my children eligible for SS. They don't get the maximum payout because I make too much, but I get enough for daycare while I work.

Thanks SS, I do believe you have saved our house.

[bleedingheart]

49. I have been thinking about you and your kids

it is for that very reason that I am more than happy to pay FICA which I know is put to good use.

[Wickerman]

2. Nice post

I too was a beneficiary of SS after my mother died. She didn't work many quarters, having stayed home to raise kids after college, but the small amount I received helped me then go on to college.

I've been paying into the system since I was 16 and also never had a regret. In my current work I daily see how SS is beneficial to so many.

thanks for the inspiring story. :hi:

[bleedingheart]

7. Thanks...

sadly I think that many people don't realize what a great system it is.

What I found funny was that the media didn't give much coverage to the fact that after the WTC attack the widows and widowers were processed through and receiving SS benefits long before they got any settlements from insurance companies or even the survivor funds.

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. My sons were also beneficiaries of SS

My husband died at age 24, our sons were 3 and 7 at the time of his death. I too am grateful for monies we received from SS. It was most helpful.

[Poppyseedman]

3. Great story. but

the question is not what happened to someone who was born in 1919.

The question is what will happen to the people born in 1990.

Ask any person under 25 if they will see any SS and they will laugh at you.

I also don't mind paying my SS taxes because I know I will receive them when I retire in 2025.

Anybody who can read Pat Moniyhan report can plainly see "something" must be done to address the shortfall after 2018.

Does Bush have the right plan, big maybe.

I'll like to see the democratic party come up with comprehensive plan rather than be in denial there is a problem.

Bush will win this fight if we don't offer up something other than "Bush is lining the pockets of Wall Street"

[DemBones DemBones]

4. If Bush** is allowed to privatize, then people may not see any of

their SS benefits. If the Dems stand up against this attack, and if Congress makes any truly necessary changes, SS will keep on keeping on for all of us, even people born in 1990, or 2005.

Go read Josh Marshall's coverage of the issues:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com

[Poppyseedman]

9. My point is

the party has to stop with the nonsense and bring "solutions" to the American people to counter the GOP position.

I am absolutely sick to death of "Bush and corp America is evil and will steal your money" rhetoric coming from the party.

If that is their strategy, it's a losing one. Bush will win hands down if that is the road we take.

The American people aren't buying it.

They see their 401(K) and go, "maybe Bush's idea isn't a bad one".

We need to present better ideas, so people will listen.

[Robbien]

16. Where in mainstream media does anyone say Bush is Evil?

On the net, sure. Not mainstream media.

In mainstream media, Democrats are saying the GAO says the system is fine until 2045 and that if money is turned over to investment managers as Bush wants, investment managers will take a hefty investement fee, limit any gains and all loss risk is on the wage earner.

What do you want as an alternative to Social Security?

[Poppyseedman]

24. "Bush is evil" will come from the republican side of the argument.

not come from the democratic side of the argument.

I'm amazed that people have not figured that out.

Just how long will it take before Hannity, Rush or O'Reilly finds some far left wing talking head from some obscure website or organization that will be be willing to speak on the things that sites like DU contains.

"Bush is trying to destroy SS"

"Wall Street is in co-hoots with the Bush Administration to steal you money"


It's their freaking game plan.

Hannity and gang trots out the left wing looking loon, let them make an ass of themselves and tell the American people, wink, wink, see we told you so.

Match, Set, Game over. Gessh.

[bleedingheart]

18. We have 4 different 401K funds

and to be honest the returns haven't been so hot and it is still a risk. There is no guarantee with the market.

Let's say that Bush's plan goes through and then 30 years from now...

1. Joe Smith invests and makes money...he is very happy and retires fine.

2. John Smith invests but his funds suck and he ends up getting far less than he can actually retire on and now he has a heart problem that really requires he stop working...what does he do?

I can see far more class warfare in the future if the middle class gets the big "screwola" from the marketeers on Wall St.

Personally I believe in a diverse portfolio. I have a 401K, I have a pension, my husband has only his 401k no pension. We put cash in the bank, we are paying off our small home. We invest in bonds and have money in CD's... I prefer Social Security as it stands.

[cattleman22]

25. RE: Class warefare and SS

I think SS should be completely need based. The OP gave a good narrative about how a family who needed SS received it. I think SS payments after retirement should be based on lifetime earning. That way a person who earned lots of money, but squandered it would receive little, but a person who earned little money, yet was frugal, would receive more.

