Log in

View Full Version : Is Social Security Enough to Live in TV?


Guzzel
02-02-2025, 08:18 AM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

Bill14564
02-02-2025, 08:51 AM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

I think it would be difficult but probably possible.

Figure $900/month for annual tax bill, utilities, and amenity fee. Another $500 (?) for groceries and $300 for home and auto insurances bring the total up to $1,700 per month.

If an average SS check is $1,900 then it looks like it is possible to live here on SS alone.

Bay Kid
02-02-2025, 08:57 AM
I don't feel anyone can live off SS.

LuvtheVillages
02-02-2025, 09:02 AM
I think it would be difficult but probably possible.

Figure $900/month for annual tax bill, utilities, and amenity fee. Another $500 (?) for groceries and $300 for home and auto insurances bring the total up to $1,700 per month.

If an average SS check is $1,900 then it looks like it is possible to live here on SS alone.

I agree with your numbers, but you have not included anything for rent/mortgage payment. So you are assuming the person has enough resources to purchase a home free and clear.

Also, that leaves a very small amount for recreation activities.

Bill14564
02-02-2025, 09:07 AM
I agree with your numbers, but you have not included anything for rent/mortgage payment. So you are assuming the person has enough resources to purchase a home free and clear.

Also, that leaves a very small amount for recreation activities.

Yep. But the question was whether one could live here on SS, not whether they could sustain a particular lifestyle.

Actually, the cost for recreation activities could be negligible with so many activities included with the amenity fee.

BrianL99
02-02-2025, 09:09 AM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel


Is there some place in the USA, where one could live on Social Security, alone?

MrFlorida
02-02-2025, 09:38 AM
Depends on how much you get, but I don't think it's possible.

Topspinmo
02-02-2025, 09:46 AM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

Unless you inherited house with low taxes IMO no. Somebody on low income with no saving would be hard to come up with 3K taxes yearly average, plus homeowners insurance. Including vehicle even more expenses. Then, got to $230 plus monthly amenities/utilities and unforeseen costs like roof, water heater, A/C. IMO you would have have retirement income of 50,000 plus.

Topspinmo
02-02-2025, 09:47 AM
Is there some place in the USA, where one could live on Social Security, alone?

Qualified low income housing, where payment base on income.

Topspinmo
02-02-2025, 09:50 AM
I don't feel anyone can live off SS.

Millions do, but barely.

Topspinmo
02-02-2025, 10:00 AM
Another thing nearly every day somebody looses long life partner and shortly afterwards financial crisis emerges and the life style changes. In my case cause my wife followed me around world in military she have little career choices and would struggle to live here after 10 years of my death due to lost of my benefits. I0 years we have been here we hear of or witness this where spouse had died and other had to move due to financial crisis.

OrangeBlossomBaby
02-02-2025, 10:03 AM
So instead of guessing and supposing, I checked the actual social security website.

If you retire at age 67, and you earned lots of money during your life, your maximum possible social security check will be $4,018 per month before taxes and medicare part B premium.

You can live in The Villages for juuuuusssst around $2000/month. That will cover all the bills, including the weekly groceries, the lawnmower guy, and your cable TV. Figure around $500/month for taxes and Medicare Part B premium deduction. It means you'll have around $1500 left over every month for incidentals.

Now this is assuming you do /not/ have a mortgage or a large bond fee. If you used the proceeds from your house in Michigan to buy a pre-owned home in an area north of 466, you'll either have a low bond, or no bond, and no mortgage. So all your SS funds can cover all the other bills, with plenty left over.

However, if you didn't plan out quite that well when you were young, didn't have a terrific high-paying career, worked many lower-paying jobs, and barely get $1000/month in social security. Nope - that is totally not affordable, you MUST have some other source of income if you want to live in The Villages - or anywhere else for that matter.

CarlR33
02-02-2025, 10:06 AM
Similar to your recent post “COL in the villages”. I don’t think SS is the sole income provider for retirees and if it is they have to adapt and adjust accordingly. There are plenty of low cost homes in the north so I am sure it could be done with making personal adjustments (no trips overseas or extravagant trips in general). I would hope the percentage of people living solo of SS is small but sometimes I look and wonder when some peoples bubble will bust.

BrianL99
02-02-2025, 10:09 AM
Qualified low income housing, where payment base on income.

