Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 10-16-2012, 06:51 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
858 posts, read 2,992,418 times
Reputation: 708

Advertisements

Per USA Today; 8:43AM EDT October 16. 2012 -

WASHINGTON (AP) — More than 56 million Social Security recipients will see their monthly payments increase by 1.7% in January.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-16-2012, 07:15 AM
 
2,410 posts, read 5,817,731 times
Reputation: 1917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
It's a not so obvious way to decrease benefits over time.
It's certainly obvious to me.......I think you are correct. Keep increases below actual inflation and the gov't pays out way less to beneficiaries. The issue of taxing SS benefits is another way that the benefits are being reduced. Back in the 1980's, Greenspan's report was adopted by congress in the Reagan administration to tax SS benefits for individuals with incomes over 25,000 and couples over 34,000. Those thresholds have not changed since the mid-1980's, which is another way they are taking money back from SS recipients. Those thresholds are not indexed for inflation. $25,000 is a very different amount today compared with the 1980's. The gov't goal is to tax all of the SS benefits eventually (according to Greenspan's report back in the '80's), and this has been happening under both dems and repubs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 07:19 AM
 
31,683 posts, read 41,024,360 times
Reputation: 14434
Quote:
Originally Posted by xz2y View Post
It's certainly obvious to me.......I think you are correct. Keep increases below actual inflation and the gov't pays out way less to beneficiaries. The issue of taxing SS benefits is another way that the benefits are being reduced. Back in the 1980's, Greenspan's report was adopted by congress in the Reagan administration to tax SS benefits for individuals with incomes over 25,000 and couples over 34,000. Those thresholds have not changed since the mid-1980's, which is another way they are taking money back from SS recipients. Those thresholds are not indexed for inflation. $25,000 is a very different amount today compared with the 1980's. The gov't goal is to tax all of the SS benefits eventually (according to Greenspan's report back in the '80's), and this has been happening under both dems and repubs.
Now this we can all agree on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 09:41 AM
 
Location: prescott az
6,957 posts, read 12,053,480 times
Reputation: 14244
Where is this information that Medicare Part B will raise the premiums 9% ??? All I can find are rumors and undocumented info that isn't confirmed. Does anyone have REAL knowledge of this???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 01:05 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,816,250 times
Reputation: 18304
I would like to see a link to medicare increase also. Besides one increase over a number of years cannot be mesured equal with one years COLA increase even if true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 02:10 PM
 
Location: Not.here
2,827 posts, read 4,339,506 times
Reputation: 2377
This is from an associated press article:

Quote:
Some of next year's COLA could be wiped out by higher Medicare premiums, which are deducted from Social Security payments. The Medicare Part B premium, which covers doctor visits, is expected to rise by about $7 per month for 2013, according to government projections.

The premium is currently $99.90 a month for most seniors. Medicare is expected to announce the premium for 2013 in the coming weeks.

The Associated Press: Social Security benefits to go up by 1.7 percent
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
25,577 posts, read 56,455,902 times
Reputation: 23372
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhxBarb View Post
Where is this information that Medicare Part B will raise the premiums 9% ??? All I can find are rumors and undocumented info that isn't confirmed. Does anyone have REAL knowledge of this???
Totally NOT TRUE.

Medicare Part B premium is subject to a hold-harmless provision and cannot increase percentage-wise more than the SS COLA.

Last year premium was $96.40. COLA was 3.6%, so premium rose to $99.90.
Quote:
This was due to a “hold harmless” provision in the law that prevents Medicare premiums from increasing for most participants if there is no social security cost-of-living adjustment. Since social security benefits will increase by 3.6 percent in 2012, most people will see their Medicare Part B premium increase from $96.40 to $99.90.

Medicare Part B Premiums for 2012
So, if it is $99.90 now, new premium will be +1.7%, or +1.70 = $101.60, or $102.

Granted if your SS benefit is $75/mo. and only goes up $1.30, an increase of $2 is more significant.

Ya' know, OP, don't start a thread with such an inflammatory title without the facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 04:16 PM
 
31,683 posts, read 41,024,360 times
Reputation: 14434
Not saying anyone is right or anyone is wrong but the following is from a mainstream publication so any agreement or disagreement is with them.

Social Security checks to increase, but it may be hard to notice - latimes.com

Quote:
The Medicare Part B premium is now about $100 a month and the government is projecting an expected increase of about $7 a month when new rate schedules are announced soon. The Part B premium covers doctor’s visits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 04:23 PM
 
31,683 posts, read 41,024,360 times
Reputation: 14434
I have a hunch that part of the confusion is that new Medicare recipients (like us) are not protected by the hold harmless clause and we will pay the full additional amount as will future retirees along with the very wealthy now and others not protected by the hold harmless provision. Is that possibe? Some folks talking apples and other oranges? So those currently receiving will be held to a 1.7% increase and those new and future retirees will pay more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2012, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
25,577 posts, read 56,455,902 times
Reputation: 23372
MadMan would know. He hasn't been around for a while.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:11 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top