Social Security Does It Again

[chicksinger]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

[kkingston57]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

Remember my working days. Company did not have COLA raises and merit only which was capped out at 5%. Insurance costs alone well exceeded the raises.

[fdpaq0580]

I think most of us are lucky to have SS. If it goes away it might not be coming back.

[ElDiabloJoe]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...
According to my 95 year old mother who has been on SS for decades, that is the name of the game. Every COLA gets eaten up by increases in Medicare. It's a zero-sum, in fact over time a losing, game.

[manaboutown]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

You got off easy. My part B is $628.90 in 2025 due to IRMAA.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I remember when hubby's company shut down his department, and I was only working part time (because we could afford for me to only work part time - until hubby's company shut down his department).

Thankfully his company paid the COBRA payments for 18 months, while we had to put the house up for sale and "retire" a couple years earlier than we had planned on.

The premiums for our health care plan exceeded $2000/month. When it ran out, we qualified for Medicaid up north. But then when we move to Florida just a couple months later, we were saddled with having to pay for our health care premiums for the first time - pretty much ever. Between the two of us, we had always worked for companies that covered our premiums 100%. When I was working full time, mine covered mine, but not his. When he worked at the company that shut down, for 25 years, his company covered both of us at 100%.

Surprise surprise, we now have to dole out almost $400/month for health insurance that first year here, even though we had NO income - his pension hadn't yet kicked in and neither of us were old enough for social security. But the revenue from the sale of our house up north was in the bank, which meant we wouldn't qualify for Medicaid.

The second year the pension kicked in, and our income level was low enough for subsidies, since we weren't getting another huge check for the sale of any house. So we were fortunate to only have to pay something like $20/month.

But then he got social security - and not old enough for medicare. So our premiums went up to around $80/month. Then my social security kicked in, and we had to pay $150/month (give or take). And then he was old enough for medicare, so now we pay around $325/month between the deduction from his SS check and my premium payment.

So for people who "only" have $5 more per month after expenses - you don't have to have Medicare A, B, and D. If you have to pay extra for C above what they take out of your social security check, then you're earning enough money that you can afford it. Or you're picking a lousy plan.

If you really mean "deductions" and not "premiums" then - wow. Consider yourself lucky. I had 0 deduction this year but a $9200 out of pocket expense max. So I just had to pay my co-pays and discounted expenses - nothing was "covered" 100% other than yearly exams. I had to pay for the routine bloodwork (CBCs and thyroid panel) for the yearly exam. Next year I'll have a $7500 deductible.

So nope - no sympathy at all if your annual deductible went up to $150 or whatever. If you meant premium - welcome to the rest of the world.

[retiredguy123]

You got off easy. My part B is $628.00 in 2025 due to IRMAA.
I feel your pain. My Part B premium would exceed my Federal Blue Cross catastrophic limit, so it is not even worth buying. Every retired Federal employee should make this comparison and decide if Medicare is worth the cost. Thankfully, Medicare is optional for Federal retirees.

[golfing eagles]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

How is it that your part B is ONLY $125????? I was under the impression (maybe a false one) that the minimum part B premium is $174.70, going up to $185/month. People with high incomes are subject to IRMA and pay double or even triple.

[MplsPete]

...I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month...

There are two fees here, which you are mixing up. My Part B is going $174.70 to $185. That is the standard Part B fee now, $185. Therefore the standard increase is $10.30 which is insignificant I feel, and your $5 increase is even less concerning. I see you reference a $34 increase for "Part B/C" So, much of the increase must be for Part C.
Do you know that there are many Part C with zero monthly premium, and they are not much different than the ones you pay $23 or $73 or $172 for? (Those are the non-zero premiums for Part C in Sumter County.) On all Part C plans, Medicare pays the insurer about $1100 per month to take care of you, so any premium you pay is almost insignificant to the insurer. Go for the zero premium plans. Both Humana and UnitedHealthCare / AARP offer zero premium plans. Go talk to those people often discussed here, who give Medicare advice in TV. Tell them you are unhappy that your Part B/C is increasing, and ask how you can avoid it. There will be some trade offs, but the $276 to $2064 you save in premiums per year may exceed what extra fees you incur through the year.

[rustyp]

You got off easy. My part B is $628.00 in 2025 due to IRMAA.

If I have this right if you have an AGI (that's income after all deductions/write-offs) of $500000 single or $750000 married joint the IRMMA would be $594/month. Oh my how can one afford groceries with this system.

[golfing eagles]

If I have this right if you have an AGI (that's income after all deductions/write-offs) of $500000 single or $750000 married joint the IRMMA would be $594/month. Oh my how can one afford groceries with this system.

Perhaps he has responsibilities commensurate with that salary. Everyone is not equal. CEOs of corporations with 100,000 employees get paid more than high school dropouts.

[MrFlorida]

I think most of us are lucky to have SS. If it goes away it might not be coming back.

If they stopped all the freebies, we wouldn't have to worry....

[rustyp]

How is it that your part B is ONLY $125????? I was under the impression (maybe a false one) that the minimum part B premium is $174.70, going up to $185/month. People with high incomes are subject to IRMA and pay double or even triple.

Medicare premiums can only increase by no more than your COLA for the year. It is possible someone has a $125 premium because their COLA real dollar raise (not percent) is very low. In this case this person has achieved no net gain for any expenses other than Medicare for years. The polar opposite of the "over educated" CEO problem.

[manaboutown]

If I have this right if you have an AGI (that's income after all deductions/write-offs) of $500000 single or $750000 married joint the IRMMA would be $594/month. Oh my how can one afford groceries with this system.

I am single. I pay the normal $185.00 plus have an additional $443.90 confiscated due to IRMAA, so $628.90. We ALL should pay the same, just as we do for gasoline, Big Macs and iMacs. That is only fair but as we all know life is not fair.

[golfing eagles]

I am single. I pay the normal $185.00 plus have an additional $443.90 confiscated due to IRMAA, so $628.90. We ALL should pay the same, just as we do for gasoline, Big Macs and iMacs. That is only fair but as we all know life is not fair.

Just another way that the government revenue stream punishes success and rewards failure

[rustyp]

Just another way that the government revenue stream punishes success and rewards failure

I believe large corporations and billionaires paying far less percentage wise than you and I in income tax is rewarding success quite well.

[KAM+6]

I remember when hubby's company shut down his department, and I was only working part time (because we could afford for me to only work part time - until hubby's company shut down his department).

Thankfully his company paid the COBRA payments for 18 months, while we had to put the house up for sale and "retire" a couple years earlier than we had planned on.

The premiums for our health care plan exceeded $2000/month. When it ran out, we qualified for Medicaid up north. But then when we move to Florida just a couple months later, we were saddled with having to pay for our health care premiums for the first time - pretty much ever. Between the two of us, we had always worked for companies that covered our premiums 100%. When I was working full time, mine covered mine, but not his. When he worked at the company that shut down, for 25 years, his company covered both of us at 100%.

Surprise surprise, we now have to dole out almost $400/month for health insurance that first year here, even though we had NO income - his pension hadn't yet kicked in and neither of us were old enough for social security. But the revenue from the sale of our house up north was in the bank, which meant we wouldn't qualify for Medicaid.

The second year the pension kicked in, and our income level was low enough for subsidies, since we weren't getting another huge check for the sale of any house. So we were fortunate to only have to pay something like $20/month.

But then he got social security - and not old enough for medicare. So our premiums went up to around $80/month. Then my social security kicked in, and we had to pay $150/month (give or take). And then he was old enough for medicare, so now we pay around $325/month between the deduction from his SS check and my premium payment.

So for people who "only" have $5 more per month after expenses - you don't have to have Medicare A, B, and D. If you have to pay extra for C above what they take out of your social security check, then you're earning enough money that you can afford it. Or you're picking a lousy plan.

If you really mean "deductions" and not "premiums" then - wow. Consider yourself lucky. I had 0 deduction this year but a $9200 out of pocket expense max. So I just had to pay my co-pays and discounted expenses - nothing was "covered" 100% other than yearly exams. I had to pay for the routine bloodwork (CBCs and thyroid panel) for the yearly exam. Next year I'll have a $7500 deductible.

So nope - no sympathy at all if your annual deductible went up to $150 or whatever. If you meant premium - welcome to the rest of the world.

You retired in your 50 ts. Medicaid is welfare. Surely, you both could have gotten other jobs. I couldn't retire until 75.

[manaboutown]

First congratulations for being so wealthy. From your posts over the years it is obvious you worked hard at it. However we should all pay the same is not how the system works. take the income tax system - the more you make the higher percent of taxes you pay. The graduated tax system. Is IRRMA not a similar system ? If we all pay the same some would call that socialism - oh no the dirty word. Given your IRMMA situation how would you feel about a national health system.

Health insurance whether it be Blues Cross or Medicare is an insurance product that pays for or reimburses folks for medical services. When I was obtaining medical insurance prior to becoming eligible for Medicare I paid premiums based on my age, perhaps my health and such, not my income. Income tax is income tax and I pay what I owe every year. It is a progressive tax as we all know. Health insurance and income tax are apples and oranges, or maybe apples and step ladders. They are not comparable.

[Aces4]

Health insurance whether it be Blues Cross or Medicare is an insurance product that pays for or reimburses folks for medical services. When I was obtaining medical insurance prior to becoming eligible for Medicare I paid premiums based on my age, perhaps my health and such, not my income. Income tax is income tax and I pay what I owe every year. It is a progressive tax as we all know. Health insurance and income tax are apples and oranges, or maybe apples and step ladders. They are not comparable.

In reality, Medicare is a subsidy for the elderly. Some people don't require as much assistance as their fellow man.

[manaboutown]

I believe large corporations and billionaires paying far less percentage wise than you and I in income tax is rewarding success quite well.

In total, about 59.9 percent of U.S. households paid income tax in 2022. The remaining 40.1 percent of households paid no individual income tax. In that same year, about 47.1 percent of U.S. households with an income between 40,000 and 50,000 U.S. dollars paid no individual income taxes.

From: Households paying no income tax by income level U.S. 2022 | Statista (https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us-households-that-pay-no-income-tax-by-income-level/#:~:text=In%20total%2C%20about%2059.9%20percent,pa id%20no%20individual%20income%20tax).

High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes. In 2022, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 11.5 percent of total AGI and paid 3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 22.4 percent of total AGI and paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes.

The bottom half of taxpayers, or taxpayers making under $50,399, faced an average income tax rate of 3.7 percent. As household income increases, average income tax rates rise. For example, taxpayers with AGI between the 10th and 5th percentiles ($178,611 and $261,591) paid an average income tax rate of 14.3 percent—almost five times the rate paid by taxpayers in the bottom half.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $663,164 and above) paid the highest average income tax rate of 26.1 percent—seven times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.

