Can a person live on $542 a month? Not really unless they have other sources of income, but a person can’t really live on $850/month pre-tax (10k a year) either. At least the $542 isn’t taxed any.
I don’t see your point, I was saying that SS isn’t a ‘dollar in-dollar out’ system. The wealthier put in more money and get less out. A person who makes 90k a year puts in 11160 a year and a person who makes 10k puts in 1240, but the person who puts in $1240 gets alot more back for that $1240 than the person making 90k. The person who makes 10k needs social security more than the person who makes 90k, but it isn’t a system where you pay more in and you get more out like Balthisar implied when he said
The people that benefit the most from SS are low income people, they get the highest return on their 12.4%.
And of those people, those who are married and have children benefit even more. The person who really gets screwed is the single person; whereas, when a married person dies his or her surviving spouse (or even divorcee in some situations) gets auxiliary benefits (if age 60 or 50 and disabled) and his or her surviving children under the age of 16 also get benefits, and there is also parent’s benefits if the surviving spouse has a child under age 18 no matter what the surviving spouse’s age. That also holds true for disability benefits which are also covered under FICA. So you see you can have an entire family getting benefits. If anyone needs to opt out, it is the single person.
but a person can’t really live on $850/month pre-tax (10k a year) either.
Been sipping the suds a little there bud?
Our subject here has for a lifetime.
What an amazing turn of events
Kinda a relative phrase there isn’t it. “Here is your money Grandma. I know you cannot live on it but it makes for a great SDMB arguement.”
barbitu8Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark
The people that benefit the most from SS are low income people, they get the highest return on their 12.4%.
And of those people, those who are married and have children benefit even more. The person who really gets screwed is the single person; whereas, when a married person dies his or her surviving spouse (or even divorcee in some situations) gets auxiliary benefits (if age 60 or 50 and disabled) and his or her surviving children under the age of 16 also get benefits, and there is also parent’s benefits if the surviving spouse has a child under age 18 no matter what the surviving spouse’s age. That also holds true for disability benefits which are also covered under FICA. So you see you can have an entire family getting benefits. If anyone needs to opt out, it is the single person.
[Reply With Quote]
I won’t bore y’all with another personal history story except to say I was single til I was 30. 14 years of paying SS .
You know It felt kinda good to know that my money was going to someones poor old grandma.
I don’t even know what you’re talking about anymore honestly. I’m just pointing out that SS is not a dollar in, dollar out system. Lower income people get a higher rate of return than higher income people on their SS benefits.
If you have been reading these SS threads the opposition to SS believe they should get all their money back and are opposed to paying "the government " more than their fair share.
They believe in the SS system there ought to be a set fair share. Well it don’t work that way.Never has. This is the most sucessful government program ever. The rich are supposed to pay the same portion of their income as do the poor. Except **they[b/], the rich, have a cap. So it is unfair in their favor.
What you get back is the knowledge that if your dreams are somehow not to come true you will not be homeless and hungry in your old age.
Removing the cap is the first step to repairing the SS system.
I’m going to assume that we’re not ever talking about social security disability nor survivor benefits nor nothing like that in this thread; social security retirement only. In that case, the only worse program from the federal government is medicare itself. When you say “federal government” you mean us. Why the hell should I pay for your retirement? Because I’m luckier than you? Well I’m not. You’re luckier than I am because you got me paying your friggin’ bills, you jerk.
$87,000 isn’t rich my friend. I guess it might could be, if we didn’t have a progressive income tax system that already does what you ask. Hell, it even goes beyond what you’re asking. That’s what graduated income taxes are all about. But we’re not talking income taxes here; we’re talking social security retirement.
Also, everyone has a cap. Not just the rich. Work some overtime, and you’ll have a cap, too.
Again, why the hell is the government responsible for your dreams? Why the fuck don’t you come down here to Mexico for a couple of years and see what real poverty is. See what a government retirement system is like. Check out national medical coverage for the old. Then go home and count your blessings.
The SS system was put into place so that we in the US do not end our lives like those in Mexico. It has worked quite well over these almost 70 years now. Despite the rantings of some of its selfish self centered opponents.
He he – too early for the tequila. But you’ve recognized my point! I’ll stress in your own words what you just said: "[The SS system] has worked quite well over these almost 70 years now."