I'm not even sure that would work.

Have you been to a grocery store lately?

Subsidized housing runs 30% of "adjusted income" (which in Sr Housing, is essentially be gross minus medical.

if the average SS check is $1900, the rent would be $550. $1350/month after rent, but before utilities? Tough to eat on that income.

mrf6969
02-02-2025, 10:17 AM
Living on only Social Security is not a good retirement plan. If that is a person's plan, then I could not call that "living," and more just an existence.

Topspinmo
02-02-2025, 10:20 AM
So instead of guessing and supposing, I checked the actual social security website.

If you retire at age 67, and you earned lots of money during your life, your maximum possible social security check will be $4,018 per month before taxes and medicare part B premium.

You can live in The Villages for juuuuusssst around $2000/month. That will cover all the bills, including the weekly groceries, the lawnmower guy, and your cable TV. Figure around $500/month for taxes and Medicare Part B premium deduction. It means you'll have around $1500 left over every month for incidentals.

Now this is assuming you do /not/ have a mortgage or a large bond fee. If you used the proceeds from your house in Michigan to buy a pre-owned home in an area north of 466, you'll either have a low bond, or no bond, and no mortgage. So all your SS funds can cover all the other bills, with plenty left over.

However, if you didn't plan out quite that well when you were young, didn't have a terrific high-paying career, worked many lower-paying jobs, and barely get $1000/month in social security. Nope - that is totally not affordable, you MUST have some other source of income if you want to live in The Villages - or anywhere else for that matter.


People who earned lots of money usually not concerned about SS income. It’s average earners that are concerned when retiring.

Topspinmo
02-02-2025, 10:24 AM
I'm not even sure that would work.

Have you been to a grocery store lately?

Subsidized housing runs 30% of "adjusted income" (which in Sr Housing, is essentially be gross minus medical.

if the average SS check is $1900, the rent would be $550. $1350/month after rent, but before utilities? Tough to eat on that income.

It does for hundreds of thousands that barely get by. Most don’t witness it, why they organization’s like meals on wheels.

ElDiabloJoe
02-02-2025, 10:32 AM
I think it would be difficult but probably possible.

Figure $900/month for annual tax bill, utilities, and amenity fee. Another $500 (?) for groceries and $300 for home and auto insurances bring the total up to $1,700 per month.

If an average SS check is $1,900 then it looks like it is possible to live here on SS alone.
Assuming you bought the house in cash and does not factor into the calculations. Also assuming you don't need gasoline, health insurance, car insurance, homeowners' insurance, dining out, alcohol, clothing, entertaining, soap, shampoo, toothbrushes, dishes, pots. pans, etc.

I agree with Bill14565, Is it do-able? Maybe. Comfortable? Probably not.

rustyp
02-02-2025, 12:27 PM
Seems if one could live in TV on just SS it would be a very close to the vest situation. What would you do when your social acquaintances participated in other events not covered by amenities fees ? Why would one want to live here like that. Is that not akin to a recovering alcoholic visiting a bar everyday as a test of self discipline ?

asianthree
02-02-2025, 01:49 PM
I wouldn’t count mortgage (sold previous house paid cash)or food (one was eating before moving to TV) car insurance already in existence. WiFi, streaming, and cell already on the books.

Per year budget on

PV $1100 month
Cottage $1300 month
Designer depends on SF ours at 2000sf $1425 month

That would be homestead taxes, insurance, electric, gas if you have, lawn and your CDD bill. Lots of things to entertain yourself and keep active for free.

So sure if one was living elsewhere on SS, you could manage a home in TV. Or like some could rent long term, and not have to worry about taxes, lawn, CDD.

I know a few who live just on SS, my Mom does it easily even with paying in house help. She does takeaway 3 days a week, never fast food.

JohnN
02-02-2025, 02:17 PM
only if you can eat beans every day, literally

fdpaq0580
02-02-2025, 04:41 PM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

My opinion, yes. Home and lifestyle will not be extravagant, but you can be comfortable. Low expectations. Lots of "free" entertainment. Walking, music at the squares, fishing at the ponds, bird/wildlife watching, gardening. Amenities open the clubs, music, games, etc, to TV residents.
That being said, there are probably better options.
Good luck!

asianthree
02-02-2025, 05:56 PM
It does for hundreds of thousands that barely get by. Most don’t witness it, why they organization’s like meals on wheels.