From: Who Pays Federal Income Taxes? Latest Federal Income Tax Data (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/#:~:text=High%2DIncome%20Taxpayers%20Paid%20the%20 Majority%20of%20Federal%20Income%20Taxes,of%20all% 20federal%20income%20taxes).

Too, investors are doubly taxed as dividends paid to them, above some nominal level, are taxable to them, and dividends are paid out of after tax corporate income.

"Double taxation often occurs because corporations are considered separate legal entities from their shareholders. As such, corporations pay taxes on their annual earnings, just like individuals. Double taxation is often an unintended consequence of tax legislation. It is generally seen as a negative element of a tax system, and tax authorities attempt to avoid it.

When corporations pay out dividends to shareholders, those dividend payments incur income-tax liabilities for the shareholders who receive them, even though the earnings that provided the cash to pay the dividends were already taxed at the corporate level."

From: What Is Double Taxation? (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double_taxation.asp#:~:text=Double%20taxation%20oc curs%20when%20taxes,pay%20income%20tax%20on%20them ).

[Stu from NYC]

Just wish govt would fix SS and medicare before they run out of money and reduce payouts.

The longer they wait the harder it will be

[jimbomaybe]

First congratulations for being so wealthy. From your posts over the years it is obvious you worked hard at it. However we should all pay the same is not how the system works. take the income tax system - the more you make the higher percent of taxes you pay. The graduated tax system. Is IRRMA not a similar system ? If we all pay the same some would call that socialism - oh no the dirty word. Given your IRMMA situation how would you feel about a national health system.
" If we all pay the same some would call that socialism" I think you have that backwards

[jimbomaybe]

In total, about 59.9 percent of U.S. households paid income tax in 2022. The remaining 40.1 percent of households paid no individual income tax. In that same year, about 47.1 percent of U.S. households with an income between 40,000 and 50,000 U.S. dollars paid no individual income taxes.

From: https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us-households-that-pay-no-income-tax-by-income-level/#:~:text=In%20total%2C%20about%2059.9%20percent,pa id%20no%20individual%20income%20tax.

High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes. In 2022, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 11.5 percent of total AGI and paid 3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 22.4 percent of total AGI and paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes.

The bottom half of taxpayers, or taxpayers making under $50,399, faced an average income tax rate of 3.7 percent. As household income increases, average income tax rates rise. For example, taxpayers with AGI between the 10th and 5th percentiles ($178,611 and $261,591) paid an average income tax rate of 14.3 percent—almost five times the rate paid by taxpayers in the bottom half.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $663,164 and above) paid the highest average income tax rate of 26.1 percent—seven times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.

From: Who Pays Federal Income Taxes? Latest Federal Income Tax Data (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/#:~:text=High%2DIncome%20Taxpayers%20Paid%20the%20 Majority%20of%20Federal%20Income%20Taxes,of%20all% 20federal%20income%20taxes).

Don't confuse people with facts, I am very comfortable with my economic demagoguery, I don't have enough because others have more

[Kelevision]

My guess is SS, Medicare, Medicaid will get cuts moving forward. What wasn’t on the table a month ago is now ON THE TABLE so consider yourself lucky while you’re getting it at all.

[Gpsma]

I remember when hubby's company shut down his department, and I was only working part time (because we could afford for me to only work part time - until hubby's company shut down his department).

Thankfully his company paid the COBRA payments for 18 months, while we had to put the house up for sale and "retire" a couple years earlier than we had planned on.

The premiums for our health care plan exceeded $2000/month. When it ran out, we qualified for Medicaid up north. But then when we move to Florida just a couple months later, we were saddled with having to pay for our health care premiums for the first time - pretty much ever. Between the two of us, we had always worked for companies that covered our premiums 100%. When I was working full time, mine covered mine, but not his. When he worked at the company that shut down, for 25 years, his company covered both of us at 100%.

Surprise surprise, we now have to dole out almost $400/month for health insurance that first year here, even though we had NO income - his pension hadn't yet kicked in and neither of us were old enough for social security. But the revenue from the sale of our house up north was in the bank, which meant we wouldn't qualify for Medicaid.

The second year the pension kicked in, and our income level was low enough for subsidies, since we weren't getting another huge check for the sale of any house. So we were fortunate to only have to pay something like $20/month.

But then he got social security - and not old enough for medicare. So our premiums went up to around $80/month. Then my social security kicked in, and we had to pay $150/month (give or take). And then he was old enough for medicare, so now we pay around $325/month between the deduction from his SS check and my premium payment.

So for people who "only" have $5 more per month after expenses - you don't have to have Medicare A, B, and D. If you have to pay extra for C above what they take out of your social security check, then you're earning enough money that you can afford it. Or you're picking a lousy plan.

If you really mean "deductions" and not "premiums" then - wow. Consider yourself lucky. I had 0 deduction this year but a $9200 out of pocket expense max. So I just had to pay my co-pays and discounted expenses - nothing was "covered" 100% other than yearly exams. I had to pay for the routine bloodwork (CBCs and thyroid panel) for the yearly exam. Next year I'll have a $7500 deductible.

So nope - no sympathy at all if your annual deductible went up to $150 or whatever. If you meant premium - welcome to the rest of the world.

The vast majority of Villagers, of which u are one, were responsible. They got an education or training, got good jobs, didnt spend money on useless stuff and saved for their retirement

I have absolutely no sympathy for someone living here in paradise that hasnt planned for their fiancial future and looks to the government for handouts

[Kelevision]

Just wish govt would fix SS and medicare before they run out of money and reduce payouts.

The longer they wait the harder it will be

They literally just said they want to raise the age of retirement and Medicare and Social Security are on the table when it comes to accomplishing the Department of Government Efficienty’s ( DOGE) goal of cutting $2 trillion from the federal budget.

[Babubhat]

And it’s 85% taxable for many.

[rustyp]

In total, about 59.9 percent of U.S. households paid income tax in 2022. The remaining 40.1 percent of households paid no individual income tax. In that same year, about 47.1 percent of U.S. households with an income between 40,000 and 50,000 U.S. dollars paid no individual income taxes.

From: Households paying no income tax by income level U.S. 2022 | Statista (https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us-households-that-pay-no-income-tax-by-income-level/#:~:text=In%20total%2C%20about%2059.9%20percent,pa id%20no%20individual%20income%20tax).

High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes. In 2022, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 11.5 percent of total AGI and paid 3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 22.4 percent of total AGI and paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes.

The bottom half of taxpayers, or taxpayers making under $50,399, faced an average income tax rate of 3.7 percent. As household income increases, average income tax rates rise. For example, taxpayers with AGI between the 10th and 5th percentiles ($178,611 and $261,591) paid an average income tax rate of 14.3 percent—almost five times the rate paid by taxpayers in the bottom half.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $663,164 and above) paid the highest average income tax rate of 26.1 percent—seven times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.

From: Who Pays Federal Income Taxes? Latest Federal Income Tax Data (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/#:~:text=High%2DIncome%20Taxpayers%20Paid%20the%20 Majority%20of%20Federal%20Income%20Taxes,of%20all% 20federal%20income%20taxes).

Too, investors are doubly taxed as dividends paid to them, above some nominal level, are taxable to them, and dividends are paid out of after tax corporate income.

"Double taxation often occurs because corporations are considered separate legal entities from their shareholders. As such, corporations pay taxes on their annual earnings, just like individuals. Double taxation is often an unintended consequence of tax legislation. It is generally seen as a negative element of a tax system, and tax authorities attempt to avoid it.

When corporations pay out dividends to shareholders, those dividend payments incur income-tax liabilities for the shareholders who receive them, even though the earnings that provided the cash to pay the dividends were already taxed at the corporate level."

From: What Is Double Taxation? (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double_taxation.asp#:~:text=Double%20taxation%20oc curs%20when%20taxes,pay%20income%20tax%20on%20them ).

Old argument. When defending the ultra rich the measurement is always absolute dollars. You are smart enough to know that is why when making financial comparisons across large populations it is better to use the medium not the mean. This is why we will never have a fixed income tax system with no deductions. After all how would our system reward their contributors ?

[manaboutown]

Old argument. When defending the ultra rich the measurement is always absolute dollars. You are smart enough to know that is why when making financial comparisons across large populations it is better to use the medium not the mean. This is why we will never have a fixed income tax system with no deductions. After all how would our system reward their contributors ?

I am presenting actual facts, not arguing with any narrative. BTW do you mean to compare the average vs. the median? https://sciencenotes.org/median-vs-average-know-the-difference-between-them/

[rustyp]

I am presenting actual facts, not arguing with any narrative. BTW do you mean to compare the average vs. the median? https://sciencenotes.org/median-vs-average-know-the-difference-between-them/
In mathematics and statistics the mean or average is the sum of a collection of numbers divided by the count of numbers in the collection

[rustyp]

" If we all pay the same some would call that socialism" I think you have that backwards

you are correct - fingers faster than the brain. Not on my A game today. Got a flu shot yesterday and it is knocking me for a loop. Never had such a reaction before.

[manaboutown]

In mathematics and statistics the mean or average is the sum of a collection of numbers divided by the count of numbers in the collection

Yes, mean and average are interchangeable terms.

[rustyp]

Yes, mean and average are interchangeable terms.

The defense rests.

[manaboutown]

Old argument. When defending the ultra rich the measurement is always absolute dollars. You are smart enough to know that is why when making financial comparisons across large populations it is better to use the medium not the mean. This is why we will never have a fixed income tax system with no deductions. After all how would our system reward their contributors ?

In your post you compared medium to mean. What do you mean by "medium"? No pun intended.

[rustyp]

In your post you compared medium to mean. What do you mean by "medium"? No pun intended.

mean medium mode - statistics 101. you are good at copying the innerweb - look them up

[Bill14564]

mean medium mode - statistics 101. you are good at copying the innerweb - look them up

I believe you are referring to median.

[rustyp]

I believe you are referring to median.

yes I give - as I explained earlier I am in a fog today. however who didn't know what I meant ?

[bmcgowan13]

1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 7, 16

Average/Mean = (1 + 2 + 3 + 6 + 7 + 7 + 16 = 6 (42 divided by 7)
Median = 6 (the middle figure in the sequence)
Mode = 7 (the most repeated figure)

Saw this at high school on Friday last,,,, only reason it is fresh....

I hope this is correct...

[Bill14564]

yes I give - as I explained earlier I am in a fog today. however who didn't know what I meant ?

I understand reactions to the flu shot, I’m usually no good the next day.

From the flow of the conversation it appears the person you were attempting to school didn’t know what you meant.

[Bill14564]

1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 7, 16

Average/Mean = (1 + 2 + 3 + 6 + 7 + 7 + 16 = 6 (42 divided by 7)
Median = 6 (the middle figure in the sequence)
Mode = 7 (the most repeated figure)

Saw this at high school on Friday last,,,, only reason it is fresh....

