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.
I still wanna know what substitutions people at the bottom are expected to make.
they substitute living by themselves to cost sharing and living with a roomie .
but as typically happens you are asking us this question when it is you who needs to come up with the answer .
see , successful people are able to arrive at the answers to all the questions you ask so they are not the people at the bottom . the unsuccessful people want others to hand them an answer .
they substitute living by themselves to cost sharing and living with a roomie .
but as typically happens you are asking us this question when it is you who needs to come up with the answer .
see , successful people are able to arrive at the answers to all the questions you ask so they are not the people at the bottom . the unsuccessful people want others to hand them an answer .
sorry -your problem to figuer out
If you visit CCRC's and 55 plus retirement communities you will see multiple floor plans of houses/condo's with two master bedrooms each with their own full bath accessible only from the bedroom. They will often have a powder room for company. They are designed for related and unrelated people to live together. Siblings often will in retirement and it makes it so much more affordable for the individual.
Not at all. Many public pension funds, as well as private pension funds, do not give COLAs or the COLAs they do give are less than the CPI index they use. There's absolutely no guarantee at all that a pension fund guarantees COLAs every year or ever. YOU ARE WRONG.
I administered a public pension fund and am intimately familiar with them. (Rolls eyes).
While you were answering another poster, not me, I find your wording a little strange. Pension funds, even if we limit the discussion to public pension funds, vary all over the map, so your familiarity with the one you administered does not mean you are familiar with all of them. Consider that in each of the 50 states, there are multiple public pension funds (law enforcement, teachers, state employees, county and/or city employees, etc.). That is a huge number of different funds.
There are some which do guarantee a COLA every year, such as CalSTRS, which gives a 2% non-compounded COLA every year regardless of the rate of inflation however determined. If you mean that the California legislature could take away that COLA, then I would agree that the word "guaranteed" may be too strong. So let's put it this way: The way the CalSTRS system now operates, retirees get a 2% non-compounded COLA every year and that has been the case for a VERY long time. To change that would require an act of the California legislature, just like changing anything about the Social Security COLA would require an act of the United States Congress.
Same here NYgal. Mine is from the State of AZ. Went up a couple dollars once, that's all.
And if you look at the pension status in the state of Illinois, you will know THEY will NEVER get an increase. They may not even get their regular pension, ever.
If there is a COLA next year, Medicare will increase the Part B premium to match the amount of the COLA. . .in other words, it would be a wash.
You are correct! Best to plan for no increase on the monthly check; that is more than likely the reality than just hoping it won't be another zero increase for the fourth time since 2009: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/colaseries.html
And unfortunately it played out this way. . . no increase on s/s check, again. No big surprise.
Sometimes there are funny little technicalities that get in the way of figuring things out. I just got my letter today from Social Security, the one explaining about the COLA. It lists my "monthly amount before deductions" as $170, then $105 as the Medicare deduction, leaving the amount I receive as $65. That's the same as it was before.
The 0.3% COLA on $170 comes to 51 cents. SS deals only in whole dollar amounts, so perhaps they rounded up to $1 for the increase and my Medicare was increased from $104 to $105, thus leaving my net amount of $65 unchanged?
None of this matters at all, because the increase is too small to matter, even if it were not compensated for by an increase in Medicare. So all the computations are just little games, devoid of significance.
Even assuming a monthly SS retirement benefit of $2,500, the 0.3% COLA only comes to $7.50, which I suppose would be rounded off to $8. Eight dollars a month is not going to be noticeable to anybody.
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.