[bleedingheart]

30. what do you mean by squandered? What if a family has nothing

because one of the kids had leukemia and they spent all their money to treat the child and he/she still died...leaving them with debt???

The don't have any money...perhaps it wasn't very smart...but should they have been richer and let the child die???

That situation can happen to a rich as well as a poor family.

[DemBones DemBones]

38. No way! Make it need based and you kill it, because

it will be called "welfare" then.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

48. That's right--the minute the millionaires aren't eligible

they'll start griping about having to pay "lazy people who never saved for their old age."

Paying off a few millionaires is a small price to pay for maintaining universal coverage.

[shrike]

20. Most people I know have seen their 401ks shrink

dramatically. The last few years have been a lesson for most people on just what happens when you risk money in the stock market.

I wouldn't say that most Americans AREN'T buying it -- yet. So far, polls show that a majority do not support privatization.

[Poppyseedman]

22. I respectfully disagree about the polls.

If you are old enough to have seen your 401 (K) disappear down that black hole, in the late 1990, you will probably op out from moving into partial privatization. Been there, done that.

Young people have never had much invested assets think the SS is a scam.

I know, I have 5 children that are all young adults under 30.

To the last one they think SS will not be there for them.

They all are very supportive of doing something to "fix" the program so they at least have a shot of getting their money out of it.

If "fixing" the program means partial privatization, they think something is better than nothing.

I also believe a lot of people will be willing to risk a small portion of their SS to try and get greater returns on their money.

Vast majority of americans have some sort of 401 (K) plan and see the value in investing in the stock market.

[Robbien]

23. Will those vast majority of americans be willing to increase their taxes

to pay for the TRILLONS the switch over to privatization will cost?

Will those vast majority of americans be willing to swap a 1% Social Security administration cost to a personal annual payment of 20% to investment managers?

Will those vast majority of americans be will to have the government limit the rate of return on investment, but accept the whole loss if the market tanks?

[shrike]

29. You and I have been seeing different polls, I guess

And if you have children under 30, surely at least a few of them are old enough to have seen money disappear in the late 1990s. And if they didn't they weren't paying attention.

[bleedingheart]

5. but for those who have been around for a while

they will know that the same scare tactics about Social Security were being pandered by Goldwater back in the '60s and guess what, it is still here.

Krugman has done some great articles about how to address the dilemna of underfunding but I can tell you that I think that investing it into the market is the dumbest idea of all.

I am now 35 years old and I already have too much tied to the stock market in my 401K and I think that Social Security shouldn't be tied to the market for many reasons..Enron..and Tort Reform will screw people. Companies will rob people of their SS money and then Tort Reform will prevent them from taking legal action. Oh...and let us talk about the fees that taxpayers will be charged by the brokers...more money will be made on those fees and that money could be benefiting the recipients.

[idiosyncratic]

17. What if the person born in 1990 becomes disabled in 2020?

That person will be very, very thankful for the SS disability payments they receive as a result of contributing during their working years.

No one ever thinks about the possibility of disability when they talk about "private accounts." An acquaintance just rolled his BMW Z3 and is now a quadraplegic.

His payments into SS will give him a monthly income now that he can no longer work.

[onecitizen]

37. If they let that.....

pathetic little man who has NEVER been successful at any business, despite his "Business" degree from Harvard, touch one thin dime of that money there will be blood in the streets. Look what he has done with our money so far. Surely, you cannot think he should be given the money to do with as he pleases do you?

REPUKES CANNOT MANAGE MONEY!!! Look back in history to see what happens when they "run" something. We all lose.

[Wright Patman]

6. The difference

between the era in which Social Security was passed and now has a lot to do with the division and acrimony, mostly created by GOP strategists such as Rove, pitting us against one another by class, race, ethnic origin, etc. Back during the Great Depression, there was a certain president (a "traitor to his class" as his fellow "to the manor born" bluebloods called him) who REALLY DID try to unite us.

This is by far the biggest lie Bushco and its Flying Monkey Brigades hosting the talk shows on Clear Channel tell us--that they are only trying to unite us. The GOP has successfully demonized entire groups of tens of millions of people whom the denizens of whitebread suburbia no longer consider to be fellow Americans with a stake in the system.