I hope this is correct...

That looks correct.


Let’s change the sequence to 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 7, 80, 90
Mode=7 - kinda small
Median=6, kinda small
Mean=22, not too bad

If we’re making an argument that everyone is doing okay then the mean looks good. However, the median is not skewed by large outliers and gives a better indication of the size of the individual numbers.

[tophcfa]

I think most of us are lucky to have SS. If it goes away it might not be coming back.

Lucky? How do you figure? With all the $$ taken from my wages over my working career to fund the program, there is nothing lucky about only getting a fraction of it back (after taking into consideration the time value of $$$). If social security never existed and I could have kept all the money they took from my wages, my wife and I would be much better off now. That would have been lucky.

[Bill14564]

Lucky? How do you figure? With all the $$ taken from my wages over my working career to fund the program, there is nothing lucky about only getting a fraction of it back (after taking into consideration the time value of $$$). If social security never existed and I could have kept all the money they took from my wages, my wife and I would be much better off now. That would have been lucky.

Theoretical value vs actual value -> apples to oranges

It would be interesting to see how many younger workers would actually save that money and invest it wisely. My guess is most would not. Even if they did invest it, most would not then move it into an annuity in order to take withdrawals for the rest of their lives.

Perhaps we could look at the participation rates in employer-matched 401K plans (that data must be out there somewhere). This would not be an exact comparison but it might be similar. How many young employees eligible for employer-matched 401K contributions:
- Contribute at least 3% of their salary to get a 3% match
- Make appropriate investment selections to amass $1M by retirement time
- Take distributions in the $40K/year range so their savings lasts into their 90s

AND, what do we do for/about those that do not and who run out of money?

[Bogie Shooter]

Reading this thread makes my head hurt…….:rant-rave:

[REDCART]

Lucky? How do you figure? With all the $$ taken from my wages over my working career to fund the program, there is nothing lucky about only getting a fraction of it back (after taking into consideration the time value of $$$). If social security never existed and I could have kept all the money they took from my wages, my wife and I would be much better off now. That would have been lucky.

Is it possible you may have overlooked the disability and survivor insurance protection that you and your family had during your working years, also paid from your FICA contribution.

[BrianL99]

You got off easy. My part B is $628.90 in 2025 due to IRMAA.

$500,000 inclome / year for a Single. $750,000/year for married.


Not likely to get a lot of sympathy on TOTV.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

You retired in your 50 ts. Medicaid is welfare. Surely, you both could have gotten other jobs. I couldn't retire until 75.

I was still working my part time job. When we moved to Florida, I got a new part time job, and didn't retire from working until I turned 60. And no - he tried getting a new job but he couldn't get one even close to his rate of pay when the department closed, and our mortgage required more than entry level pay for someone who'd been a professional in the trade for over 40 years.

When someone is looking for a brand new job in a skilled trade, you have to start at the beginning again. When you're already 60 years old and looking for a brand new job in a skilled trade, you don't really get that opportunity. Unless you're willing to work part time with no benefits an hour away from home. That's what we were dealing with.

I'm sorry that YOUR job was such that you couldn't afford to retire until you were 75. I know there are a lot of people in your situation. That was not ours.

[MplsPete]

Let’s change the sequence to 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 7, 80, 90
Mode=7 - kinda small
Median=6, kinda small
Mean=22, not too bad

If we’re making an argument that everyone is doing okay then the mean looks good. However, the median is not skewed by large outliers and gives a better indication of the size of the individual numbers.

I can illustrate better (I think)

Imagine a society of 100 people;
97 earn $1 per year;
2 earn $0.01
one earns $100,000,000.

Mean income is ~$1,000,000.
Median is $1, Mode is 1 cent.

Which is the best indication of central tendency?

[Bill14564]

I can illustrate better (I think)

Imagine a society of 100 people;
97 earn $1 per year;
2 earn $0.01
one earns $100,000,000.

Mean income is ~$1,000,000.
Median is $1, Mode is 1 cent.

Which is the best indication of central tendency?

Mode would be $1 also

[jimbomaybe]

Old argument. When defending the ultra rich the measurement is always absolute dollars. You are smart enough to know that is why when making financial comparisons across large populations it is better to use the medium not the mean. This is why we will never have a fixed income tax system with no deductions. After all how would our system reward their contributors ?
Without deduction you would strangle economic growth, spending money, use of capital for reasons that benefit the economy, how could any business operate much less start up without deductions for expenses, mortgage interest deduction has made it possible for many to buy a home that otherwise could not

[retiredguy123]

I am single. I pay the normal $185.00 plus have an additional $443.90 confiscated due to IRMAA, so $628.90. We ALL should pay the same, just as we do for gasoline, Big Macs and iMacs. That is only fair but as we all know life is not fair.
I agree. I paid for Medicare eligibility for 35 years while working. But now, because of IRMAA, I don't even have Medicare because it is not worth buying.

[Federspiel]

Unfortunately, if we had invested our social security dollars the government squandered, we would all be millionaires.

[Rwirish]

Well if you are also impacted by IRMMA you would probably be feeling better. Also, let’s not forget how RMD’s impact your total income potentially pushing you into higher Medicare premiums.

[Cliff Fr]

If I have this right if you have an AGI (that's income after all deductions/write-offs) of $500000 single or $750000 married joint the IRMMA would be $594/month. Oh my how can one afford groceries with this system.

Lol

[SoCalGal]

We ALL should pay the same, just as we do for gasoline, Big Macs and iMacs. That is only fair but as we all know life is not fair.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. ~Karl Marx (1875)

[RoseyRed]

::rant-rave::rant-rave:Remember my working days. Company did not have COLA raises and merit only which was capped out at 5%. Insurance costs alone well exceeded the raises.
5% you were lucky! Our company gives 2.5% yearly and if you happen to get 3% pick up the jaw off the floor!

[Cliff Fr]

I agree. I paid for Medicare eligibility for 35 years while working. But now, because of IRMAA, I don't even have Medicare because it is not worth buying.

You have a very high retirement income so you can easily afford to pay it. Think of the people who have to live on SS alone!

[sharonl7340]

How is it that your part B is ONLY $125????? I was under the impression (maybe a false one) that the minimum part B premium is $174.70, going up to $185/month. People with high incomes are subject to IRMA and pay double or even triple.

That is what I was wondering. Mine is $185 up from $174. Doesn't everyone pay the pay amount for Medicare A and B?

[jojo]

I was shocked a few years ago when I learned the bad news that IRMAA is also based on supposedly "non-taxable" income. That kills and quickly put us in the upper IRMAA brackets as you.

[retiredguy123]

That is what I was wondering. Mine is $185 up from $174. Doesn't everyone pay the pay amount for Medicare A and B?
No. It is based on income. You can pay anything from zero, for some people on Medicaid, to $628 per month for some high income people.

[TomPerry]

You got off easy. My part B is $628.90 in 2025 due to IRMAA.
Based on your prior locations and paying $628.90 in 2025 due to IRMAA, you’re probably not concerned about Social Security.

[Jimmay]

I think most of us are lucky to have SS. If it goes away it might not be coming back.

Why are we lucky to have SS? We paid into it, it’s ours to begin with and if it was put into a growth fund in the beginning the return would be higher.

[Jensor17]

I think the $40 trillion US Debt will wipe out Our SOCIAL SECURITY. The USA owes Red China big bucks on multi trillion $ loan. Our Dollar isn’t worth $1.

[Nordhagen]

First congratulations for being so wealthy. From your posts over the years it is obvious you worked hard at it. However we should all pay the same is not how the system works. take the income tax system - the more you make the higher percent of taxes you pay. The graduated tax system. Is IRRMA not a similar system ? If we all pay the same some would call that socialism - oh no the dirty word. Given your IRMMA situation how would you feel about a national health system.
It’s not a tax, it’s a penalty. This person doesn’t get any better care than anyone who doesn’t pay this penalty. Not sure where the fairness is in that.

[dtennent]

I agree. I paid for Medicare eligibility for 35 years while working. But now, because of IRMAA, I don't even have Medicare because it is not worth buying.

At $628.90/month for Medicare, where do you buy health insurance that is comparable to that cost? My wife is moving to Medicare in March which will give us a nice decrease in our monthly premiums.

Fifteen years ago, when I was putting together the budget for our town, the cost per employee for healthcare was $1500/month. After a long negotiation with the union, we were able to get a plan for $1000/month per employee.

While the Affordable Care Act provided subsidies for low income folks, I am not aware of any impact for higher income people.

[JerseyGurl]

Lucky you. I’m getting an extra $1.00/month.

[retiredguy123]

It’s not a tax, it’s a penalty. This person doesn’t get any better care than anyone who doesn’t pay this penalty. Not sure where the fairness is in that.
Correct. Medicare is the only product or service I can think of that charges an income penalty. Should restaurants start charging more for meals served to higher income people?

[golfing eagles]

Correct. Medicare is the only product or service I can think of that charges an income penalty. Should restaurants start charging more for meals served to higher income people?

Shhhhh. Don’t give them any ideas. We already subsidize groceries, utilities, healthcare and rent for others—-why shouldn’t they enjoy eating out as well 😂😂😂

[Nordhagen]

Correct. Medicare is the only product or service I can think of that charges an income penalty. Should restaurants start charging more for meals served to higher income people?
Exactly. In addition, the last four years, inflation has added at least 20% to the cost of everything. Very hard on retired people on fixed incomes.

[Battlebasset]

61 year old guy here. SS needs to be phased out in favor of private systems. It served a purpose 100 years ago, but it no longer does, and has become fat, bloated, and a drag on the economic vitality of our country.

I would envision a cut off point (age 50?) where you are under the current system going forward. Younger than that over a period of several years, it is slowly taken away, until you are responsible for saving for your retirement, with no government pension.

Yes, this would require a temporary tax to cover the obligations as we would no longer be collecting SS payments from younger people or their companies. There could be a number of ways to manage that.

"What about people that at retirement don't have enough money?" you might say. For that, we have welfare. Which unlike SS, can be means tested and have work requirements. Don't want to be waiting tables at 75? Think about that at 25, when you are considering going on that "once in a lifetime vacation" or buying a McMansion or BMW. Save that until later in life, when you aren't mortgaging your future comfort. Because Uncle Sugar isn't going to support it any more.

[daca55]

I feel your pain. My Part B premium would exceed my Federal Blue Cross catastrophic limit, so it is not even worth buying. Every retired Federal employee should make this comparison and decide if Medicare is worth the cost. Thankfully, Medicare is optional for Federal retirees.

I don’t think that is true. BC/BS told me when I was 65 that I was now eligible for public insurance and that I needed to sign up for it as they would not be primary anymore. I don't believe Medicare is optional for Federal retirees which I am.

