Social Security Means Test

[buggyone]

I was reading recently in The Washington Post that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments.

The idea is to require a yearly "means test" that will adjust Social Security retirement annually based on other income such as company pensions as well as the amounts of assets a person has in the form of house, car, investments, and other assets.

This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt.

[janmcn]

I was reading recently in The Washington Post that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments.

The idea is to require a yearly "means test" that will adjust Social Security retirement annually based on other income such as company pensions as well as the amounts of assets a person has in the form of house, car, investments, and other assets.

This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt.


Great idea. Social Security, along with Medicare, is bankrupting this country, and action must be taken to reduce the national debt.

[mulligan]

I paid into it for 50 years. I earned what I'm getting (principle plus interest). If they want to change the rules, do it for those just starting. There are plenty of other ways to reduce the debt.

[billethkid]

Reasons why SS is running out of money:

Not enough people paying into it

More people getting benefits than paid into the fund

Constant borrowing/taking from the fund for non SS programs

Illegal aliens getting benefits from SS

And too many more political actions.

[mixsonci]

I paid into it for 50 years. I earned what I'm getting (principle plus interest). If they want to change the rules, do it for those just starting. There are plenty of other ways to reduce the debt.

I agree totally, I'm depending on the little I'll get now to supplement my monthly income. I've paid into for almost 50 years and I earned it. They can pay the national dept with their HUGE salaries and even bigger PENSIONS.

[folkh]

I was reading recently in The Washington Post that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments.

The idea is to require a yearly "means test" that will adjust Social Security retirement annually based on other income such as company pensions as well as the amounts of assets a person has in the form of house, car, investments, and other assets.

This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt.

Why don't the fiscal conservatives for go there Gov. pension and go on S.S. and see how they feel about this move. I'm sure with their assets they would get close to zero for a pension or from S.S. Why is it always the working class that has to foot the bill for the mistakes of WASHINGTON!!!!!

[Papa Cuma]

I say we take all the politicians to the back of the courthouse and shoot them.

[Rags123]

I was reading recently in The Washington Post that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments.

The idea is to require a yearly "means test" that will adjust Social Security retirement annually based on other income such as company pensions as well as the amounts of assets a person has in the form of house, car, investments, and other assets.

This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt.


Could you supply an actual link to that story ? I have been checking in order to read in context and cannot find it at all.

Thanks

The only story in the Post that mentions MEANS TESTING was an article about a woman who drove her Mercedes to apply for government assistance....she is known as the "Mercedes Mom"

The article, if this is the one you are "quoting" sort of...had nothing to do with Social Security directly and was just mentioned in this paragraph

"One point that was sort of lost in the story is that owning a car has nothing to do with being eligible for WIC payments. The WIC program is a type of federal assistance that is income-based, or “means tested,” meaning that only people whose income falls below a certain level are eligible for the program. Medicaid and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families are other examples of these means-tested programs. These programs differ from the federal “entitlement” programs, in which people are entitled to receive the benefits if they meet certain non-income tests. For example, people who lose their jobs are entitled to unemployment benefits regardless of their income. The same is true of Social Security and Medicare, which are based on a person’s age, not income."


Should ‘Mercedes Mom’ have sold the car before applying for government assistance? - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2014/07/19/should-mercedes-mom-have-sold-the-car-before-applying-for-government-assistance/)

Your opening post was a bit deceiving and out of context...we should supply links and actual quotes to save misunderstanding

[maybe]

I paid into it for 50 years. I earned what I'm getting (principle plus interest). If they want to change the rules, do it for those just starting. There are plenty of other ways to reduce the debt.

The SS system has never been based upon getting your "principle plus interest". The benefits are simply whatever congress sets. We have no contractual right to current benefits, which is why some members of congress can be considering reductions for people of certain income and wealth levels. Generally, earlier generations received much more in benefits than P +I . That does not mean that congress should ignore the fact that many people made retirement decisions in reliance upon their expected SS benefits.

[Penguin]

Great idea. Social Security, along with Medicare, is bankrupting this country, and action must be taken to reduce the national debt.

WHAT!!! WHAT!!!!! Welfare and Medicaid are bankrupting this country. Have you any idea how much money this country wastes. How many gazillions we give away to foreign countries. Shame on you for blasting 2 programs put in place many years ago to help people, who have paid into them, to help with their retirement. Sometimes I cant believe what I read on this forum.

[janmcn]

WHAT!!! WHAT!!!!! Welfare and Medicaid are bankrupting this country. Have you any idea how much money this country wastes. How many gazillions we give away to foreign countries. Shame on you for blasting 2 programs put in place many years ago to help people, who have paid into them, to help with their retirement. Sometimes I cant believe what I read on this forum.

All Tax Revenue Will Go Toward Entitlements and Net Interest by 2030 (http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/entitlements-historical-tax-levels)


No bashing on my part, just a simple statement of fact that all tax revenues will go to pay social security, medicare and debt by the year 2030.