We are just one step away from the reinstitution of slavery. Indeed, the middle class is evaporating more and more rapidly as globalization gathers momentum and a sort of wage slavery can already be said to exist for millions upon millions of Americans who grew up never expecting to face the economic plight now engulfing them.

I began to see through the economic utopia BS about 25 years ago. It was what the economists continually pushed to get through all the free trade deals, which were wanted by both parties. It didn't take a rocket scientist or even a very savvy economist to predict this would end the American Dream for vast segments of the population and accelerate a trend toward what can only be called a return to feudalism complete with the modern equivalent of castles (the "gated communities").

The only difference is that the Democrats felt guilty about destroying the middle class. The GOP did it with glee. They were destroying people they employed who were constantly bitching about how much they were being paid and even unionizing over it. Now people are just grateful to have a job(s) that keeps the wolf away from the door, if only for now. This is precisely what the plan called for in the corporate boardrooms of 25 years ago. To coin a phrase, "Mission accomplished!"

Funny that I should have had 25 years in my mind. The link below says there has been no real growth in the U.S. economy in 25 years.

http://www.safehaven.com/article-2482.htm

[TheMom]

8. It's great

that SS help your family after your dad died. That is part of the reason we pay taxes.

Where I have a problem SS is my dad paid his fair share for 45 years. He retired, starting receiving SS payments, then passed away. Why does SS get to keep his money?

[Bridget Burke]

10. Well, my father never received a cent from SS.

He died when I was 4; my brother & sister are younger. The SS payments & some government money (it was a service connected death) helped my mother bring us up. Of course, she worked as well, so she also had a pension. Don't worry; she didn't live all that long after retirement.

I got SS payments, you remember your father. Want to switch places?

[sherilocks]

11. If your mom is alive and they were married

she can opt to receive benefits from his account at age 60. She can also opt to use his benefits if your dad's FICA earnings were greater than hers. (Even if they were divorced, under certain circumstances) Think of it as an insurance policy, not as a savings account. I'd rather have the insurance policy myself. Would you feel the same way if your dad died young and you needed the benefits as a dependent child? Parents don't have to be married for dependent children to receive the benefit. It's a great system that protects everyone.

I'm truly sorry about your dad's untimely death. Unfortunately life and death aren't always fair.

[TheMom]

33. Parents divorced over 30 years ago

I do believe she is receiving benefits based on his income, as they were married over 10 years.

I have no problem with spouses and dependent children receiving benefits.

Thanks for the condolences.

[Blue Diadem]

19. What about your mom?

If she worked and made less, she can collect it.

[Oilwellian]

26. Social Security is insurance, not an investment

If your father had died young, while he was still working and paying into Social Security, you and your mother would have been protected and you'd receive benefits immediately. If your father became disabled while still working, he would have started receiving benefits immediately and, in both instances, your family would have received far more than paid into the system.

Odds were against your father dying before he could earn back what he paid into the system. Most seniors today are earning far more than they paid into Social Security because they're living longer lives. I'm sorry for your father's loss but you can be sure he rested comfortably each night knowing his family would have income to sustain them should something happen to him tomorrow.

That's the beauty of the program. It allows seniors, women and children to survive should something happen to the breadwinner.

In essence,what the republicans are saying is, the trust funds paid for with the SS surplus are worthless. Please see:

Annual Social Security surpluses are credited to the Social Security Trust Funds, but have been used to cover government expenses, leaving in their place government securities, or "IOUs."

"The trust fund is bankrupt; it is IOUs from the government," said Sean Spicer, spokesman for Rep. Jim Nussle, Iowa Republican and House Budget Committee chairman.

Mr. Spicer said Democrats' contention that trust funds can be used to make up the shortfall that starts in 2018 is "a disingenuous way of looking at the problem."

Democrats and other analysts see it differently.

Kenneth S. Apfel, commissioner of Social Security during the Clinton administration, said the money in the trust funds is indeed legitimate government securities that must be paid — far from "worthless IOUs."

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20050116-115804-7584r.htm

Why aren't we discussing why a republican controlled congress for the past 10 years, spent the surplus money we paid in to shore up the Social Security program? Isn't it scary a spokesman from the chairman of the House Budgetary Committee is saying government trust funds are worthless?

