Comments on: How Beneficial is Our Social Security System after Retirement?

By: Nan

Nan — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 04:22:16 +0000

With few exceptions, SS is working about like it was intended when FDR and the New Deal put it together. It is a lifesaver for me — I have worked most of my adult life, except when I was home with small children; but because of the disparity in women’s wages my SS is no where as large as many other older people. I still work part time, and will until I drop. I am lucky to be in good health. Yes, it does seem like SS dis has become a crapshoot. Some really deserving people are denied, while others are receiving on what I consider trivial ailments. Also, the system is overloaded so that many applicants who are eligible for dis, who may even be told by hearing officers that they will receive, are still waiting months or years into the future.

By: B. Kaplan

B. Kaplan — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 04:20:01 +0000

The whole PROBLEM to SS is that Congress was charged with dispursing SS. There were no requirements of how to utalize the money collected from those paying in. If congress has purchased annuity’s with that $, then ss would be funded beyond the next century. However, Congress has been using this # as a “private fund” to pay for things not in the budget, but somehow get done.
It might be too late to fix for everyone, but if word really gets out of how SS is screwed up because Congress doesn’t want to fix it. It will take away lots of their PLAY $$$.

By: Elsie Hutton

Elsie Hutton — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:53:52 +0000

Just wondering….. Our Social Security contributions have, over the years, been deposited into accounts in our names, is it not theft to divert the monies in our accounts to fund other uses? That being said, is there a case for a class action suit against Congress for the repayment of the “loans” that have depleated one leg of our retirement stool?

By: mike

mike — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 02:40:34 +0000

do members of congress, senate. house of legeslators contribute to s.s? Is it against a government employee’s constituitional right to be subject to a drug test?

By: M. Hamilton

M. Hamilton — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 02:39:47 +0000

Even though my husband receives a SS benefit, reduced by not being vested for 30 years and being a federal gov’t retiree, I will never receive any spousal benefit because Congress years ago stole the benefits of gov’t employees to ‘save’ the SS system. Next time don’t say ‘everybody receives benefits’ when they don’t, makes for sloppy reporting!

By: dale coberly

dale coberly — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 01:49:07 +0000

ss is not paying out more than it is taking in. because the boomers prepaid a lot of their retirement costs, there is a huge bank account full of social security money. some of that money is being used now to bridge the recession… the original purpose of the Trust Fund. Social Security can pay for itself with no changes until about 2037. After that if the next generation is living longer than the last, premiums (the payroll tax) might need to go up… about twenty cents per week per year while incomes are going up ten dollars per week per year. in other words there is nothing at all wrong with Social Security, and there never will be.

of course “the rich” should be able to collect Social Security. they paid for their benefits just like everyone else. Social Security is not welfare.

trouble is most of what you have heard about social security for the past twenty or more years has been essentially lies by Peterson foundation and Cato foundation, repeated by a press that does not have the ability or motivation to analyze the numbers, or even understand the basic facts about Social Security.

By: Mr. Hill

Mr. Hill — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:22:37 +0000

The condition and inherent unfairness of Social Security not withstanding, after reading this post, and many posted before it, the downward spiral of intelligent, gramatically correct writing continues. Does anybody use any other punctuation mark besides periods?

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:16:12 +0000

For years Dems have called regressive programs progresive and gotten away with it.
They would have us think that it is the natural way of things for those THEY consider wealthy, to pay more than they do, or more directly just give them something for nothing.

Now that we have the top 5 or 10 percent of earners paying most of the taxes, you would think they might stop. But they will not stop it seems, until thier entire lot in life is free.

If some of these “Thinkers” would get off thier socialist butts and try really working for a living, they to could get screwed over by lifes loafers.

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:50:45 +0000

I have had many surgeries over the last 29 years. Once when I was waiting in the admitting office i saw a brochure from SS. It said that if you are permanently disabled you may qualify with help with your medical bills.

After getting home I called and SS said i should come to their office.

I did .They said I had to quit my job in order to collect! I continued to pay in and went back t work.

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:47:27 +0000

Most of us don’t know this but there are benefits beyond retirement income. When you apply SS asks if you are poor. If so, you don’t have to be 65 or a US citizen to get benefits.As a matter of fact you can collect as soon as you land from a foreign country. Many get double benefits by lying about living with their spouse. They use 2 addresses.They each apply and are granted a check each.

Think this is a good use for our SS payments? There is no other country in the World that does this.