Meals on wheels isn’t just for low income. Those who live alone are prime candidates for this service. PC docs and social workers highly recommend MoW, especially for newly widowed.
Five days a week usually the same person delivers a hot meal, at lunchtime, has a conversation with the person, gives human contact with a personal touch.

Meals run $5-8.50 per meal. There is also option of 5 frozen meals delivered once per week, with a longer visit for those who choose this method.

Each individual is evaluated for not only financial, but for those who can no longer navigate outside of home, from low vision, recovery from stroke, or replacement devices.

dewilson58
02-02-2025, 06:07 PM
$5,000 per month.................sure.

RL Lemke
02-02-2025, 06:31 PM
I’ve taken real numbers to develop our planned Monthly Nut, with all the regular monthly and annual expenses. Our social security covers everything except food and travel, with a $5,000 delta. That is with us paying cash for our home in The Villages. I’d say that $5,000 per month for incidentals, meals and travel is sufficient for our Dave Ramsey lifestyle. While we have a significant investment portfolio, we want to leave it to grow while providing security for our declining years.

shut the front door
02-02-2025, 06:49 PM
It's a total nonsense question. How can I tell someone else if they can afford to live here if I don't know their habits, wants, needs, and budget. Do you like to eat out 5x a week? Does your wife shop at Chicos? Do you travel? Do you have a car payment? Do you have a mortage?
Seriousy, such a stupid question to throw out without knowing the thousands of variables.

Bill14564
02-02-2025, 07:06 PM
It's a total nonsense question. How can I tell someone else if they can afford to live here if I don't know their habits, wants, needs, and budget. Do you like to eat out 5x a week? Does your wife shop at Chicos? Do you travel? Do you have a car payment? Do you have a mortage?
Seriousy, such a stupid question to throw out without knowing the thousands of variables.

Not so stupid actually.

The question wasn't whether you can live RL Lemke's Dave Ramsey lifestyle, the question was whether SS provided enough to live. I don't have to find out but it looks like it is.

It probably isn't enough for a mortgage, it isn't enough for two cruises per year or flights to Europe, and it isn't enough to eat out three times per week but it looks like SS is enough to cover property tax, bond, home and car insurance, amenities, utilities, and food. A lot of us live better, but that is sufficient to live.

OrangeBlossomBaby
02-02-2025, 07:24 PM
Not so stupid actually.

The question wasn't whether you can live RL Lemke's Dave Ramsey lifestyle, the question was whether SS provided enough to live. I don't have to find out but it looks like it is.

It probably isn't enough for a mortgage, it isn't enough for two cruises per year or flights to Europe, and it isn't enough to eat out three times per week but it looks like SS is enough to cover property tax, bond, home and car insurance, amenities, utilities, and food. A lot of us live better, but that is sufficient to live.

The Villages website has an actual outlay of the expected cost of living in the community.
Here it is:
Cost of Living in The Villages(R): Affordable 55+ Community (https://www.thevillages.com/cost-of-living/)

And it does NOT include your mortgage, food, cable, health insurance/health expenses. You need to include these things in your configuration, if you're planning on living ONLY on your social security check. If you only get $1900/month, and you pay $1000/month on "The Villages" - then you have only $900/month left for food, internet, phone service, maintenance on your home and vehicle, health insurance, and everything else. It doesn't leave anything to save for the day your car breaks down and needs costly repairs, or if a year after you move in, your insurance company says they'll double your premiums unless you get a new roof.

Bill14564
02-02-2025, 07:51 PM
The Villages website has an actual outlay of the expected cost of living in the community.
Here it is:
Cost of Living in The Villages(R): Affordable 55+ Community (https://www.thevillages.com/cost-of-living/)

And it does NOT include your mortgage, food, cable, health insurance/health expenses. You need to include these things in your configuration, if you're planning on living ONLY on your social security check. If you only get $1900/month, and you pay $1000/month on "The Villages" - then you have only $900/month left for food, internet, phone service, maintenance on your home and vehicle, health insurance, and everything else. It doesn't leave anything to save for the day your car breaks down and needs costly repairs, or if a year after you move in, your insurance company says they'll double your premiums unless you get a new roof.

My numbers for the items listed in their cost of living table plus car insurance comes to $1,000 per month in 2024 (it was a little less in 2023). So that leaves the $900/month that you identified.

I can't use my grocery spending since I go out frequently and don't worry about trying to save money. The internet says $400 per month per person is a good number. That leaves $500 per month. Granted, $500 is not a lot. On the other hand, steak for dinner, Culver's for lunch, and cable television are not necessities.

Again, the question isn't whether you can live comfortably or even live well, the question was whether you could live.

badkarma318
02-02-2025, 08:51 PM
Yes, I know numerous people who do. A few have big bank accounts and choose to live that way for whatever reason (not everyone needs a second home on a lake to brag about endlessly, nor take multiple expensive vacations every year).

A few live in the northern areas, bought their home outright many years ago, and have low property taxes/monthly fees.

None of them are eating dog food out of a can, and all of them are enjoying a good quality of life.

kkingston57
02-02-2025, 10:12 PM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

Too many variables but we can live in TV on SS only We do not have a mortgage and get about 60K in SS. Our fixed costs(no food) are around 2k a month

kkingston57
02-02-2025, 10:16 PM
Is there some place in the USA, where one could live on Social Security, alone?

Yes in TV. Most retirees have no mortgage and if 2 people get the average SS amount that would be around 4K a month. Our fixed expenses are 2K a month

brianherlihy
02-03-2025, 07:19 AM
no stay a way

Caymus
02-03-2025, 07:32 AM
Yes in TV. Most retirees have no mortgage and if 2 people get the average SS amount that would be around 4K a month. Our fixed expenses are 2K a month

and when one spouse passes?

biker1
02-03-2025, 07:57 AM
There can be a large variation in SS benefits. Assuming you worked 30 years, the minimum is about $1000 per month. The maximum is about $5000 per month. Medicare Part B will, of course, be taken out each month and there might be Federal taxes. Regardless, the range of SS benefits can be from about $1000 per month for a single person to about $10,000 per month for a couple.

Yes in TV. Most retirees have no mortgage and if 2 people get the average SS amount that would be around 4K a month. Our fixed expenses are 2K a month

asianthree
02-03-2025, 08:57 AM
and when one spouse passes?

My parents always counted their income and debts separately, during their entire life. That way one dies in an auto accident on the way home at 30, the other could continue. We follow the same as does our children and grands. Today is a guarantee tomorrow is a maybe.

But some in their 70-80s may think there will always be two. Then the children come into play, unless they are Dinks, two of our three are.

RL Lemke
02-03-2025, 11:30 AM
The question as to whether one could afford The Villages on social security is pretty easy math. In order to be accurate, one must look at the Districtgov.org site for bond assessment, for homes you are interested in. Thus, the math may be easy but completing an accurate spreadsheet takes effort.

Here is my budget list for the Monthly Nut, with all annual costs figured monthly.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-LfM6vFF/0/KKkjLRvkrhvbfQ8scFJrXMLG6CxFtRmxHVpF336pf/X3/i-LfM6vFF-X3.png

Other variables, like Income Tax, meals, incidentals, vehicle replacement, home repairs (EG: roof every 15 years), travel, etc… will need to be provided for. I carefully considered YouTube The Villages Newcomers and Rusty Nelson and their budget presentations for 2023 and 2024, then secured hard numbers for the home we are purchasing from service providers and assessor.

For assessment based property taxes this provides a budget number, based on home location.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-VhkGVS8/0/MpbdCndzpk842Nn3zNMXfPHQ75rrmqS9KcBTNbzgW/M/i-VhkGVS8-M.jpg

OrangeBlossomBaby
02-03-2025, 11:41 AM
Yes, I know numerous people who do. A few have big bank accounts and choose to live that way for whatever reason (not everyone needs a second home on a lake to brag about endlessly, nor take multiple expensive vacations every year).

A few live in the northern areas, bought their home outright many years ago, and have low property taxes/monthly fees.

None of them are eating dog food out of a can, and all of them are enjoying a good quality of life.

Thing is, you're assuming that everyone here is getting that "average". Average is average, because some get more, some get less. It's even possible that NO ONE is getting average (since averages are the sum of all numbers in a given set, divided by how many numbers exist in that given set).

As for me, there's no way I'd be able to live on just my own social security check alone. My check is under $1000. I spent most of my life working part time. I worked part time consistently, but it didn't amount to much when it came to social security payroll deductions and earnings.