The republican scheme is to deny responsibility for the IOU's they've created, and put it on the middle class in the form of higher SS taxes and a higher retirement age. The rich will continue to get their tax breaks while we're double taxed and work longer. They want US to pay for their piggishness with OUR money.

I doubt there will be privatization because we can't afford the additional debt. But I can assure you Bush will get an increase in SS taxes and an extended retirement age out of this created so-called "crisis."

I guess we shouldn't trust buying goverment bonds while republicans are in power.

[newyawker99]

34. Hi TheMom!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[TheMom]

44. Thanks!

Trying to find a place to hang my hat.

[yankeedem]

36. It's not HIS money

It is an insurance program. When you buy an insurance policy, and the event doesn't happen, do you get a refund? If so, can I have the $25000 or so that I have paid for car insurance back? I haven't even filed a claim.

Why is it that noone in the press or the right suggests the one sure fire solution for the "crisis", which is to remove the $87k cap on contributions?

[TheMom]

43. There are different insurance types

I have had car insurance since the beginning of time. I realize one puts way more money into it then they will get out of it. I have car insurance for the same reason I have health insurance ~ ~ ~ insurance.

If I were to die tomorrow my family would receive no money from either my car or health insurance. However, they will receive something from my life insurance.

If a single person, with no dependent children, of retirement age dies no monetary burial benefits are given to the family. Social Security tells them to piss up a rope.

Oh, and yes it was his money.

[Lugnut]

12. I too am grateful for SS

I've been collecting SS disability benefits since I was 49 due to spinal cord injury. Thankfully my contributions to the system were there to provide me with a monthly income. SS insurance is not just for the elderly.

[seemunkee]

13. An often overlooked benefit of SS. I had a similar situation

My father was a UPS truck driver and went blind from diabetes. Thanks to disablity benefits he was able to get a masters in economics and get back into the work force at the Dept of Commerce. When I was a teen his kidneys failed and he passed away after a long stuggle. Those same benefits along with his govt employee bennies kicked in and my mom did what she needed to do to make it possible for my brother and I to go to college.
I recognize my obligation to provide for others as they provided for my family in our hour of need.

[juajen]

40. My children feel the same way.

My husband had a life threatening and life changing event that twenty years later is still too disturbing for me to go into. He has been drawing ss disability for over 20 years. He was 43 when he became disabled. He was so bad off physically and mentally afterwards, that I had to quit my job to care for him.

Without our ss disability we would have been sunk. We also received ssi for our children. People everywhere need to see what an important insurance policy this is. God forbid they learn the hard way that its value is immeasurable.

[YNGW]

14. SS Tax Code

As a side issue, there's all sorts of ways to circumvent having to pay SS Taxes if you'd rather plan your own retirement without paying maximum into SS. Of course, it's good to keep the option of SS open, and you can do that with a minimum of income.

The scale of "payments to benefits" is a skewed bellcurve that diminishes as you pay more in. Currently, if you were to claim $8,000 annual income, and paid 15.3% tax on that amount ($1,224), you would recieve $400/mo from SS ($4,800 annually), or approx. $4 for every $1 you contributed.

Now, if you were to claim $80,000 annual income, paying 15.3% would be $12,240, and you would only receive $2,100/mo from SS ($25,200), or approx. $2 for every $1 you contributed. Not as good.

I own and operate my own business, so what I do is claim the minimum as income and the rest as Sub-S dividends which are taxed at a much lower rate than income and are not subject to SS taxes. In essance, I avoid paying $11,000 into SS that I can use to invest elsewhere (that gives a larger return) for a program that, given my income level, really doesn't benefit me much to begin with.

I'm sure there's are accountants here who can verify these numbers more accurately and others here who own businesses that do similar things. I say all this to say the SS system as it currently stands can be made useful for each individual's needs if they properly use the tax codes.

[GoldenOldie]

21. My experience with SS

I worked for 20-years in the private world and began with minimum wages of $.70 per hour and paying into FICA. I was barely able to pay the rent and buy groceries. During the ast 15-years of this 20-year period, I became a working full-time mom who needed to work to help supplement my spouse's income and still paying into FICA.

Having had my immediate family employed in government service for several years and realizing that they were doing much better than I, with benefits and retirement, I soon acquired a position with the DOD and spent the next 20-years working and paying into the Federal employee retirement fund. Federal employees did not at that time pay into SS.....they could not receive what they did not pay into.