[G.R.I.T.S.]

Hence the reason for the “increase.”😁

[retiredguy123]

I don’t think that is true. BC/BS told me when I was 65 that I was now eligible for public insurance and that I needed to sign up for it as they would not be primary anymore. I don't believe Medicare is optional for Federal retirees which I am.
Not true. I am a Federal retiree, and my only health insurance is the FEP Blue Cross standard plan. I have never had any problem getting treatment. The only Medicare coverage I have is Part A hospitalization, which is free.

[Pennyt]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

I am grateful for my Medicare coverage. It is SO much cheaper in premiums than if I had to get private insurance coverage. Before I turned 65, my private insurance was over $1,000 per month and coverage wasn't as good as what I have now. I was thrilled to go on Medicare! When I had cancer and had to have super expensive chemo treatments, Medicare covered it all. Be careful what you complain about - it could be so much worse should it be taken away.

[retiredguy123]

At $628.90/month for Medicare, where do you buy health insurance that is comparable to that cost? My wife is moving to Medicare in March which will give us a nice decrease in our monthly premiums.

Fifteen years ago, when I was putting together the budget for our town, the cost per employee for healthcare was $1500/month. After a long negotiation with the union, we were able to get a plan for $1000/month per employee.

While the Affordable Care Act provided subsidies for low income folks, I am not aware of any impact for higher income people.
I have the Federal Blue Cross standard plan for retirees, which costs me $378.76 per month and has an annual catastrophic out-of-pocket limit of $6,000. At $628.90 per month, the annual cost for Medicare Part B would be $7,546, which would still only pay 80 percent of my health care cost. That would be a total waste of money.

[Singerlady]

Sounds like you made a healthy wage to have it cost that much.

[Wondering]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...
Stop complaining! Switch to a Medicare Advantage Plan and get a rebate off the Medicare fee and you come out way ahead. Stop complaining and do some research!

[Justputt]

According to my 95 year old mother who has been on SS for decades, that is the name of the game. Every COLA gets eaten up by increases in Medicare. It's a zero-sum, in fact over time a losing, game.

I think that's the entire reason behind Cost Of Living Adjustments! It's not like getting a raise! The idea is to cover increased costs. There's no "merit raise" for living longer :)

[Jayhawk]

mortgage interest deduction has made it possible for many to buy a home that otherwise could not

Fake news. Spend $1.00 on mortgage interest to save $0.25 on taxes? Plus, 90% of taxpayers no longer itemize, so zero tax savings on mortgages for them.

[Jayhawk]

Our Dollar isn’t worth $1.

I'll give you 50 cents for every dollar you want to get rid of.

:pepper2:

[oneclickplus]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

This isn't the fault of social security. Inflation is not a mystery. This is entirely the result of the federal government spending more than it takes in. Print money ... it's value (buying power) goes down ... prices go up to compensate. This is as predictable as the sun rising each morning. And, it is precisely why our money was illegally taken off of the gold standard. This will all end soon as the dollar will be completely destroyed; pain, suffering, hunger, violence, civil unrest, chaos straight ahead. Even Trump can't undo $37T of debt. The math can not be denied. We are past the point of no return. Prepare. Ignore the warnings at your (and your family's) own peril.

Deuteronomy 28:43-45 “The alien who is among you shall rise higher and higher above you, and you shall come down lower and lower. He shall lend to you, but you shall not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you shall be the tail. “Moreover all these curses shall come upon you and pursue and overtake you, until you are destroyed, because you did not obey the voice of the Lord your God, to keep His commandments and His statutes which He commanded you.

Habakkuk 2:5-8 “Indeed, because he transgresses by wine,
He is a proud man,
And he does not stay at home.
Because he enlarges his desire as hell,
And he is like death, and cannot be satisfied,
He gathers to himself all nations
And heaps up for himself all peoples.

“Will not all these take up a proverb against him,
And a taunting riddle against him, and say,
‘Woe to him who increases
What is not his—how long?
And to him who loads himself with many pledges’?

Will not your creditors rise up suddenly?
Will they not awaken who oppress you?
And you will become their booty.

Because you have plundered many nations,
All the remnant of the people shall plunder you,
Because of men’s blood
And the violence of the land and the city,
And of all who dwell in it.

[Topspinmo]

First congratulations for being so wealthy. From your posts over the years it is obvious you worked hard at it. However we should all pay the same is not how the system works. take the income tax system - the more you make the higher percent of taxes you pay. The graduated tax system. Is IRRMA not a similar system ? If we all pay the same some would call that socialism - oh no the dirty word. Given your IRMMA situation how would you feel about a national health system.

I feel fine with one payer national healthcare provider. Would eliminate all the healthcare insurance scams and eliminate insurance companies making billions. Let government make billions. Don’t say insurance can do better government can’t no worse. Beside insurance lobbyists write all insurance laws and this what we get.

[kkingston57]

Unfortunately, if we had invested our social security dollars the government squandered, we would all be millionaires.

Big word in the assumption is IF. Bet that number would be the same # as the % who uitlize a 401K.

[kkingston57]

::rant-rave::rant-rave:
5% you were lucky! Our company gives 2.5% yearly and if you happen to get 3% pick up the jaw off the floor!

Cap was 5%. most got 3%. Point is people complain about low COLA and companies I worked for has no COLA. Looks like we were in same boat. Terrible raises

[kkingston57]

At $628.90/month for Medicare, where do you buy health insurance that is comparable to that cost? My wife is moving to Medicare in March which will give us a nice decrease in our monthly premiums.

Fifteen years ago, when I was putting together the budget for our town, the cost per employee for healthcare was $1500/month. After a long negotiation with the union, we were able to get a plan for $1000/month per employee.

While the Affordable Care Act provided subsidies for low income folks, I am not aware of any impact for higher income people.

Regarding last statement, impact on the higher income people is that ACA eliminated the pre exclusions that 90% of us have who are over 50 years old.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Some of you want to privatize social security, force workers to choose to invest on their own, or not.

I'm curious how that idea will work for people who were working, and become disabled.

Currently social security disability covers that. In addition, *legal* immigrants here on work visas pay into social security, but are not allowed to receive any social security benefits. That is where a lot of the disability money comes from.

But if you do away with mandatory payroll deductions, that money won't exist. Your kids are working, doing fine, investing in a 401k for their retirement, all is well. Then one of them has an accident and loses her ability to work. She's only 49 and has a 10-year-old kid to support.

Now what?

[bumpa]

Lucky? How do you figure? With all the $$ taken from my wages over my working career to fund the program, there is nothing lucky about only getting a fraction of it back (after taking into consideration the time value of $$$). If social security never existed and I could have kept all the money they took from my wages, my wife and I would be much better off now. That would have been lucky.

A very common argument but one without any actual demonstration or proof of concept. In fact you and your employer contributed throughout your working lifetime. People often have an exaggerated estimate of what their total contribution was in total. The amount of the combined contributions were limited by the annual cap and the amount you receive annually is based on that total contribution. You will find, if you do the math, that all your personal and employee contributions will last for approx. 10-12 years. So for most people who reach 75 or so their annual payment is in fact coming from the contributions of people who died young.

[golfing eagles]

I feel fine with one payer national healthcare provider. Would eliminate all the healthcare insurance scams and eliminate insurance companies making billions. Let government make billions. Don’t say insurance can do better government can’t no worse. Beside insurance lobbyists write all insurance laws and this what we get.

I'll state it. Believe me, government can do much, much worse. Medicare and Medicaid run at 37% overhead; Blue Cross/Shield runs at 11-13% overhead. Right off the bat, government inefficiency will cost us 200 billion out of every trillion.

[manaboutown]

While the Affordable Care Act provided subsidies for low income folks, I am not aware of any impact for higher income people.

To help pay for the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama and Congress imposed a 3.8% “net-investment-income tax” (NIIT) on couples with incomes above $250,000 and singles with income above $200,000. It applies to interest, dividends, royalties, and–here’s the rub–“income derived from a trade or business in which the taxpayer does not materially participate.”

From: In Obama's budget, a case study on finding and closing tax loopholes (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/in-obamas-budget-a-case-study-on-finding-and-closing-tax-loopholes/#:~:text=To%20help%20pay%20for%20the,singles%20wit h%20income%20above%20%24200%2C000).

[dano121]

Yes, this is ludacris, I won't share my feelings here but I did share them with our Congressman, Mr. Daniel Webster. I suggest that everybody "Shout" and maybe there will be a change someday.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

To help pay for the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama and Congress imposed a 3.8% “net-investment-income tax” (NIIT) on couples with incomes above $250,000 and singles with income above $200,000. It applies to interest, dividends, royalties, and–here’s the rub–“income derived from a trade or business in which the taxpayer does not materially participate.”

From: In Obama's budget, a case study on finding and closing tax loopholes (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/in-obamas-budget-a-case-study-on-finding-and-closing-tax-loopholes/#:~:text=To%20help%20pay%20for%20the,singles%20wit h%20income%20above%20%24200%2C000).

Not entirely accurate. You say couples "with incomes above $250,000 and singles with income above $200,000." This is for MODIFIED ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME. Not gross income.

So - you deduct what you deduct to get your AGI, then "add back" certain exemptions to raise that AGI somewhat. For most people, the two numbers will be similar. But they will both be less than gross income.

A couple who earns $400,000 can have a MAGI of $250,000 and therefore be exempt from that 3.8% NIIT.

[golfing eagles]

Not entirely accurate. You say couples "with incomes above $250,000 and singles with income above $200,000." This is for MODIFIED ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME. Not gross income.

So - you deduct what you deduct to get your AGI, then "add back" certain exemptions to raise that AGI somewhat. For most people, the two numbers will be similar. But they will both be less than gross income.

A couple who earns $400,000 can have a MAGI of $250,000 and therefore be exempt from that 3.8% NIIT.

Regardless of the exact threshold, it was just another example of Robin Hood mentality/mental illness

[manaboutown]

Not entirely accurate. You say couples "with incomes above $250,000 and singles with income above $200,000." This is for MODIFIED ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME. Not gross income.

So - you deduct what you deduct to get your AGI, then "add back" certain exemptions to raise that AGI somewhat. For most people, the two numbers will be similar. But they will both be less than gross income.

A couple who earns $400,000 can have a MAGI of $250,000 and therefore be exempt from that 3.8% NIIT.


Who is subject to paying the NIIT?
The law requires you to pay the NIIT if your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) is above the threshold for your filing status and you earn net investment income.1 However, if you have no investment income, you are not liable for the NIIT, even if your MAGI exceeds the threshold amount.