I have no pension because - part time doesn't typically offer 401ks and the job that did, the store completely closed down before I could even earn $1000 from it. I rolled it over into an IRA that I'd had kicking around, and even that isn't worth much.

shut the front door
02-03-2025, 12:34 PM
Yes, I know numerous people who do. A few have big bank accounts and choose to live that way for whatever reason (not everyone needs a second home on a lake to brag about endlessly, nor take multiple expensive vacations every year).

A few live in the northern areas, bought their home outright many years ago, and have low property taxes/monthly fees.

None of them are eating dog food out of a can, and all of them are enjoying a good quality of life.

Many on this board do!

Michael G.
02-03-2025, 01:43 PM
https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=107298&stc=1&d=1738608151

Rainger99
02-03-2025, 01:52 PM
It would be very difficult to live solely on Social Security anywhere in the USA. Please note that SS was not designed to be the sole source of income for retired people. People have always talked about the "3 legged stool" of retirement.

The 3-Legged Stool Metaphor
1. Social Security
2. Pensions
3. Personal savings

This is from the SS website.

Social Security was never meant to be the only source of income for people when they retire. Social Security replaces a percentage of a worker’s pre-retirement income based on your lifetime earnings. If you start benefits in 2025 at your “full retirement age” (see our “Full retirement age” section), this percentage ranges from as much as 79% for very low earners, to about 43% for medium earners, to about 28% for maximum earners. I

Most financial advisers say you will need about 70% to 80% of pre-retirement income — including your Social Security benefits, investments, and personal savings — to live comfortably in retirement.

I have been surprised at how little social security pays and how expensive Medicare is. I thought that Medicare would free (people are always talking about free healthcare for all) since I paid into it for more than 50 years. I was wrong about that!!

OrangeBlossomBaby
02-03-2025, 07:10 PM
It would be very difficult to live solely on Social Security anywhere in the USA. Please note that SS was not designed to be the sole source of income for retired people. People have always talked about the "3 legged stool" of retirement.

The 3-Legged Stool Metaphor
1. Social Security
2. Pensions
3. Personal savings

This is from the SS website.

Social Security was never meant to be the only source of income for people when they retire. Social Security replaces a percentage of a worker’s pre-retirement income based on your lifetime earnings. If you start benefits in 2025 at your “full retirement age” (see our “Full retirement age” section), this percentage ranges from as much as 79% for very low earners, to about 43% for medium earners, to about 28% for maximum earners. I

Most financial advisers say you will need about 70% to 80% of pre-retirement income — including your Social Security benefits, investments, and personal savings — to live comfortably in retirement.

I have been surprised at how little social security pays and how expensive Medicare is. I thought that Medicare would free (people are always talking about free healthcare for all) since I paid into it for more than 50 years. I was wrong about that!!

I don't know where on the SSA website you read that, but here's what I saw - and a link to the page and location on that link:

Social Security History (https://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html)

The biggest problem with company-provided pensions was that the percentage of workers anticipating an employment-related pension from their company or their union was tiny. Indeed, in 1900 there were a total of five companies in the United States (including Dolge) offering their industrial workers company-sponsored pensions. As late as 1932, only about 15% of the laborforce had any kind of potential employment-related pension. And because the pensions were often granted or withheld at the option of the employer, most of these workers would never see a retirement pension. Indeed, only about 5% of the elderly were in fact receiving retirement pensions in 1932.

So the company pension was an option not available to most Americans during the time prior to the advent of Social Security.

The above is somewhat near the top of the page, under "The Company Pension."

Social Security History
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.
The above is around the half-way mark on that page.

The tl;dr (too late, didn't read) version: Social Security WAS ABSOLUTELY designed as a pension/retirement for retired workers, many of whom had no pension plan at all from their jobs, and didn't earn enough to "save for retirement" during the Depression and shortly thereafter. That is exactly precisely WHY it was created.

FloridaGuy66
02-03-2025, 07:53 PM
Too many variables. Almost anything is possible if you're very cheap/frugal.

I see a wide range of spending even by people that live in nearly identical homes in my neighborhood.

Some are driving 15+ year vehicles and appear to rarely leave the house except for groceries. Zero landcape upgrades to their home including not adding gutters.