I worked for 18-years with the DOD with the assumption that I had well-over my requirements for SS and I would receive retirement benefits from SS along with my retirement savings from the Federal Employee Retirement Fund. You know what they say when you "assume."

During Reagan's term, the end of "double dipping," .......receiving 2 Federal retirement checks by one individual was initiated. They changed rules 2-years prior to my retirement and in my elder siblings case, who had a similar work experience....working private for 15-years for much higher salary, and then hired by the US Government for 25-years. My sibling retired the year in which the new "double dipping," changes went into affect. Her SS retirement monthly benefit went from $758. to $100. a month. This is when I learned that I would fall into the same category and I had 2-years before I retired to make adjustment to my retirement budget.

I do not hold any animosity for these changes and I have been able to obtain a good standard of living. But, I was fortunate enough to make promotions and enough grade within the Government to receive a living retirement, this maynot have been true for the lower grade typists, clerical workers.

My point is: SS is an excellent Program and is vital to our citizens that find themselves in their waning years not as fortunate
as we. If those opposing SS, were to honestly debate and understand the intent and original purpose of the SS Program they would know that it is basically an insurance program to ensure that those less fortunate do not fall through the cracks. Would they demand that they be allowed to determine how they would invest their Life Insurance, Health Insurance, etc. SS is an insurance investment that if the need arises at some point in your life, you or your family will not be out on the streets. The largest financial institutions have taken over the small community banks and they are unwilling to have the personal talks with the customer/investor. I don't want some financial institution with a CEO receiving millions of dollars benefit packages coming from the SS monies and some WS lottery genius determing where and who will get the billions of dollars. They will not be responsible to the "People" and just who will be auditing these funds????

The majority of the young are totally ignorant on the SS Program and assuming that they would actually control "their money," if it is privatized.

[FlaGranny]

27. I lost my first husband when our kids

were 6 and 7 years old. I don't know what I would have done without that income. We would have lost our home, probably. The money made it possible for the kids to go to college, and for us to stay in our home until I remarried.

I also am thankful for the Social Security system.

[Heddi]

28. My grandma worked for 52 years STRAIGHT before illness forced her to

'retire'.

She gets $345 a month on Social Security.

She *just* was allowed to get food stamps. She gets $45 a month food stamps.

52 fucking years. Started working when she was 12, rolling cigars by hand, to help her family make ends meet.

Now, she is reliant upon my mother to help her make her house payment. She sits in a dark, cold house because turning on the heat is too expensive. Turning on the lights is too expensive.

Last summer, the average temp in her house was 90F because it was too expensive to turn on the air conditioner.

My mom recently bought her an electric heater to use at night, but she's afraid to use it because she can't afford her electric bill when she uses it for more than 4 hours a night.

She had to "borrow" toilet paper from the neighbors because after paying the heat bill, water bill, property taxes, and mortgage last month, she didn't have enough $$ to get TP. So she had to ask them for some.

52 years of work. No years off. No stay-at-home mom. NEVER without a job except for 4 months when she tore up her knee (at age 62) from falling at work. She couldn't stay out for the full year to get disability because she would have been living in the street. She forced herself to go back to work, causing more injury to her knees, forcing her to quit again to get a double knee replacment. Went back to work, had a heart attack and is now "retired" and living large on $390 a month.

Man, if these are the golden years, please shoot me now.

***On Edit*** i'm NOT against Social Security. If it wasn't for SS, Granny WOULD be on the street (well, living with my mom, forcing my mom to live on the street b/c she's hardly able to live on her salary, much less provide for another person).

It just is infuriating that my Grandma was penalized because she was just not physically able to wait another 8 years or whatever to retire at the OLDER AGE and get more SS.

She paid into the system from youth until old age, and it's not enough for her to live on.

I've gotten into arguments with people who chastize her for not saving for her future. Yeah, when you're making $25 a week and have mouths to feed, it's a bit hard to save for the future. It's a bit hard to save for the future when, as a woman in the 50's and 60's, she wasn't eligible for company retirement plans. Also, my granddad was in the Navy so they moved around alot, so she wasn't able to work at a job for more than a year or two because he kept getting stationed all over the place.