Subject to NIIT

Nonqualified annuities
Capital gains
Dividends
Interest
Non-exempt portion of capital gains from the sale of a home
Passive business income
Rents
Royalties

Not subject to NIIT

Wages
Alimony
Distributions from certain tax-advantaged retirement accounts, including IRAs and 401(k) and 403(b) plans
Nonpassive business income
Social Security benefits
Tax-exempt income (e.g., tax-exempt interest, life insurance death benefits, etc.)
Unemployment compensation
Inheritance and gifts

From: The net investment income tax (NIIT) | Ameriprise Financial (https://www.ameriprise.com/financial-goals-priorities/taxes/net-investment-income-tax#:~:text=The%20law%20requires%20you%20to,you%20 earn%20net%20investment%20income.&text=However%2C%20if%20you%20have%20no,MAGI%20exce eds%20the%20threshold%20amount).

[Coley]

Be glad you have that kind of problem!!

[mraines]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

Just wait. Be glad you still have social security.

[mraines]

Yes, this is ludacris, I won't share my feelings here but I did share them with our Congressman, Mr. Daniel Webster. I suggest that everybody "Shout" and maybe there will be a change someday.

Webster is the last person I would go to. Just wait, it is going to get worse.

[J1ceasar]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

It certainly does not help complaining here, you should write to someone in your district congressionally

[J1ceasar]

I worked in a Muslim area of Paterson New Jersey and there were halal meat shops

Prejudice is not something I approve of

If by "HALAL" you mean actions or things that are allowed or acceptable under Islamic law, America needs HALAL like a moose needs a hat rack. HALAL will NEVER happen in America.

[J1ceasar]

It astounds me that people that are making two or $300,000 in retirement on investments really worry about 10 or 15 bucks tax taken out because of Medicare.

We have a regressive tax system in America for the reason that most people can't really afford health care based on their social retirement alone

[mraines]

A very common argument but one without any actual demonstration or proof of concept. In fact you and your employer contributed throughout your working lifetime. People often have an exaggerated estimate of what their total contribution was in total. The amount of the combined contributions were limited by the annual cap and the amount you receive annually is based on that total contribution. You will find, if you do the math, that all your personal and employee contributions will last for approx. 10-12 years. So for most people who reach 75 or so their annual payment is in fact coming from the contributions of people who died young.

People don't seem to understand that. They always say "I paid into SS". Yes, but it is basically a Ponzi scheme. If you outlive what you paid in, someone else is paying for you.

[Driller703]

Just another way that the government revenue stream punishes success and rewards failure

Yeah, probably just decline it.

[golfing eagles]

Yeah, probably just decline it.

People have tried to decline SS, basically, you can't

[rustyp]

People have tried to decline SS, basically, you can't

Here is a way :
Social Security benefit checks may be cashed up to one year after their issue date. If a beneficiary does not cash a check within one year, the Department of the Treasury returns the funds to SSA. When SSA receives the returned funds, it sends a letter to the beneficiary inquiring if the check was received and cashed. If the beneficiary responds to the letter, SSA reviews the beneficiary’s record, and if appropriate, reissues the check. If the beneficiary does not respond to the letter or indicates the check was cashed, SSA takes no further actions.

[Stu from NYC]

People have tried to decline SS, basically, you can't

Who in their right mind would decline free money. Well not free but use it or lose it

[manaboutown]

Some folks donate their SS income to a charity or other good cause in the public interest.

[KAM+6]

...

[Road-Runner]

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. ~Karl Marx (1875)

Anyone talking to younger people (<40) knows there's a willingness to move into a more 'equalized' economy. The reaction of many young people to the recent UHC CEO murder speaks to the widening gap between the 'haves' and 'have nots' which is not healthy for any style of government. A CEO making $10M per year while at the same time overseeing an AI implementation that results in 2-3X the industry average for claim denials isn't garnering a lot of sympathy for his death given that some of those denials resulted in policy holder's deaths.

I 100% think his murder is a tragedy and a dangerous event for our country, but if Americans don't want to see even more murders & uprisings (think Marie Antoinette) they need to start figuring out how to rebuild the middle class before it's too late.

[Caymus]

Here is a way :
Social Security benefit checks may be cashed up to one year after their issue date. If a beneficiary does not cash a check within one year, the Department of the Treasury returns the funds to SSA. When SSA receives the returned funds, it sends a letter to the beneficiary inquiring if the check was received and cashed. If the beneficiary responds to the letter, SSA reviews the beneficiary’s record, and if appropriate, reissues the check. If the beneficiary does not respond to the letter or indicates the check was cashed, SSA takes no further actions.

They still issue physical checks?

[jimjamuser]

Health insurance whether it be Blues Cross or Medicare is an insurance product that pays for or reimburses folks for medical services. When I was obtaining medical insurance prior to becoming eligible for Medicare I paid premiums based on my age, perhaps my health and such, not my income. Income tax is income tax and I pay what I owe every year. It is a progressive tax as we all know. Health insurance and income tax are apples and oranges, or maybe apples and step ladders. They are not comparable.
The income tax percentages have changed say from 1950 to today. I would say toward the LESS progressive.

[opinionist]

The true rate of inflation is much higher than the COLA.

Shadow Government Statistics - Home Page (https://www.shadowstats.com/)

[JRcorvette]

If you haven't already noticed or seen your updated SS statements for 2025... it's crazy. That 2.5% increase gets eaten up right off the bat. I looked at my deductions for medical insurance Part B/C and saw it went up from $125 a month to $159 a month starting in January...giving me a grand total increase of $5.00 per month. So much for keeping up with the COLA... better check yours...

I hope you are not having to live off of SS. Every time they mention changing it for younger people one Party starts screaming foul. Can you imagine how much we would have if we were allowed to Private Invest from an early age. Let younger people put it into a Locked private investment account that they can choose form a handful of Mutual Funds. It will not help us old folks out but it sure will help the next generation!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

If by "HALAL" you mean actions or things that are allowed or acceptable under Islamic law, America needs HALAL like a moose needs a hat rack. HALAL will NEVER happen in America.

That is the poster's "signature" that appears on the bottom of every one of their posts. You can have a signature too. They're referring to food. Halal food is food that adheres to strict dietary laws in the Muslim religion. It's comparable to kosher food for Jewish people.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The true rate of inflation is much higher than the COLA.

Shadow Government Statistics - Home Page (https://www.shadowstats.com/)

That is an alt-facts website.

[jimjamuser]

In total, about 59.9 percent of U.S. households paid income tax in 2022. The remaining 40.1 percent of households paid no individual income tax. In that same year, about 47.1 percent of U.S. households with an income between 40,000 and 50,000 U.S. dollars paid no individual income taxes.

From: Households paying no income tax by income level U.S. 2022 | Statista (https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us-households-that-pay-no-income-tax-by-income-level/#:~:text=In%20total%2C%20about%2059.9%20percent,pa id%20no%20individual%20income%20tax).

High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes. In 2022, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 11.5 percent of total AGI and paid 3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 22.4 percent of total AGI and paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes.

The bottom half of taxpayers, or taxpayers making under $50,399, faced an average income tax rate of 3.7 percent. As household income increases, average income tax rates rise. For example, taxpayers with AGI between the 10th and 5th percentiles ($178,611 and $261,591) paid an average income tax rate of 14.3 percent—almost five times the rate paid by taxpayers in the bottom half.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $663,164 and above) paid the highest average income tax rate of 26.1 percent—seven times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.

From: Who Pays Federal Income Taxes? Latest Federal Income Tax Data (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/#:~:text=High%2DIncome%20Taxpayers%20Paid%20the%20 Majority%20of%20Federal%20Income%20Taxes,of%20all% 20federal%20income%20taxes).

Too, investors are doubly taxed as dividends paid to them, above some nominal level, are taxable to them, and dividends are paid out of after tax corporate income.

"Double taxation often occurs because corporations are considered separate legal entities from their shareholders. As such, corporations pay taxes on their annual earnings, just like individuals. Double taxation is often an unintended consequence of tax legislation. It is generally seen as a negative element of a tax system, and tax authorities attempt to avoid it.

When corporations pay out dividends to shareholders, those dividend payments incur income-tax liabilities for the shareholders who receive them, even though the earnings that provided the cash to pay the dividends were already taxed at the corporate level."

From: What Is Double Taxation? (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double_taxation.asp#:~:text=Double%20taxation%20oc curs%20when%20taxes,pay%20income%20tax%20on%20them ).
The top marginal tax rate for 1950 was 84%, for 1970 was 72%, for 1980 was 70%, for 2000 was 40%, for 2010 was 35%. So to summarize, for 50 years corporate backed politicians have SLASHED taxes to line the pockets of their wealthy donors.
.......That had a lot to do with the US today virtually having lost its middle class.

[jimjamuser]

Lucky? How do you figure? With all the $$ taken from my wages over my working career to fund the program, there is nothing lucky about only getting a fraction of it back (after taking into consideration the time value of $$$). If social security never existed and I could have kept all the money they took from my wages, my wife and I would be much better off now. That would have been lucky.
The problem is that you might be frugal with your money, but another person might invest stupidly or gamble it away or get an illness. Those people still have a right to life. So, the government takes some from you (and everyone) so there is some money for the "not so lucky individuals". The idea is to keep society stable.

[Caymus]

The top marginal tax rate for 1950 was 84%, for 1970 was 72%, for 1980 was 70%, for 2000 was 40%, for 2010 was 35%. So to summarize, for 50 years corporate backed politicians have SLASHED taxes to line the pockets of their wealthy donors.
.......That had a lot to do with the US today virtually having lost its middle class.

And how many people actually paid those rates? Tax shelters existed back in the 1950"s

[jimjamuser]

Anyone talking to younger people (<40) knows there's a willingness to move into a more 'equalized' economy. The reaction of many young people to the recent UHC CEO murder speaks to the widening gap between the 'haves' and 'have nots' which is not healthy for any style of government. A CEO making $10M per year while at the same time overseeing an AI implementation that results in 2-3X the industry average for claim denials isn't garnering a lot of sympathy for his death given that some of those denials resulted in policy holder's deaths.

I 100% think his murder is a tragedy and a dangerous event for our country, but if Americans don't want to see even more murders & uprisings (think Marie Antoinette) they need to start figuring out how to rebuild the middle class before it's too late.
i agree and the 2nd paragraph has some very good advice. I have often said that the middle class is almost non-existing.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Some folks donate their SS income to a charity or other good cause in the public interest.

My dad used it to fund his precision rifle collection. Which is now mine :)

[biker1]

Nonsense. Government revenue, as a percentage of GDP, has been constant at 18% for the last 50 years. Marginal tax rates don’t matter.

The top marginal tax rate for 1950 was 84%, for 1970 was 72%, for 1980 was 70%, for 2000 was 40%, for 2010 was 35%. So to summarize, for 50 years corporate backed politicians have SLASHED taxes to line the pockets of their wealthy donors.
.......That had a lot to do with the US today virtually having lost its middle class.

