Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Editorials & Other Articles

MichMan

(13,718 posts)

8. From my understanding it will cost the SS system quite a bit of $$$.

Reply to Dulcinea (Original post)

Sun Dec 15, 2024, 11:13 AM

Dec 15

Someone with a pretty decent government pension who worked enough credits to qualify for SS on a previous job will now get to apply for SS benefits based on that previous income.

What is an issue is that they many of them will receive monthly SS checks far disproportionate to the amount that they ever put in. The SS system has a minimum monthly payment that far exceeds what very low income people have contributed in order to ensure people are able to survive when they are retired. As far as the system sees it, they didn't contribute very much over a lifetime, so even though they have a pretty healthy pension coming in every month, their SS payments will be structured as if they were low income earners.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Social Security Fairness Act takes big step towards passage [View all] Dulcinea Dec 15 OP

Please correct me if I'm wrong... Think. Again. Dec 15 #1

I think these are people who did pay into social security MacKasey Dec 15 #2

I see, so they HAVE PAID into the SS system... Think. Again. Dec 15 #4

You are correct. The GPO IS a problem because survivor/spousal benefits are dependent benefits, valleyrogue Dec 15 #12

"An inequities will have to be fixed down the road." MichMan Dec 15 #14

I agree, it doesn't seem that 2 very different issues should be addressed by one act.. Think. Again. Dec 15 #19

Thank you, I think I understand that... Think. Again. Dec 15 #18

Why should I have to pay tax on 85% of my SS, that is tax on a tax. doc03 Dec 15 #3

Worse, why is the threshold for that tax fixed at a 1984 dollar value? Voltaire2 Dec 15 #7

That is the first time I ever saw just how many people it doc03 Dec 15 #9

Ronald Reagan signed it into law in 1983 MacKasey Dec 15 #16

Tip O'Neil proudly worked with Reagan on the bipartisan 'reform' bill. nt. Voltaire2 Dec 15 #17

SS isn't going "'broke." That is a fiction. WEP is earned benefits stolen from those who paid in. valleyrogue Dec 15 #13

No one should be exempted from paying into SS MichMan Dec 15 #5

This message was self-deleted by its author doc03 Dec 15 #11

Confused XanaDUer2 Dec 15 #6

From my understanding it will cost the SS system quite a bit of $$$. MichMan Dec 15 #8

I hope it happens. No, SS isn't going "insolvent." That is a rightwing lie since there is an valleyrogue Dec 15 #10

It's going insolvent. Igel Dec 15 #15