[Rags123]

Until I see a link, I suggest this entire conversation is based on a very false premise.

[dewilson58]

:sigh:

[onslowe]

For those retirees with income in the hundreds of thousands, twenty or thirty thousand is not a meaningful subtraction - especially for the benefit of all other retirees. The problem is doing anything at all to tamper with those already participating in the system. Bad precedent for money hungry politicians and activists with all sorts of 'social' agendas.

As a matter of history and buyer's remorse I guess, wouldn't the formerly inviolate Social Security system be in better shape if LBJ was never elected in '64? The country bought a boatload of lies, and now is inheriting the wind.

[Chi-Town]

The joke of it all is who is going to administer this yearly means test? The IRS or maybe the census bureau? Maybe a web site we can all log into? All good ideas, huh?

[folkh]

For those retirees with income in the hundreds of thousands, twenty or thirty thousand is not a meaningful subtraction - especially for the benefit of all other retirees. The problem is doing anything at all to tamper with those already participating in the system. Bad precedent for money hungry politicians and activists with all sorts of 'social' agendas.

As a matter of history and buyer's remorse I guess, wouldn't the formerly inviolate Social Security system be in better shape if LBJ was never elected in '64? The country bought a boatload of lies, and now is inheriting the wind.

Right LBJ was the problem, prior SS was a separate account not in the general fund.

[Rags123]

Great idea. Social Security, along with Medicare, is bankrupting this country, and action must be taken to reduce the national debt.


I assume that everyone is aware that "that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments." is NOT TRUE and was made up.

As is this...."This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt."

ALL MADE UP....not true. Simply, it appears, just stirring the pot and not even worthy, as it's not true.

[Ragman]

Sounds like good old election year third rail "scare the old folks" tactics

:eek::eek::eek:

[njbchbum]

Concept has been batted around more than once and more than recently.

Here's a bit from a while back:
http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/public_policy_institute/econ_sec/2012/option-means-test-social-security-benefits-AARP-ppi-econ-sec.pdf

[REDCART]

Right LBJ was the problem, prior SS was a separate account not in the general fund.

It's called creative accounting. By including SS in the general budget LBJ was able to take credit for a balanced budget. He offset the cost of the Vietnam war (on paper) with the FICA taxes earmarked for SS. It gave the impression that we had a balanced budget. There was really no other reason to consolidate SS into the federal budget, either then or now. As you know SS benefi payments are a mandatory obligation, not discretionary, and does not require annual appropriations by Congress.

[Rags123]

Concept has been batted around more than once and more than recently.

Here's a bit from a while back:
http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/public_policy_institute/econ_sec/2012/option-means-test-social-security-benefits-AARP-ppi-econ-sec.pdf


No doubt....BUT

It was not covered "recently" in the Washington Post !!!

And to take an article on welfare fraud and turn it into something totally opposite, to me anyway, is stirring the pot for some reason.

Social Security was mentioned in passing in an article about the rules on welfare and a lady signing up in a new Mercedes because it is allowed to own that car and collect welfare.

Big difference in my opinion. If I have insulted you or anyone I apologize. Just seems to me that we need, not lies, but truth in discussion 1

[njbchbum]

No doubt....BUT

It was not covered "recently" in the Washington Post !!!

And to take an article on welfare fraud and turn it into something totally opposite, to me anyway, is stirring the pot for some reason.

Social Security was mentioned in passing in an article about the rules on welfare and a lady signing up in a new Mercedes because it is allowed to own that car and collect welfare.

Big difference in my opinion. If I have insulted you or anyone I apologize. Just seems to me that we need, not lies, but truth in discussion 1

Not worth the time to discuss. One must always consider the topic and the source. Do like me and go enjoy yourself! :)

[l2ridehd]

There is always talk about Social Security going broke, but you never hear we have to cut welfare because it's going broke. Guess it's because most of those that get SS paid into it, but most of those getting welfare didn't. Interesting.

[Villages PL]

Means testing already started a few years ago. If you earn a certain amount of money, you will pay a higher Medicare premium. The higher your income the higher your premium will be.

So, for example, if you sell a lot of stocks one year, taking big profits, you might expect to pay a higher Medicare premium the following year.

The problem with it is that it's not indexed for inflation. Right now no one cares because it only hits those who are considered wealthy. But as incomes rise for future generations, millions will be affected. This will be the same as the Alternative Minimum Tax. At first it was only designed to hit a few of the top income earners. But as years went by it affected millions of taxpayers because it was not indexed for inflation.

[coolkayaker1]

If there is a Social Security means test which may prevent some of those that have paid into it from benefitting from their forced past SS contributions during employment, isn't that, in effect, a tax?

Taxation without representation will go to the Supreme Court before ever being enacted.

[Villages PL]

I was reading recently in The Washington Post that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments.

The idea is to require a yearly "means test" that will adjust Social Security retirement annually based on other income such as company pensions as well as the amounts of assets a person has in the form of house, car, investments, and other assets.

This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt.