[jimjamuser]

Nonsense. Government revenue, as a percentage of GDP, has been constant at 18% for the last 50 years. Marginal tax rates don’t matter.
It seems that you are talking about the COMBINED (ALL income LEVELS) tax rate. I am focused on the HIGHEST INCOME LEVEL TAXPAYER and how they altered the laws to HELP themselves to more money. That is why there are so many more millionaires (in constant dollars) today than in the 1950s. There are way more Elon Musks in the US now than in 1950. And he probably even came to the US in order to take advantage of our lenient tax system for the super-wealthy.

[Number 10 GI]

If a person ever thought that they could live off of social security after retirement, they are an idiot. It was never meant to be a plan that would allow someone to live at the same lifestyle they had when working full time.

[rustyp]

///

[biker1]

Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on who actually pays the taxes in this country. Hint, it is the highest income levels. I suspect that Elon Musk has created way more jobs than you so any criticism leveled by you at him is pretty stupid sounding.

It seems that you are talking about the COMBINED (ALL income LEVELS) tax rate. I am focused on the HIGHEST INCOME LEVEL TAXPAYER and how they altered the laws to HELP themselves to more money. That is why there are so many more millionaires (in constant dollars) today than in the 1950s. There are way more Elon Musks in the US now than in 1950. And he probably even came to the US in order to take advantage of our lenient tax system for the super-wealthy.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

If a person ever thought that they could live off of social security after retirement, they are an idiot. It was never meant to be a plan that would allow someone to live at the same lifestyle they had when working full time.

I don't think anyone has ever thought they could live "at the same lifestyle they had when working full time."

However, "live off of social security" is not the same thing as "live at the same lifestyle."

Social Security was ABSOLUTELY meant to be a plan that allowed retirees to not age into poverty. That was WHY it was created. Here's from the Social Security Administration's history page:

The Social Security Act was signed into law by President Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. In addition to several provisions for general welfare, the new Act created a social insurance program designed to pay retired workers age 65 or older a continuing income after retirement.

and this is what Roosevelt said at the signing ceremony:

"We can never insure one hundred percent of the population against one hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age."

[USNA87]

Thankfully, Medicare is optional for Federal retirees.

Can you please explain this? I am a federal employee and retired military officer and I am not familiar with this. Thank you.

[REDCART]

Can you please explain this? I am a federal employee and retired military officer and I am not familiar with this. Thank you.

For retired Federal employees with federal health insurance, Part B of Medicare is not mandatory, and federal health benefit coverage would be similar to the coverage of active federal employees. You would have a deductible and copay.

[golfing eagles]

It seems that you are talking about the COMBINED (ALL income LEVELS) tax rate. I am focused on the HIGHEST INCOME LEVEL TAXPAYER and how they altered the laws to HELP themselves to more money. That is why there are so many more millionaires (in constant dollars) today than in the 1950s. There are way more Elon Musks in the US now than in 1950. And he probably even came to the US in order to take advantage of our lenient tax system for the super-wealthy.

WOW! More millionaires than the 50's????? I'll give a hint for those that
a) have trouble figuring it out for themselves, and
b) have chugged down all the class warfare propaganda they could find online

INFLATION

[Nordhagen]

Stop complaining! Switch to a Medicare Advantage Plan and get a rebate off the Medicare fee and you come out way ahead. Stop complaining and do some research!
Be careful with advantage plans. If you get real sick and you need advanced care, some hospitals won’t take these plans ie Mayo Clinic and I think Moffit in Tampa as well.

[Andyb]

Please, no one has ever claimed to take away SS. However, it has been decimated the last several years.

[Andyb]

Mine has gone dow, wonder what has changed these last few years. I would be up over 10 times if I was allowed to invest my “benefits” instead of government.

[biker1]

In what way?


Please, no one has ever claimed to take away SS. However, it has been decimated the last several years.

[Bill14564]

Please, no one has ever claimed to take away SS. However, it has been decimated the last several years.

The last time I looked at the numbers, the SS COLA has kept up pretty well with inflation.

That doesn't mean certain products and services have not increased faster than inflation. On the other hand, some items have increased slower than insurance.

I don't think there is a special inflation measurement for "products and services consumed by retirees living in the fastest growing retirement community in Florida." Plus, not all retirees live in Florida or in retirement communities. Therefore, COLAs have to be tied to a more general measure of inflation and they seem to have kept fairly close to that over the recent past.

[jimjamuser]

Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on who actually pays the taxes in this country. Hint, it is the highest income levels. I suspect that Elon Musk has created way more jobs than you so any criticism leveled by you at him is pretty stupid sounding.
I AM aware that the upper levels pay the most income taxes today and I assume that is the way it has ALWAYS been in US history. What I am pointing out is that the upper levels NEED TO PAY MORE, that's right MORE, than they do today. And the PROOF of that is that the US was stronger as a country in the period from WW2 to about 1975 when the US middle class was strongest. Today due to tax changes and that STUPID outsourcing and prejudices against UNIONS we really have no (ZERO) middle class with ANY strength. Note : Germany is a strong nation and they have much more UNIONS than the US has. The US prejudice against UNIONS which also began about 1980 is VERY non-productive for America. Also unpatriotic.
.........Since Elon Musk was mentioned........Musk is famously non-union. Even wants to move his businesses to Texas to avoid unions. He is known for being DIFFICULT to work for.

[dewilson58]

America is more productive without unions.

Technology replaces inefficient union workers.

:girlneener:

[jimjamuser]

I don't think anyone has ever thought they could live "at the same lifestyle they had when working full time."

However, "live off of social security" is not the same thing as "live at the same lifestyle."

Social Security was ABSOLUTELY meant to be a plan that allowed retirees to not age into poverty. That was WHY it was created. Here's from the Social Security Administration's history page:



and this is what Roosevelt said at the signing ceremony:
Great Post !!!!!!

[dewilson58]

I don't think anyone has ever thought they could live "at the same lifestyle they had when working full time."


I did think that, and I am doing it.

Quite simple if you plan ahead.

:beer3:

[jimjamuser]

WOW! More millionaires than the 50's????? I'll give a hint for those that
a) have trouble figuring it out for themselves, and
b) have chugged down all the class warfare propaganda they could find online

INFLATION
I am sorry, it is NOT inflation. I mentioned constant dollars which takes care of the inflation factor. Note: there are also tables that are used to REMOVE the inflation factor (probably something on-line also). Anyway, even when removing the inflation factor, TODAY we have WAY more millionaires today than in say 1950. This is because of the changing TAX LAW over that time period. To basically summarize ........The RICH have gotten RICHER and the middle class does NOT exist anymore !!!!!

[golfing eagles]

I AM aware that the upper levels pay the most income taxes today and I assume that is the way it has ALWAYS been in US history. What I am pointing out is that the upper levels NEED TO PAY MORE, that's right MORE, than they do today. And the PROOF of that is that the US was stronger as a country in the period from WW2 to about 1975 when the US middle class was strongest. Today due to tax changes and that STUPID outsourcing and prejudices against UNIONS we really have no (ZERO) middle class with ANY strength. Note : Germany is a strong nation and they have much more UNIONS than the US has. The US prejudice against UNIONS which also began about 1980 is VERY non-productive for America. Also unpatriotic.
.........Since Elon Musk was mentioned........Musk is famously non-union. Even wants to move his businesses to Texas to avoid unions. He is known for being DIFFICULT to work for.

Why???? Because it is "fair"???? Because a Bowery Bum deserves to have as much as Elon Musk just because he was born????? The world today is very different than the period 1950-1975 for a zillion reasons other than the tax code. We have now become a nation where those that produce absolutely NOTHING gets handouts that make most of the 3rd world people who work 100 hours/week at hard labor jealous. What's worse is that many of those that benefit from our government mandated "generosity" think they "deserve" it. WHY???? What have they done to deserve anything???? It's prevalent in the retail sector as well----"Get the cell phone you deserve", Get the computer that you deserve", "Get the home you deserve"---how often do we hear that on TV ads? You "deserve" what you earn, not what the taxpayer hands you. And all without so much as a simple "Thank You". It's time we drastically cut this boondoggle that in some cases is into the 4th generation. When welfare was started under FDR it was a subsistence living----a cold water flat and a ticket to the government bread and cheese line. People would take any crap job to get off "the dole" because it was embarrassing. Now it's a way of life and we even go out of our way to replace food stamps with EBT cards that look like credit cards so the recipient won't be "embarrassed" in the check out line. BE EMBARRASSED. Get a job. Become a net taxpayer.

Go Elon Musk---the more you can cut these outrageous transfer payments and kill the Robin Hood mentality, the better.

[Stu from NYC]

America is more productive without unions.

Technology replaces inefficient union workers.

:girlneener:

Unions have made workforce less productive. Restrictive rules have in the long run cost jobs.

[jimjamuser]

Be careful with advantage plans. If you get real sick and you need advanced care, some hospitals won’t take these plans ie Mayo Clinic and I think Moffit in Tampa as well.
Regular Medicare is better than Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage works if you are young and very healthy. Humorously, the ADVANTAGE in Medicare Advantage is to the Executives that administer the program.

[dewilson58]

.................... This is because of the changing TAX LAW over that time period. To basically summarize ........The RICH have gotten RICHER and the middle class does NOT exist anymore !!!!!

False

Taxation is not create millionaires.

Taxes on the Rich Were Not Much Higher in the 1950s | Tax Foundation (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/)

[Bill14564]

I did think that, and I am doing it.

Quite simple if you plan ahead.

:beer3:

But planning ahead means saving and investing rather than living at the limit of your salary.

We could have afforded more but saved instead - now we are retired. Friends made a different choice - they are still working.

[dewilson58]

Unions have made workforce less productive. Restrictive rules have in the long run cost jobs.

:BigApplause:

[biker1]

In the last couple of years, the percentage of workers who are unionized has declined and is now about 11%. Why do you think that is? Regarding the upper income levels needing to pay more taxes, fortunately your opinion is not listened to by anyone of significance and we actually need the opposite; more people with some skin in the game. Regarding Elon Musk being “difficult” to work for, Bill Gates was apparently also “difficult” to work for, as was General Patton. Starting to see a pattern? Successful people often demand excellence from those around them and that is apparently your definition of “difficult”.


I AM aware that the upper levels pay the most income taxes today and I assume that is the way it has ALWAYS been in US history. What I am pointing out is that the upper levels NEED TO PAY MORE, that's right MORE, than they do today. And the PROOF of that is that the US was stronger as a country in the period from WW2 to about 1975 when the US middle class was strongest. Today due to tax changes and that STUPID outsourcing and prejudices against UNIONS we really have no (ZERO) middle class with ANY strength. Note : Germany is a strong nation and they have much more UNIONS than the US has. The US prejudice against UNIONS which also began about 1980 is VERY non-productive for America. Also unpatriotic.
.........Since Elon Musk was mentioned........Musk is famously non-union. Even wants to move his businesses to Texas to avoid unions. He is known for being DIFFICULT to work for.

