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.
At least 10 of my friends/acquaintances have died between 60 & 65, after paying into SS and medicare (maximum pmts) their entire professional lives. None collected on either.
There are spouse benefits for spouse at time of death and also ex spouse if they were married at least 10 years and ex did not remarry.
Since your Social Security benefits - - unlike private-sector retirement plans - expire when you do...
They don't expire IF you had a spouse or ex-spouse for 10 years that has not remarried. Those survivor benefits are half of your expected monthly payment. Unless the spouse/ex has their own SS that is a higher monthly payment- then they likely will choose to receive the higher check from their own work history.
FYI SSI (Supplemental Security Income) is not Social Security at all.2 entirely different programs.
I luv ppl who think they know "everything", talk like pompus arses and in the end have added nothing to the discussion.
General welfare clause, so you think the welfare clause ONLY exists in the preamble???
Text of preamble;
Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
See it there, now see it here, in ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 (Enumerated Powers), CLAUSE 1:
Quote:
The Congress SHALL (emph added) have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
While the preamble says they government should "promote" the general welfare the word SHALL in Article 1, Section 8, clause 1 makes it clear that congress has the power to provide for the general welfare.
Explain how an elderly immigrant gets around the work requirements. That's a new one for me. I have never heard of someone getting SS without paying in fica for the required years. I'm thinking you got hoodwinked by a talking head spreading half truths.
It has been going on for years.
A couple comes here legally from, say Russia.
After they are here for a while they apply to "sponsor" their parents. Part of being a sponsor is to provide a roof over their head, food etc.
AFTER the parents get here and move in with the children, the parents go to the local SS office and claim that the children will no longer provide those things for them.
They are now coincided indigent.and qualify for SS benefits.
As with most gov't programs there is always to learn how to scam it costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars every year.
The formula they're using now is 150% of what you're entitled to in Social Security if you would retire at 65/66. So some people are getting around $1000.
I wasn't aware that SSI wasn't part of the SS fund.
Never was, it is administered by SS but payments are not from the trust fund. When you apply for SSDI you should also apply for SSI at the same time. No, the SSI payments are usually very small, half to a 1/3 of a SSDI payment. I have a family member that received SSDI for a closed period (about two years) and almost half the time was eaten by a "waiting period" and a period of SSI payments. SSDI was a little under $1250 a month and their SSI was about $450 a month.
Bottom line immigrants with no work history aren't magically claiming Social Security old age benefits.
After they are here for a while they apply to "sponsor" their parents. Part of being a sponsor is to provide a roof over their head, food etc.
AFTER the parents get here and move in with the children, the parents go to the local SS office and claim that the children will no longer provide those things for them.
They are now coincided indigent.and qualify for SS benefits.
As with most gov't programs there is always to learn how to scam it costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars every year.
Wrong, you're confusing SSI for SS. Not the same at all.
As for wiggle room to claiming SSI, that isn't that easy....
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzards27
Yahoo answers? Really? FYI, your other link is bad, at least on this phone.
As for Yahoo!, this answer seems to counter your claim...
" The rules for non-citizens being eligible for Supplemental Security Income are pretty strict.
You must be legally in the United States and be blind or disabled on or before August 22, 1996 and have already been on SSI;
or you must be a legal permanent residence under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and have a total of 40 credits of work in the United States (in some situations a spouse’s or parent’s work also may count);
or be and active duty member of the U.S. armed forces;
or be a member of a federally recognized Indian tribe;
or be certain noncitizens admitted as Amerasian immigrants;
or be Cuban/Haitian entrants under the Refugee Education Assistance Act.
Some refugees and other noncitizens can get SSI for up to seven years.
It's so very hard to get SSI benefits, and with the very few ways that people can legally immigrate to the US, I don't think people are abusing the system. I am also comforted to know that people who've taken the necessary steps to be here legally will be taken care of in the event of a disabling illness or accident. When families fall apart because of a disability, the whole community can pay the cost. I also wouldn't want the US to start deporting people who are legally here because they are or have become disabled."
There are spouse benefits for spouse at time of death and also ex spouse if they were married at least 10 years and ex did not remarry.
Most were women. At least half were unmarried and had no children. Those who were married did not earn more than their husbands. There is one man in the group (died at 61) and his divorced wife started collecting his benefit when she retired (at 65) rather than hers, which gave her a few hundred more per month.
Those who say that the system is doomed and should be scrapped entirely need to educate themselves with the facts. A combination of a few of these proposals will make the system entirely solvent.
I luv ppl who think they know "everything", talk like pompus arses and in the end have added nothing to the discussion.
General welfare clause, so you think the welfare clause ONLY exists in the preamble???
Text of preamble;
See it there, now see it here, in ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 (Enumerated Powers), CLAUSE 1:
While the preamble says they government should "promote" the general welfare the word SHALL in Article 1, Section 8, clause 1 makes it clear that congress has the power to provide for the general welfare.
the general welfare of the NATION...not the individual
the general welfare of the NATION...not the individual
Well, if the NATION is not composed of 330 million individuals then I'm the Son of Sam.
What comprises "The Nation?"
Is it the land?
Is it the government?
Or is it The People?
How about "All of the above?"
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.
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.