Social Security is a great thing. I'm more than happy to pay into it. I just feel that the pittance they're throwing at a woman who worked more than half a century is just appaling. But because she wasn't able to physically keep working for more years than she did, she's penalized and left to freeze in the winter and sweat in the summer because she can't pay her bills. It's disgusting, and sadly, she's not the only elderly person for whom SS payments are their ONLY form of income.

[bleedingheart]

31. sadly I think that privatization will make situations like your

grandmothers far more common.

Social Security coupled with pensions or savings is fine but there are many like your grandmother that only get SS and that is a crime.

If anything I know that my company's pension program is going to "dock" our pensions based on what we get in SS when we retire...so in 30+ years I can't imagine what that scheme will work out too...and with this privatization thing going on...I just shake my head and wonder...

[Heddi]

41. of course it'll make it worse

Enron...Worldcom...Tyco....helloooo...we're supposed to TRUST our MONEY in these fools? HARDLY.

How about the folks that were bilked when Enron went belly up. I'm sure they're DROOLING waiting to put not only their private retirement funds into the stock market, but their 'Guaranteed' government SSI 'retirement' funds into the stock market.

I guess, I don't know...call me crazy, but I don't think I should have to play "RISK" with the money that the government mandatorally witholds from my paycheck every week. I'll risk the personal money I have for savings...but SOMETHING should be sacred, no?

Of course, if we do privatize, we'll be part of the ownership class....only we'll not be the owners, we'll be the ones owned

[ignatius 2]

35. Thanks for sharing your story. Social security is the best system ever

put in place by our government. It provides a safety net for families and allows seniors to live in dignity.

From reports I have read from the CBO,Paul Krugman and other respected economists, a small tweaking such as increasing the begining age by one year per decade would keep the system solvent to the year 2075. Just like Iraq and IMHO Afghanistan, this administration "creates" a crisis then for its own agenda "fixes" said problem.

I have e-mailed my congressman to let them know they should leave social security to hell alone. Please all of you do the same so they know in explicit terms how you feel about this.

I work in the financial industry and believe me when I say Wall Street is salivating at the amount of money to be made "by them" in investing those funds. The irony is the main reason SS came about was because of the stock crash and now Chimpy wants to invest those funds in the stock market. Strange and very dangerous.

[DemBones DemBones]

39. My father-in-law always said he'd never get any Social Security;

it would go broke first. This was a man born in 1918, married and in the workforce in 1939. He thought FDR was wrong to set this up. He thought it might help his parents and in-laws but be gone by the time he retired. He was smart but he was wrong about this.

Of course he DID get his retirement benefits, and Medicare, and so did my mother-in-law.

People have made these claims that it won't work since Social Security began but it HAS worked and benefited many Americans and WILL continue to do so in the future if Congress just makes adjustments from time to time.

The best thing Congress could do would be to remove the income cap so that ALL income would be taxed for FICA. We could lower the retirement age back to 65 or even lower and raise benefit amounts if we did that. The rich would still be rich, too.

[CarpeVeritas]

42. if they remove the wage cap-

they could even lower the overall rate.
if they(i guess that should read "we") went a little further, and applied a point or two of FICA "tax" to capital gains income(after all- it's Social security, not individual security, and everyone benefits), the overall rate applied to wages could be lowered even further...

but we'll probably have to wait until the pendulum swings back to the left...provided the pendulum hasn't been outsourced to india.

[juajen]

46. Amen, I love your solution

We get cost of living increases, but my husband's is always mostly taken up by increase in medicare. Because I opted to take my ss early, I am not covered by medicare. It was a difficult choice for me, but we really needed my additional ss to live. Though I am disabled now also, because I stayed home with my hubbie to care for him, I did not get my time in to be eligible for disability, even though I had worked for over 30 years by the time I drew mine, just not in the last ten years. However, my hubbie had paid in the maximum, so his disability is pretty high compared to what a lot of people draw. So, in a lot of ways, I'm lucky. The worst is that I am not covered by health insurance. I have to wait until I am 65 yrs. and 8 months. When Clinton left office, this was at 65. I resent those extra 8 months and also think that because I was disabled and had no choice but to stay home with my hubbie, that I should be eligible for medicare. I have health problems, so this is a real problem.

[seemunkee]

45. Hubert H. Humphrey quote

It was once said that the moral test of Government is how that Government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.

[juajen]

47. HH was a good man.

It's a shame he was never President.