[jimjamuser]

Why???? Because it is "fair"???? Because a Bowery Bum deserves to have as much as Elon Musk just because he was born????? The world today is very different than the period 1950-1975 for a zillion reasons other than the tax code. We have now become a nation where those that produce absolutely NOTHING gets handouts that make most of the 3rd world people who work 100 hours/week at hard labor jealous. What's worse is that many of those that benefit from our government mandated "generosity" think they "deserve" it. WHY???? What have they done to deserve anything???? It's prevalent in the retail sector as well----"Get the cell phone you deserve", Get the computer that you deserve", "Get the home you deserve"---how often do we hear that on TV ads? You "deserve" what you earn, not what the taxpayer hands you. And all without so much as a simple "Thank You". It's time we drastically cut this boondoggle that in some cases is into the 4th generation. When welfare was started under FDR it was a subsistence living----a cold water flat and a ticket to the government bread and cheese line. People would take any crap job to get off "the dole" because it was embarrassing. Now it's a way of life and we even go out of our way to replace food stamps with EBT cards that look like credit cards so the recipient won't be "embarrassed" in the check out line. BE EMBARRASSED. Get a job. Become a net taxpayer.

Go Elon Musk---the more you can cut these outrageous transfer payments and kill the Robin Hood mentality, the better.
Thank you for expressing yourself very eloquently. I agree that we as a country can find people at the lower rungs of the economic ladder that are taking advantage of the system in a dishonest way. What I normally say to that is - we also have white collar crime, which is MUCH greater (more costly to the US) than that of the lower social levels. It is said that women at low social levels purposely have more children in order to get MORE government support. let us say that one such incident would cost the US government THOUSANDS of dollars over their lifetime. But, compare that to a white collar criminal such as a local banker that "SKIMS OFF" millions of dollars over their lifetime. White collar crime is hard to prove and takes hard detective work and a protracted legal case. The so-called "welfare Mom" is more visible and easier to disparage than the dishonest white collar executive.
............I go back to saying that the majority of the people-problems in the US is caused by over-population, which means letting too many immigrants in - both legally and illegally. A.I. and robotics are coming on strong and there will be less need for uneducated workers.
............I also believe that you are correct as to the idea that Elon Musk will make cuts to many Government programs and that he will be more in tune to your philosophy than mine. However if his cuts are too Draconian, he may just be breeding more Luigi Mangiones. Government must NOT be thought of as OVERREACHING.

[retiredguy123]

Thank you for expressing yourself very eloquently. I agree that we as a country can find people at the lower rungs of the economic ladder that are taking advantage of the system in a dishonest way. What I normally say to that is - we also have white collar crime, which is MUCH greater (more costly to the US) than that of the lower social levels. It is said that women at low social levels purposely have more children in order to get MORE government support. let us say that one such incident would cost the US government THOUSANDS of dollars over their lifetime. But, compare that to a white collar criminal such as a local banker that "SKIMS OFF" millions of dollars over their lifetime. White collar crime is hard to prove and takes hard detective work and a protracted legal case. The so-called "welfare Mom" is more visible and easier to disparage than the dishonest white collar executive.
............I go back to saying that the majority of the people-problems in the US is caused by over-population, which means letting too many immigrants in - both legally and illegally. A.I. and robotics are coming on strong and there will be less need for uneducated workers.
Women who have more children to get more Government support are not committing a crime. The crime is committed by the Government that allows it to happen.

[manaboutown]

///

[jimjamuser]

In the last couple of years, the percentage of workers who are unionized has declined and is now about 11%. Why do you think that is? Regarding the upper income levels needing to pay more taxes, fortunately your opinion is not listened to by anyone of significance and we actually need the opposite; more people with some skin in the game. Regarding Elon Musk being “difficult” to work for, Bill Gates was apparently also “difficult” to work for, as was General Patton. Starting to see a pattern? Successful people often demand excellence from those around them and that is apparently your definition of “difficult”.
Why do I think that Unionization in the US has decreased. My 1st thought is STUPIDITY. My 2nd thought is from the movie "Aliens" has IQ s DROPPED significantly. But, to be serious, Unionization has dropped because of propaganda and class warfare. And right now the upper class is WINNING or maybe HAS WON. And maybe America has LOST.
.....Like I have said in numerous posts, I believe that America was stronger and more favorable for Americans in 1955. One family member working was ALL that was needed for a full, successful life.........................NOT today !!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

Women who have more children to get more Government support are not committing a crime. The crime is committed by the Government that allows it to happen.
I DO agree with that. Sorry that I did not make myself clear on that point. I had a lot of territory to cover in my post.

[biker1]

Propaganda and class warfare? Really? So, those who vote against unionizing are just stupid? OK, feel free to continue believing that nonsense.


Why do I think that Unionization in the US has decreased. My 1st thought is STUPIDITY. My 2nd thought is from the movie "Aliens" has IQ s DROPPED significantly. But, to be serious, Unionization has dropped because of propaganda and class warfare. And right now the upper class is WINNING or maybe HAS WON. And maybe America has LOST.
.....Like I have said in numerous posts, I believe that America was stronger and more favorable for Americans in 1955. One family member working was ALL that was needed for a full, successful life.........................NOT today !!!!!!

[dewilson58]

Propaganda and class warfare? Really? So, those who vote against unionizing are just stupid? OK, feel free to continue believing that nonsense.

& how is it.................the most financially successful people in America are non-union and represent themself??

:eclipsee_gold_cup:

[jimbomaybe]

The problem is that you might be frugal with your money, but another person might invest stupidly or gamble it away or get an illness. Those people still have a right to life. So, the government takes some from you (and everyone) so there is some money for the "not so lucky individuals". The idea is to keep society stable.
but another person might invest stupidly or gamble it away or get an illness. Subsidize stupidity ? , (not having health INS is a definition of stupidity)

[Stu from NYC]

Propaganda and class warfare? Really? So, those who vote against unionizing are just stupid? OK, feel free to continue believing that nonsense.

Not saying him, but not really sure, but some people fell on their heads a few times too often in earlier years.

[Stu from NYC]

& how is it.................the most financially successful people in America are non-union and represent themself??

:eclipsee_gold_cup:

At one time unions did a great job. However over time they were more interested in enriching themselves, very restrictive work rules and less interested in the success of the business they were working for.

[golfing eagles]

Thank you for expressing yourself very eloquently. I agree that we as a country can find people at the lower rungs of the economic ladder that are taking advantage of the system in a dishonest way. What I normally say to that is - we also have white collar crime, which is MUCH greater (more costly to the US) than that of the lower social levels. It is said that women at low social levels purposely have more children in order to get MORE government support. let us say that one such incident would cost the US government THOUSANDS of dollars over their lifetime. But, compare that to a white collar criminal such as a local banker that "SKIMS OFF" millions of dollars over their lifetime. White collar crime is hard to prove and takes hard detective work and a protracted legal case. The so-called "welfare Mom" is more visible and easier to disparage than the dishonest white collar executive.
............I go back to saying that the majority of the people-problems in the US is caused by over-population, which means letting too many immigrants in - both legally and illegally. A.I. and robotics are coming on strong and there will be less need for uneducated workers.
............I also believe that you are correct as to the idea that Elon Musk will make cuts to many Government programs and that he will be more in tune to your philosophy than mine. However if his cuts are too Draconian, he may just be breeding more Luigi Mangiones. Government must NOT be thought of as OVERREACHING.

Kudos on one of your best posts ever, and you'd be surprised that I agree with about 85% of it. However, the cost of "welfare" is almost quadruple that of white collar crime---here are the relevant numbers from the internet:

"The total cost of US welfare programs in fiscal year 2022 was $1.19 trillion, representing almost 20% of total federal spending and a quarter of tax revenues. These figures refer to means-tested welfare benefits and exclude entitlement programs to which people contribute (e.g., Social Security and Medicare)12."

"According to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) website, white collar crimes, “…are not violent, but they are not victimless. White collar crimes can destroy a company, wipe out a person’s life savings, cost investors billions of dollars, and erode the public’s trust in institutions.” White collar crimes cost the United States about $300 billion annually."

So in other words, when I pay $40,000 in federal income tax, $10,000 is going into the pockets of people I'm forced to support. Don't you think I should at least get a thank you card :1rotfl::1rotfl:;1rotfl:

[jimjamuser]

but another person might invest stupidly or gamble it away or get an illness. Subsidize stupidity ? , (not having health INS is a definition of stupidity)
If that is true then the WHOLE US is STUPID because they don't have National Health Care like all civilized countries.

[biker1]

Absolutely, there was a time that abuses were apparently wide spread. The thing I struggle with is when Government workers, at both the Federal, State, and Local level, are unionized. Does anyone believe that the Government is abusing workers to the level that prompted the creation of unions in the past?


At one time unions did a great job. However over time they were more interested in enriching themselves, very restrictive work rules and less interested in the success of the business they were working for.

[biker1]

So, why didn’t your favorite political party fix this “issue” when they had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a super majority in the Senate? They could have passed any bill they wanted with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Asking for a friend.

If that is true then the WHOLE US is STUPID because they don't have National Health Care like all civilized countries.

[jimjamuser]

Kudos on one of your best posts ever, and you'd be surprised that I agree with about 85% of it. However, the cost of "welfare" is almost quadruple that of white collar crime---here are the relevant numbers from the internet:

"The total cost of US welfare programs in fiscal year 2022 was $1.19 trillion, representing almost 20% of total federal spending and a quarter of tax revenues. These figures refer to means-tested welfare benefits and exclude entitlement programs to which people contribute (e.g., Social Security and Medicare)12."

"According to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) website, white collar crimes, “…are not violent, but they are not victimless. White collar crimes can destroy a company, wipe out a person’s life savings, cost investors billions of dollars, and erode the public’s trust in institutions.” White collar crimes cost the United States about $300 billion annually."

So in other words, when I pay $40,000 in federal income tax, $10,000 is going into the pockets of people I'm forced to support. Don't you think I should at least get a thank you card :1rotfl::1rotfl:;1rotfl:
OK Thank You very much for agreeing with 85% of what I said in my post. If together we could solve 85% of America's problems, life would be wonderful. it takes a lot of GUTS to agree with me on this social platform. I have burnt a lot of bridges because I am just a TINY bit stubborn and opinionated.
.....OK let me do some math. If we assume that each white collar criminal stole 1 million dollars, then that would be 300,000 criminals each year. Compared to 100 million people that receive government assistance. Of which about 50% on welfare are RETIRED workers. so they ONCE worked and contributed to the American dream. They could have worked on building roads, railroad repair, cooks, and maybe nurses aides. So at one time in their lives they were functional, but had little retirement benefits and somehow ran out of money. So then, about 50 million receiving assistance may have NEVER worked or only partly. They may have been housewives that raised some children. Also, I found that 31 million receive food stamps. Overall, I come to the conclusion that those people receiving government assistance seem to have CONTRIBUTED some significant things to the American system. In other words they are NOT 100% PARASITES to the US system. The white collar criminals, in contrast, seem to be almost 100% PARASITES to the system.
............I can't make a perfect analysis about this, which is worse, contrast because it would probably take a College business school about a week to get it right.

