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.
With regard to the idea of raising the SS tax wage cap, currently $113,700, would there be a side effect of making those people affected eligible for higher benefits at retirement ?? Since benefits are based on "highest 35 years" SS taxed wages, would the result be higher payouts that would just eat up the additional $$ that went into the SS "trust fund" ??
(although the fund might get some $$ back if these higher payments trigger a higher level of income tax on benefits come April 15)
Last edited by reed303; 06-10-2013 at 12:18 PM..
Reason: add'; info
With regard to the idea of raising the SS tax wage cap, currently $113,700, would there be a side effect of making those people affected eligible for higher benefits at retirement ?? Since benefits are based on "highest 35 years" SS taxed wages, would the result be higher payouts that would just eat up the additional $$ that went into the SS "trust fund" ??
(although the fund might get some $$ back if these higher payments trigger a higher level of income tax on benefits come April 15)
Yes, but there are those who want others to pay more and get less.
As most people know, earlier years amounts are adjusted for inflation. BH has worked 52 years and
is still working parttime, but will never eliminate the earlier years because of the adjusting.
Right a lot depends on your career path and when you started meaningful employment. My final salary and my first full post college salary was about 20 times greater which makes a difference. At a certain point the ratio decreases. At had earnings before graduating but they were not in the final 35 and not part of the ratio I gave.
With regard to the idea of raising the SS tax wage cap, currently $113,700, would there be a side effect of making those people affected eligible for higher benefits at retirement ?? Since benefits are based on "highest 35 years" SS taxed wages, would the result be higher payouts that would just eat up the additional $$ that went into the SS "trust fund" ??
Given my experience during the last ten years of my career, unequivocally no.
I just read it, too. I agree about phasing the early retirement age in. 64 seems reasonable. I don't understand how
there are so many people on disability. Why do children who have borderline issues collect disability?
I also see people work who are 'disabled'.
This gets my goat also. Where I live people who no longer want to work to support themselves use "mental illness" to get on the SS dole. One neighbor I knew well claimed to suffer from MPD now called DID. She collected for at least 10 years before she was thrown off. Another, a seamstress, claimed obsession with harming others and suicide. Mental illness can not be seen or found like a physical disability so they use it to get on the dole. They were teaching each other how to do this in one low-income community on the edge of town. They claimed they did better on SSD or SSI than working minimum wage, no-benefit jobs. Maybe they're right. Maybe all jobs should be required to pay a living wage since not everyone is college/university material.
Ok so the world can understand, I do but hopefully they do. You have a high skill set which is in demand. You have a high security clearance which is in demand so you have limited job competition and a much in demand skill set. It is hard to see the government doing much out sourcing overseas of work that requires a security clearance. Good for you and hopefully you will be career a model for others just starting out. Are you in the DC area if so finding decent housing there for 168K is a joke.
As I follow, he earned that in Iraq or Afghanistan where you "work" 7 12 hour days, have housing,food, medical and laundry provided and don't have to spend a nickel if you don't want to all the time your there.
My personal opinion is at age 62 to 65 folks are tired after working 40 years and they want to enjoy what's left of their life. Let the young 'uns have the jobs. I found when I retired at nearly 63 I was discriminated against big time, being the oldest in the office. Work til your 69 or 70...I think not. The old body starts getting aches and pains!
I'm 69 and still working, and I miss a lot less time than most of the younger ones that call in sick often.
This gets my goat also. Where I live people who no longer want to work to support themselves use "mental illness" to get on the SS dole. One neighbor I knew well claimed to suffer from MPD now called DID. She collected for at least 10 years before she was thrown off. Another, a seamstress, claimed obsession with harming others and suicide. Mental illness can not be seen or found like a physical disability so they use it to get on the dole. They were teaching each other how to do this in one low-income community on the edge of town. They claimed they did better on SSD or SSI than working minimum wage, no-benefit jobs. Maybe they're right. Maybe all jobs should be required to pay a living wage since not everyone is college/university material.
Aren't they required to pay back the system? I would hope so. Mental illness is way overused. Obesity
can be a disability, too. Completely curable. IMO. Does ugliness apply, too?
With regard to the idea of raising the SS tax wage cap, currently $113,700, would there be a side effect of making those people affected eligible for higher benefits at retirement ?? Since benefits are based on "highest 35 years" SS taxed wages, would the result be higher payouts that would just eat up the additional $$ that went into the SS "trust fund" ??
(although the fund might get some $$ back if these higher payments trigger a higher level of income tax on benefits come April 15)
I've thought of that myself. A solution for that would be means testing. Does someone making over $250,000 yearly after retirement really need Social Security? Instead of a higher paying benefit they could just get reimbursed what they paid in SS taxes spread out over a specified length of time.
I've thought of that myself. A solution for that would be means testing. Does someone making over $250,000 yearly after retirement really need Social Security? Instead of a higher paying benefit they could just get reimbursed what they paid in SS taxes spread out over a specified length of time.
In a lump sum with interest keyed to the historic rate of return on the S@P over that time. Folks would also game the system and still get their money up to at least age 70 and take SS at 62 and keep combined income streams under 250k. Remember a person can spend 400k and still make less than 250k by taking money from taxable accounts with much of it being previously taxed principle thus it isn't income
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.
