U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-22-2018, 07:22 AM
 
11,305 posts, read 8,685,017 times
Reputation: 28515

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda View Post
Just out of curiosity, I wonder how many posters who are complaining about SS benefits for children of retirees have themselves taken advantage of SS benefits based on other people's work histories? For example, did any of you take advantage of file and suspend before the law was changed? Have any of you filed for spousal benefits instead of your own in order to receive higher benefits? Any posters filed based on their ex-spouse's work history? If so, why is it okay that you as a family member receive benefits based on the work history of a retiree, but it is not okay for other family members, in this case children, to receive benefits based on the work history of a retiree?
I think we need to get rid of spousal benefits also. They were started when men were the main breadwinners. Women have the option to work and contribute into the SS system. If they stay home, they don't get benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2018, 11:00 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
22,854 posts, read 40,325,885 times
Reputation: 24160
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
I think we need to get rid of spousal benefits also. They were started when men were the main breadwinners. Women have the option to work and contribute into the SS system. If they stay home, they don't get benefits.
behind every successful man / woman... there is OFTEN a non-working spouse at home. (STILL!!!)

100% of my (hourly) coworkers had a non-working spouse (excluding the bosses who were a bit more caught up in affluenza.)

Since I am a homeschooler (as well as many of my peers...)

...we and others without kids (seniors) should erase our 'School Tax' from our Property tax?

Schools (failed USA schools) takes over 50% of the $38k property taxes I pay / yr, as they have for over 40 yrs of paying property taxes.

I'm all for 'compensated volunteerism (reduced taxes)', since I have thousands of hours as a Public School volunteer.

Would be great for thrifty seniors! (mentoring / tutoring / disaster relief...)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 12:04 PM
 
341 posts, read 174,305 times
Reputation: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
I think we need to get rid of spousal benefits also. They were started when men were the main breadwinners. Women have the option to work and contribute into the SS system. If they stay home, they don't get benefits.
This was set up years ago to allow women who salaries were sometimes extremely low to receive a decent social security benefit. Over the years women's salaries have increased where their ss benefit is closer to a man.

However, I am extremely thankful this provision is in place for my ex-SIL who had a freak accident and became disabled. She never made much money due to being home with the children and only a high school education. She will be collecting ss benefits from my brother's ss next month.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 04:07 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
20,104 posts, read 19,099,501 times
Reputation: 34198
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
I think we need to get rid of spousal benefits also. They were started when men were the main breadwinners. Women have the option to work and contribute into the SS system. If they stay home, they don't get benefits.
Different case. Even though I never had kids and always worked, what about women who stayed home for quite a few years while the kids were young? They sacrificed some of their working years and thus will get less in SS benefits. Meanwhile, the man was working and paying into SS. And many of those men depend upon the wife for the free childcare--so the spousal benefits are understandable. Anyway, the man can receive spousal benefits if the wife earned more.

As for comments about one political party not wanting to end something like kids getting SS benefits when the parents retire, I bet they would. I belong to that political party and I would vote for ending this benefit because we are constantly hearing about how SS is running out of money.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 04:47 PM
 
6,998 posts, read 3,956,332 times
Reputation: 15904
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland View Post
Different case. Even though I never had kids and always worked, what about women who stayed home for quite a few years while the kids were young? They sacrificed some of their working years and thus will get less in SS benefits. Meanwhile, the man was working and paying into SS. And many of those men depend upon the wife for the free childcare--so the spousal benefits are understandable. Anyway, the man can receive spousal benefits if the wife earned more.

As for comments about one political party not wanting to end something like kids getting SS benefits when the parents retire, I bet they would. I belong to that political party and I would vote for ending this benefit because we are constantly hearing about how SS is running out of money.

Yes to both your points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 05:28 PM
 
11,305 posts, read 8,685,017 times
Reputation: 28515
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland View Post
Different case. Even though I never had kids and always worked, what about women who stayed home for quite a few years while the kids were young? They sacrificed some of their working years and thus will get less in SS benefits. Meanwhile, the man was working and paying into SS. And many of those men depend upon the wife for the free childcare--so the spousal benefits are understandable. Anyway, the man can receive spousal benefits if the wife earned more.

As for comments about one political party not wanting to end something like kids getting SS benefits when the parents retire, I bet they would. I belong to that political party and I would vote for ending this benefit because we are constantly hearing about how SS is running out of money.
Having children is a choice. I don't have kids. Why should my SS be in jeopardy to finance someone made a choice to not work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 06:20 PM
 
6,998 posts, read 3,956,332 times
Reputation: 15904
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
Having children is a choice. I don't have kids. Why should my SS be in jeopardy to finance someone made a choice to not work.

Probably because we will all need those children to be paying into ss when we are retired so it keeps going.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 06:39 PM
Status: "The dwarfs are for the dwarfs!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
5,150 posts, read 2,367,863 times
Reputation: 17146
Nobody who works & pays taxes today is providing money for a child today.

Everyone & anyone receiving SS benefits today; is being paid out of funds their parents or grandparents paid into. It's a "pay it forward" system.

At least a child receiving benefits now might grow up, work, pay taxes & have kids. The only way the system could start to crumble within 2 generations, is if too many people don't have any kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 06:42 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
34,073 posts, read 42,505,536 times
Reputation: 43585
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Nobody who works & pays taxes today is providing money for a child today.

Everyone & anyone receiving SS benefits today; is being paid out of funds their parents or grandparents paid into. It's a "pay it forward" system.

At least a child receiving benefits now might grow up, work, pay taxes & have kids. The only way the system could start to crumble within 2 generations, is if too many people don't have any kids.
You've kind of got it backwards, those receiving benefits today are being paid out of money collected from those working today.

That was the way the system was set up in the 1930s. There is no drawer with "your" money on it, that was spent decades ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2018, 07:06 PM
 
Location: Ohio
20,163 posts, read 14,375,337 times
Reputation: 16359
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
I think we need to get rid of spousal benefits also. They were started when men were the main breadwinners. Women have the option to work and contribute into the SS system. If they stay home, they don't get benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
Having children is a choice. I don't have kids. Why should my SS be in jeopardy to finance someone made a choice to not work.
Your Social Security Benefits are in jeopardy solely due to the fact that the FICA Payroll Tax has not been increased since 1990.

The largest period of time without an increase was 12 years. It has now been 27 years without an increase to off-set for population growth and benefit increases due to Cost-of-Living.

You might want to consider the fact that there aren't enough jobs to employ every adult 16 and older, and that children are necessary to contribute to the retirement benefits.

I'm an ultra-conservative, and I don't have any issues with the current Social Security Benefit scheme.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top