[JMintzer]

The income tax percentages have changed say from 1950 to today. I would say toward the LESS progressive.

And you would be wrong...

[JMintzer]

The top marginal tax rate for 1950 was 84%, for 1970 was 72%, for 1980 was 70%, for 2000 was 40%, for 2010 was 35%. So to summarize, for 50 years corporate backed politicians have SLASHED taxes to line the pockets of their wealthy donors.
.......That had a lot to do with the US today virtually having lost its middle class.

I've explained the difference between "marginal" and "effective" rated countless time, yet you continue to promote this nonsense...

[JMintzer]

People don't seem to understand that. They always say "I paid into SS". Yes, but it is basically a Ponzi scheme. If you outlive what you paid in, someone else is paying for you.

You conveniently ignore the added amount you would have if you were allowed to invest that money...

[JMintzer]

The problem is that you might be frugal with your money, but another person might invest stupidly or gamble it away or get an illness. Those people still have a right to life. So, the government takes some from you (and everyone) so there is some money for the "not so lucky individuals". The idea is to keep society stable.

They can do those very same things with your salary, your pension, or your SS payments once you receive them...

[JMintzer]

I don't think anyone has ever thought they could live "at the same lifestyle they had when working full time."

However, "live off of social security" is not the same thing as "live at the same lifestyle."

Social Security was ABSOLUTELY meant to be a plan that allowed retirees to not age into poverty. That was WHY it was created. Here's from the Social Security Administration's history page:



and this is what Roosevelt said at the signing ceremony:

Neither of those statement you quoted, suggest nor imply that one should be able to live only on SS...

[JMintzer]

I AM aware that the upper levels pay the most income taxes today and I assume that is the way it has ALWAYS been in US history. What I am pointing out is that the upper levels NEED TO PAY MORE, that's right MORE, than they do today. And the PROOF of that is that the US was stronger as a country in the period from WW2 to about 1975 when the US middle class was strongest. Today due to tax changes and that STUPID outsourcing and prejudices against UNIONS we really have no (ZERO) middle class with ANY strength. Note : Germany is a strong nation and they have much more UNIONS than the US has. The US prejudice against UNIONS which also began about 1980 is VERY non-productive for America. Also unpatriotic.
.........Since Elon Musk was mentioned........Musk is famously non-union. Even wants to move his businesses to Texas to avoid unions. He is known for being DIFFICULT to work for.

Now it's decrease in unions that are the problem? I thought it was tax rates...

[DonnaNi4os]

There are two fees here, which you are mixing up. My Part B is going $174.70 to $185. That is the standard Part B fee now, $185. Therefore the standard increase is $10.30 which is insignificant I feel, and your $5 increase is even less concerning. I see you reference a $34 increase for "Part B/C" So, much of the increase must be for Part C.
Do you know that there are many Part C with zero monthly premium, and they are not much different than the ones you pay $23 or $73 or $172 for? (Those are the non-zero premiums for Part C in Sumter County.) On all Part C plans, Medicare pays the insurer about $1100 per month to take care of you, so any premium you pay is almost insignificant to the insurer. Go for the zero premium plans. Both Humana and UnitedHealthCare / AARP offer zero premium plans. Go talk to those people often discussed here, who give Medicare advice in TV. Tell them you are unhappy that your Part B/C is increasing, and ask how you can avoid it. There will be some trade offs, but the $276 to $2064 you save in premiums per year may exceed what extra fees you incur through the year.

You never know how good your insurance really is until
you need it. None of us want a catastrophic illness that can cause hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have Medicare with a supplemental UHC/AARP and can tell you that, although I don’t like paying the premiums, it was nothing compared to what I would have owed. People can lose their homes because of catastrophic medical events.

[Stu from NYC]

Now it's decrease in unions that are the problem? I thought it was tax rates...

Or does he think we need more govt to tell us what to do?

[golfing eagles]

Or does he think we need more govt to tell us what to do?

All of the above :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Stu from NYC]

All of the above :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

We seem to have done much better when govt had less power and we got to make more decisions for our selves.

Guess he likes the nanny state.

[Wilharm]

SS COLA does not include food or gasoline. So if you don't eat or drive you will be fine.

[Jim1mack]

How is it that your part B is ONLY $125????? I was under the impression (maybe a false one) that the minimum part B premium is $174.70, going up to $185/month. People with high incomes are subject to IRMA and pay double or even triple.

Mine also is going from $174.70 to $185. That increase and the increase in the 10% Federal tax withholding, I’ll receive about $35 more a month. $420 annually. That will cover my weekly nine hole round at the championship courses so it’s like free golf going forward.

[jimjamuser]

Absolutely, there was a time that abuses were apparently wide spread. The thing I struggle with is when Government workers, at both the Federal, State, and Local level, are unionized. Does anyone believe that the Government is abusing workers to the level that prompted the creation of unions in the past?
Some Governments abuse their citizens. We don't want to be like Assad's Syria where non-compliant citizens are literally put in the PRESS. And not a free press!!!!

[jimjamuser]

So, why didn’t your favorite political party fix this “issue” when they had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a super majority in the Senate? They could have passed any bill they wanted with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Asking for a friend.
Good question. (and lot's of friends with questions) The answer is similar to, "Why has America NEVER elected a woman President". Why does almost everyone in the US own a GUN ? There must be something in the water or in the fabric of US History that the Greatest Nation on Planet Earth has some strange WARTS.
.........The best answer I suppose ( in MHO), is that even though the US insurance system is INFERIOR to a National Healthcare System - it became FIRMLY ESTABLISHED strangely as an UNWANTED BI-PRODUCT. Historically, INSURANCE companies prevented implementation of National Health Care (NHC) by heavily lobbying against proposed legislation, utilizing FEAR tactics (like BIG government control is BAD) and heavily PROMOTING the idea of employer-based health care as preferable.
.........Also the AMA collaborated to sway public opinion AGAINST NHC. Strangely, today, the AMA is VERY unhappy (P-word) that they turned over their POWER to the GREEDY, uncaring insurance companies.

[jimjamuser]

So, why didn’t your favorite political party fix this “issue” when they had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a super majority in the Senate? They could have passed any bill they wanted with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Asking for a friend.
In Germany the UNION heads sit on the Corporate Boards right alongside the company Executives. They CAN WORK together. In the US, I believe, that PROPAGANDA against Unions has "WON the DAY".

[jimjamuser]

So, why didn’t your favorite political party fix this “issue” when they had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a super majority in the Senate? They could have passed any bill they wanted with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Asking for a friend.
Actually, I don't believe in parties. I believe that in (other than time sensitive situations) that ALL the people should get to VOTE on ALL the issues. This is possible due to everyone having computers. Vote ALL issues - just like taking a poll, just a big national poll.
......For example, I believe that the southern border should be BLOCKED of illegal alien entrants. And ALL illegals returned to ?WHEREVER? THAT IS hard core CONSERVATIVE. But, I have other LIBERAL beliefs. The US 2 Party system just frustrates me.

[biker1]

I noticed that you could not focus on the issue. Typical of your responses.

Good question. (and lot's of friends with questions) The answer is similar to, "Why has America NEVER elected a woman President". Why does almost everyone in the US own a GUN ? There must be something in the water or in the fabric of US History that the Greatest Nation on Planet Earth has some strange WARTS.
.........The best answer I suppose ( in MHO), is that even though the US insurance system is INFERIOR to a National Healthcare System - it became FIRMLY ESTABLISHED strangely as an UNWANTED BI-PRODUCT. Historically, INSURANCE companies prevented implementation of National Health Care (NHC) by heavily lobbying against proposed legislation, utilizing FEAR tactics (like BIG government control is BAD) and heavily PROMOTING the idea of employer-based health care as preferable.
.........Also the AMA collaborated to sway public opinion AGAINST NHC. Strangely, today, the AMA is VERY unhappy (P-word) that they turned over their POWER to the GREEDY, uncaring insurance companies.

[biker1]

Another example of going off the rails. Try to focus.

Actually, I don't believe in parties. I believe that in (other than time sensitive situations) that ALL the people should get to VOTE on ALL the issues. This is possible due to everyone having computers. Vote ALL issues - just like taking a poll, just a big national poll.
......For example, I believe that the southern border should be BLOCKED of illegal alien entrants. And ALL illegals returned to ?WHEREVER? THAT IS hard core CONSERVATIVE. But, I have other LIBERAL beliefs. The US 2 Party system just frustrates me.

[JMintzer]

You never know how good your insurance really is until
you need it. None of us want a catastrophic illness that can cause hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have Medicare with a supplemental UHC/AARP and can tell you that, although I don’t like paying the premiums, it was nothing compared to what I would have owed. People can lose their homes because of catastrophic medical events.

I have the same insurance. So far (other than a few minor lab tests), no problems, with everything being covered.

Also, my insurance costs are now about 1/4 of what I had to pay under the ACA...

[JMintzer]

Good question. (and lot's of friends with questions) The answer is similar to, "Why has America NEVER elected a woman President". Why does almost everyone in the US own a GUN ? There must be something in the water or in the fabric of US History that the Greatest Nation on Planet Earth has some strange WARTS.
.........The best answer I suppose ( in MHO), is that even though the US insurance system is INFERIOR to a National Healthcare System - it became FIRMLY ESTABLISHED strangely as an UNWANTED BI-PRODUCT. Historically, INSURANCE companies prevented implementation of National Health Care (NHC) by heavily lobbying against proposed legislation, utilizing FEAR tactics (like BIG government control is BAD) and heavily PROMOTING the idea of employer-based health care as preferable.
.........Also the AMA collaborated to sway public opinion AGAINST NHC. Strangely, today, the AMA is VERY unhappy (P-word) that they turned over their POWER to the GREEDY, uncaring insurance companies.

Pretty much everything in your post is wrong (not to mention POLITICAL, which you know, quite well, is against the rules...)

[golfing eagles]

Pretty much everything in your post is wrong (not to mention POLITICAL, which you know, quite well, is against the rules...)

I'm confused. What part was right?????

[Stu from NYC]

I'm confused. What part was right?????

Periods and question marks at the end of sentences?

[JMintzer]

I'm confused. What part was right?????

Periods and question marks at the end of sentences?

I was being kind...