So, in the future, it will be more of a welfare program? Everyone must pay into it but you only get back what they think you need. Isn't that welfare?

[sunnyatlast]

The Congress could vote for all of us "constituents" in the country to have the same retirement and health/life/dental/optical/prescription/long-term-care insurances they have.

That would be a nice method of "means" testing: Anybody who's earned less pension and insurance than Congressional members earned gets the same package members of Congress get after being in office for 5 years......

Retirement Benefits of Congress Vs. You | Bankrate.com (http://www.bankrate.com/finance/retirement/retirement-benefits-congress-vs-you.aspx)

[Steve9930]

I say we take all the politicians to the back of the courthouse and shoot them.

That's too easy, make them work for a living.

[Penguin]

The Congress could vote for all of us "constituents" in the country to have the same retirement and health/life/dental/optical/prescription/long-term-care insurances they have.

That would be a nice method of "means" testing: Anybody who's earned less pension and insurance than Congressional members earned gets the same package members of Congress get after being in office for 5 years......

Retirement Benefits of Congress Vs. You | Bankrate.com (http://www.bankrate.com/finance/retirement/retirement-benefits-congress-vs-you.aspx)

You should run for office. I would vote for you.

[RVRoadie]

I assume that everyone is aware that "that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments." is NOT TRUE and was made up.

As is this...."This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt."

ALL MADE UP....not true. Simply, it appears, just stirring the pot and not even worthy, as it's not true.

In our politically divided country, it's no longer necessary for something to be true, it just has to sound like it could be true.

[Bizdoc]

The Congress could vote for all of us "constituents" in the country to have the same retirement and health/life/dental/optical/prescription/long-term-care insurances they have.

That would be a nice method of "means" testing: Anybody who's earned less pension and insurance than Congressional members earned gets the same package members of Congress get after being in office for 5 years......

Retirement Benefits of Congress Vs. You | Bankrate.com (http://www.bankrate.com/finance/retirement/retirement-benefits-congress-vs-you.aspx)

They (amazingly) pay 100% of the cost of dental/optical and long term care. They pay roughly 25% of medical/prescription.

[buggyone]

I assume that everyone is aware that "that there is now a move being put forward by fiscal conservatives regarding Social Security retirement payments." is NOT TRUE and was made up.

As is this...."This would, proponents say, reduce the national debt."

ALL MADE UP....not true. Simply, it appears, just stirring the pot and not even worthy, as it's not true.

Just Google "Social Security Means Test" and you will come up with an entire list of articles that say there is a move being put forward for a means test for Social Security retirement benefits. No where did I say it would be happening or that I advocate it.

I have attached one such link and there are many more sites.

http://www.actuary.org/files/Means_Testing_SS_IB.pdf

[Rags123]

Just Google "Social Security Means Test" and you will come up with an entire list of articles that say there is a move being put forward for a means test for Social Security retirement benefits. No where did I say it would be happening or that I advocate it.

I have attached one such link and there are many more sites.

http://www.actuary.org/files/Means_Testing_SS_IB.pdf

Still waiting for the Washington Post article that you said you read ! The article that alluded to the move to help the budget ?

[sunnyatlast]

You should run for office. I would vote for you.

But I would not run on such a platform. I know Congress would not be concerned with where the additional trillions of dollars would come from to fund such a program. They'd just vote to print money to do it, and that is dangerous to the already crumbling economy.

[sunnyatlast]

They (amazingly) pay 100% of the cost of dental/optical and long term care. They pay roughly 25% of medical/prescription.

Here are the actual premiums for FL non-postal federal employees, fee for service medical plans:

http://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/healthcare/plan-information/premiums/2014/nonpostal-ffs.pdf

[The Mountaineer]

Only 2 percent of benefits are paid to people with more than $100,000 in other income, according to AARP. So means-testing would do little to reduce the gap between income and payout. It's a political ploy, obviously, to sooth the masses. Far more would be saved by the U.S. purchasing 20 fewer planes, at $35 million apiece, from Congress' most loyal campaign contributors. Think that $700 million savings will happen?

[784caroline]

Just Google "Social Security Means Test" and you will come up with an entire list of articles that say there is a move being put forward for a means test for Social Security retirement benefits. No where did I say it would be happening or that I advocate it.

I have attached one such link and there are many more sites.

http://www.actuary.org/files/Means_Testing_SS_IB.pdf

This article is from 2012...and that was the last Congress. All Congressional bills introduced in 2012 expired if not acted upon by the end of That congress (December 2012). A Congressional session lasts for only 2 years and old bills would have to be reintroduced, Its now 2014...with this Congress coming to and end in December.

Do you have anything current!!

[old moe]

Reasons why SS is running out of money:

Not enough people paying into it

More people getting benefits than paid into the fund

Constant borrowing/taking from the fund for non SS programs

Illegal aliens getting benefits from SS WHAT!!!

And too many more political actions. WHAT AGAIN!!!

YES We PAID INTO IT , ITS NOT A GIFT FROM THE GOVN"T.:pray: