Social Security makes the biggest jump since 2012.
OK,, it hasn't happened yet but the projections are:
The Senior Citizens League, a nonpartisan senior advocacy organization, forecasts benefits will jump by 2.8 percent in 2019 ? which would be the largest increase in seven years. That is slightly down from the group?s previous forecast of 3 percent, but would still boost the average beneficiary?s check by $39 per month ? and raise the current maximum benefit collected by someone who retires at full retirement age by about $78 per month.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/social-security-checks-could-rise-by-most-since-2012
Another reason to keep Congress Republican.
The Senior Citizens League, a nonpartisan senior advocacy organization, forecasts benefits will jump by 2.8 percent in 2019 ? which would be the largest increase in seven years. That is slightly down from the group?s previous forecast of 3 percent, but would still boost the average beneficiary?s check by $39 per month ? and raise the current maximum benefit collected by someone who retires at full retirement age by about $78 per month.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/social-security-checks-could-rise-by-most-since-2012
Another reason to keep Congress Republican.
0
-
Social Security is an easy fix. We all acknowledge it isn't a savings account it is a tax. Why do we allow the wealthiest Americans a 12.6% tax break on all earnings over the Cap?
Simply remove the Cap and charge ALL earnings the full rate. That alone would resolve the issue and in order to prevent trickery apply the TAX to all earnings that way those who don't receive earnings as a pay check still pay in.
And before it gets said, some argue why should people have to pay in more when they can only draw out X dollars. We all pay for food stamps and welfare and we don't all draw it. That is why Social Security should be means tested and those who earn above a certain amount shouldn't be drawing it!0 -
I can see means testing coming first before payments get cut to Joe Average or as a method used to reduce payments to current retirees with substantial wealth. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by mogley98
Social Security is an easy fix. We all acknowledge it isn't a savings account it is a tax. Why do we allow the wealthiest Americans a 12.6% tax break on all earnings over the Cap?
Simply remove the Cap and charge ALL earnings the full rate. That alone would resolve the issue and in order to prevent trickery apply the TAX to all earnings that way those who don't receive earnings as a pay check still pay in.
And before it gets said, some argue why should people have to pay in more when they can only draw out X dollars. We all pay for food stamps and welfare and we don't all draw it. That is why Social Security should be means tested and those who earn above a certain amount shouldn't be drawing it!
I've read the RICH don't want Social Security and know they don't need Social Security. Think that would be OK with today's rich because many have said so. Personally think "MEANS TESTING" is a "slippery slope" after all, they paid in and MUCH MORE than the average person. Reminds me of the INCOME TAX. Only the rich would pay and only a few percentage points. Ha, Ha, Ha.
Buffet has gone on record with his "fixes" to avoid a shortfall in 2034. Have every confidence it will be fixed, with no reduction in benefits.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx (2018)
Income tax, when it started real low, and now.
Main article: History of taxation in the United States
In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. In fiscal year 1918, annual internal revenue collections for the first time passed the billion-dollar mark, rising to $5.4 billion by 1920.[14] The amount of income collected via income tax has varied dramatically, from 1% in the early days of US income tax to taxation rates of over 90% during WW2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Hunter Mag
Sorry Don but the politicians(puke)will keep SS bankrupt no matter what we do.
It's what they do on all levels of government. Federal, State, County, Municipal and even schools and park districts ect. [xx(]
Any possibility that when a politician suggest that SS payments have to be cut to save SS, that politician is either voted out of office or is never voted in?
If we as voters encourage government to give us money it doesn't have, government will do so.
Trump would not have been elected had he stated that he would cut SS payments, or eliminate cost of livening increases so that the system would pay for itself before the 'trust fund' runs out of money. Politicians from both parties continue to buy votes with SS dollars that do not exist. It would be fine if we were the ones that will suffer for it. The fact is that may suffer a little, but our children, grand children and their children will bear the brunt.
It is criminal and it is driven by a selfish electorate, not politicians.
The dollar will devaluate first then a War in the Middle East or vice versa and if we lose with our limited forces there it will only get worse. They are building up opposing forces over there everywhere.
It's not going to be some third-rate dictator this time but Russia, Turkey, and China.
serf
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-21/china-threatens-retaliation-against-us-over-military-sanctions
China, predictably, was furious, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang telling reporters in Beijing that the move seriously harmed bilateral relations and military ties.
"China expresses strong indignation at these unreasonable actions by the U.S. side and has already lodged stern representations."
"We strongly urge the U.S. side to immediately correct the mistake and rescind the so-called sanctions, otherwise the US side will necessarily bear responsibility for the consequences," he said, without giving details.
serf0 -
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
quote:Originally posted by Bottom Gun
quote:Jeez, whatever will I do with all those unexpected riches?
Don't worry the Medicare premium increase will offset any benefit increase.
[:(!] Welfare just doesn't seem to work for me.
Social Security is not welfare. It is an insurance policy funded by employee and employer FICA payments over the employees working career. It can be argued that Social Security is actually an annuity differing only in taxation rules.
Welfare is government support for the citizens and residents of society. It is intended to ensure that the poor can meet their basic human needs such as food and shelter...
Unfortunately, lack of proper oversight by government agencies and political pandering, welfare abuse is a way of life for some that are capable of providing for themselves...which , in my opinion, is fraudulent and no different than thievery.
This said, I will gladly accept any COLA increase to my Social Security check and have no qualms in doing so...As the old lady said while peeing in the ocean..."Every little bit helps." [:D]0 -
Being an old fart, I can well remember when Bob Hope proudly accepted his Social Security benefits. IMHO, with all of his hard work he deserved it. 0 -
The cap on income counting toward SS was a key part of the sales job FDR did to sell it to the people. The concept, so we were told, was that the government was setting aside our SS "contributions" as savings to be paid back to us when we retired. If all income earned by high income workers was included, then they would "unfairly" get a greater SS benefit when they retired. Even then, it was unfair that some people should have more than others. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
37 comments