Others I see with a different vehicle or golf cart every year almost and they're going out for a meal almost nightly. The same people have what seems like a revolving door of contractors starting on a new upgrade or landscape project on their house every few months. Some people here seem to just love spending money and hopefully it's because they can afford it.

Bay Kid
02-04-2025, 08:23 AM
I still have to pay taxes on SS.

Bill14564
02-04-2025, 08:32 AM
I still have to pay taxes on SS.

You wouldn't if your only income was SS.

BrianL99
02-04-2025, 09:34 AM
I still have to pay taxes on SS.

Social Security is taxable income, just like most every other kind of income. Why shouldn't it be?

mtdjed
02-04-2025, 09:36 AM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

Since the supposition is "Social Security alone", why answers including pension, investments etc? Answer would depend on individual or couple total Social Security income.

An anonymous opinion with ambiguous conditions. Almost like someone throwing a fox in the henhouse to see how alert the flock is today.

Maybe someday you will see a question regarding moving to The Villages to see if they would fit in with their Capybara. Oh! That already happened.

biker1
02-04-2025, 09:38 AM
Not exactly. If your income is low enough, none of it is taxed. At most, 85% is taxed.

Social Security is taxable income, just like most every other kind of income. Why shouldn't it be?

ROCKETMAN
02-04-2025, 09:42 AM
That’s a tough question to answer, if you can live on social security. Right now for 2025 max is $4025 if you work till max retirement date, more if you wait till age 70. Average social security is $2000. Depends if you have mortgage, car payment, etc. way to many variables to say if you can live on social security

jimhoward
02-04-2025, 09:48 AM
Here is a slight tangent to the topic.

We purchased a CYV late last year that is walking distance from LSL to use as a rental property. It is a major fixer-upper. The home was owned by the estate of a widower. The former owner was very likely mainly living on SSI because the house had a reverse mortgage on it and was way under water. Negotiation of the purchase was very difficult because the trustee and the bank did not want to take a haircut on the sale of the property.

We were told by the realtor (who may or may not know that they are talking about) that this is common in the villages and houses languish on the market because a bank and/or estate would rather sit on them than take a loss.

The relevance to the topic at hand is....for villager living on social security and whose main asset is their house, are reverse mortgages common? If so, that is one way that villagers living on SSI could make ends meet. Although it seems like a very painful way.

Rainger99
02-04-2025, 10:17 AM
I don't know where on the SSA website you read that[/I].".

This is the link where I read it. Page 5.

https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10024.pdf

Bay Kid
02-05-2025, 08:08 AM
My Dad's SS went from $364 per to $205 per month in January. His Civil Service retirement went from $1,265 to $1,315. He lost $109 and his Medicare went up. What is with this?

I think the gov isn't fair to him. If it wasn't for me he would be in bad shape.

biker1
02-05-2025, 08:33 AM
The are a lot of rules with Social Security. Why did his Social Security decrease? If you don’t know, you might want to ask.


My Dad's SS went from $364 per to $205 per month in January. His Civil Service retirement went from $1,265 to $1,315. He lost $109 and his Medicare went up. What is with this?

I think the gov isn't fair to him. If it wasn't for me he would be in bad shape.

DrMack
02-05-2025, 10:09 AM
[QUOTE=Guzzel;2406366]Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel[/QUOTEz]

Hardly, maybe if food stamps increased.

asianthree
02-06-2025, 06:46 AM
If someone is living just off SS, prior to moving to TV, then it’s not much difference in TV. Except for amenities fees, one would still need wifi, car (or not) insurance, a dwelling, heat, air, food.

For many free activities saves money, plus taxes for many are far less. So money in the bank. I know some who choose their lifestyle, with just SS, and investing pension, so when time come spouse and or children will have a tidy sum.

We traveled our whole life, for a living, seeing the world in younger age. Some have second homes to travel and enjoy anytime they please. Have to say we enjoyed Europe in our younger days, and have family to visit in multiple countries, when we chose. Now we mostly stick to vaca homes, two hour flights or less with a different view, culture, and lifestyle

Aces4
02-06-2025, 10:18 AM
If someone is living just off SS, prior to moving to TV, then it’s not much difference in TV. Except for amenities fees, one would still need wifi, car (or not) insurance, a dwelling, heat, air, food.

For many free activities saves money, plus taxes for many are far less. So money in the bank. I know some who choose their lifestyle, with just SS, and investing pension, so when time come spouse and or children will have a tidy sum.

We traveled our whole life, for a living, seeing the world in younger age. Some have second homes to travel and enjoy anytime they please. Have to say we enjoyed Europe in our younger days, and have family to visit in multiple countries, when we chose. Now we mostly stick to vaca homes, two hour flights or less with a different view, culture, and lifestyle

I think you're forgetting about pest control, termite contracts, lawn mowing and maintenance services, the extra bond charges on your tax bill at the end of the year along with the amenity fees that you mentioned, which keep rising. I would not plan to live in The Villages with only SS benefits in retirement, there are many less expensive options.

asianthree
02-06-2025, 01:59 PM
I think you're forgetting about pest control, termite contracts, lawn mowing and maintenance services, the extra bond charges on your tax bill at the end of the year along with the amenity fees that you mentioned, which keep rising. I would not plan to live in The Villages with only SS benefits in retirement, there are many less expensive options.

Nope we do our own pest (Sunday all natural 4 applications $75) we also mow our own because let’s face it’s a better job than any company (electric mower 4 years old paid for itself 5 times over)

Not all houses have a bond, I didn’t say plan on just SS, but some live on SS and invest their other income. 2007 was the first time we came to TV. Very well versed in all things to run a household including, 4 types of homes in TV, and the exact budget for each

If one needs to be concerned about amenities rising, I don’t think that is the only problem, one should be concerned about. Amenity is not the only cost that has risen since 2007 in TV.

OrangeBlossomBaby
02-06-2025, 02:48 PM
Nope we do our own pest (Sunday all natural 4 applications $75) we also mow our own because let’s face it’s a better job than any company (electric mower 4 years old paid for itself 5 times over)

Not all houses have a bond, I didn’t say plan on just SS, but some live on SS and invest their other income. 2007 was the first time we came to TV. Very well versed in all things to run a household including, 4 types of homes in TV, and the exact budget for each

If one needs to be concerned about amenities rising, I don’t think that is the only problem, one should be concerned about. Amenity is not the only cost that has risen since 2007 in TV.

At some point, you will no longer be capable of mowing your own lawn. But the lawn will still require mowing. You'll have to pay someone to do it. If your social security doesn't rise enough to cover the increase in your health insurance, AND general inflation on goods and services, AND the increase in amenity fees, AND the increase in taxes - then you'll be hurting.

Social security is considered a fixed income, even though it goes up a few percentage points every year or two. Your costs for living, generally go up more than a few percentage points every year or two.

Eventually, your fixed income will cease to be enough to support your costs for living. If one of you outlives the other, you'll end up with less to live on. Even pensions don't transfer 100% to a spouse, it's always a reduced amount. If you're struggling now, good luck affording it later.

mco1965
02-06-2025, 03:08 PM
Is there some place in the USA, where one could live on Social Security, alone?

My parents live in Tenn.. on social security alone. home is paid for.
I think collecting SS for both makes a huge difference, it would tough it were only 1...

Aces4
02-06-2025, 03:15 PM
Nope we do our own pest (Sunday all natural 4 applications $75) we also mow our own because let’s face it’s a better job than any company (electric mower 4 years old paid for itself 5 times over)

Not all houses have a bond, I didn’t say plan on just SS, but some live on SS and invest their other income. 2007 was the first time we came to TV. Very well versed in all things to run a household including, 4 types of homes in TV, and the exact budget for each

If one needs to be concerned about amenities rising, I don’t think that is the only problem, one should be concerned about. Amenity is not the only cost that has risen since 2007 in TV.

Exactly, if one has to worry about living on SS and amenities rising, the bond on the tax bill rising, price of groceries which appear to be higher and I'm not talking about the house bond, and every other expense, The Villages isn't for them. Why live here with such limited income when they can choose another location which makes their retirement so much more enjoyable.

I get that you are well-heeled and planned well with a good income but picture living here with only $25,000-$35,000 before taxes in your pocket a year with no additional assets other than able to purchase a low end home here and a vehicle. It's pretty skimpy living and the cost of living in The Villages is not cheap as some would have you believe.

Bill14564
02-06-2025, 03:25 PM
At some point, you will no longer be capable of mowing your own lawn. But the lawn will still require mowing. You'll have to pay someone to do it. If your social security doesn't rise enough to cover the increase in your health insurance, AND general inflation on goods and services, AND the increase in amenity fees, AND the increase in taxes - then you'll be hurting.

Social security is considered a fixed income, even though it goes up a few percentage points every year or two. Your costs for living, generally go up more than a few percentage points every year or two.

Eventually, your fixed income will cease to be enough to support your costs for living. If one of you outlives the other, you'll end up with less to live on. Even pensions don't transfer 100% to a spouse, it's always a reduced amount. If you're struggling now, good luck affording it later.

Social Security COLAs have matched or exceeded inflation (cost of living) over the past ten years or so (can't remember exactly how far back I looked). Yes, you can find examples of items that have increased more but if you're honest you can find examples that have increased less. If one is living solely on SS then hopefully they will choose wisely.

Bill14564
02-06-2025, 03:28 PM
Exactly, if one has to worry about living on SS and amenities rising, the bond on the tax bill rising, price of groceries which appear to be higher and I'm not talking about the house bond, and every other expense, The Villages isn't for them. Why live here with such limited income when they can choose another location which makes their retirement so much more enjoyable.

I get that you are well-heeled and planned well with a good income but picture living here with only $25,000-$35,000 before taxes in your pocket a year with no additional assets other than able to purchase a low end home here and a vehicle. It's pretty skimpy living and the cost of living in The Villages is not cheap as some would have you believe.

What bond on your taxes is not the house bond?

Property taxes have generally been steady or decreasing over the last five years. On the other hand, school taxes have more than covered that in their increases.

The bond on the home will eventually be paid off.

It makes sense to ask why someone would want to live here if their income was that limited. Who knows, someone who is doing it might have a good answer to that.

Aces4
02-06-2025, 03:32 PM
What bond on your taxes is not the house bond?

Property taxes have generally been steady or decreasing over the last five years. On the other hand, school taxes have more than covered that in their increases.

The bond on the home will eventually be paid off.

It makes sense to ask why someone would want to live here if their income was that limited. Who knows, someone who is doing it might have a good answer to that.

Maintenance bond.

Bill14564
02-06-2025, 03:52 PM
Maintenance bond.

Ah, okay. But for accuracy, that is a yearly fee and not a bond payment. Little difference, still money out of your pocket, but a fee amount is easier to change than a bond payment and a bond payment will eventually come to an end.

asianthree
02-06-2025, 05:11 PM
At some point, you will no longer be capable of mowing your own lawn. But the lawn will still require mowing. You'll have to pay someone to do it. If your social security doesn't rise enough to cover the increase in your health insurance, AND general inflation on goods and services, AND the increase in amenity fees, AND the increase in taxes - then you'll be hurting.

Social security is considered a fixed income, even though it goes up a few percentage points every year or two. Your costs for living, generally go up more than a few percentage points every year or two.

Eventually, your fixed income will cease to be enough to support your costs for living. If one of you outlives the other, you'll end up with less to live on. Even pensions don't transfer 100% to a spouse, it's always a reduced amount. If you're struggling now, good luck affording it later.

My post was answering the OP, can you live in TV on just SS, and my answer was if one is living on SS elsewhere, TV shouldn’t be much difference in TV.

Between properties in TV and our homes up north, I can still bank large % of income every month. No pensions, All our retirement investments were self contributions. So spouse dies still good. My health care cost is Medicare B, my second coverage is free to me, I have zero out of pocket for anything. So no worries there. Home care will eventually be covered if needed

Lawn, considering it’s 21 minutes to mow, edge, and occasional weed, our lawn. We do have family that has 13 crew landscaping company, but I choose not to have free lawn care, but free landscaping is always an option.

Some actually plan well for retirement, and don’t sit and worry on a daily basis is cost goes up. Just make some changes all is good

Aces4
02-06-2025, 06:18 PM
Social Security COLAs have matched or exceeded inflation (cost of living) over the past ten years or so (can't remember exactly how far back I looked). Yes, you can find examples of items that have increased more but if you're honest you can find examples that have increased less. If one is living solely on SS then hopefully they will choose wisely.

"According to current information, Social Security COLAs (Cost-of-Living Adjustments) have not fully kept pace with the actual inflation that seniors are facing, with many experts stating that the recent 2.5% increase for 2025 is below the inflation rate experienced by older adults, particularly in areas like healthcare and housing costs; meaning seniors are still struggling to maintain their purchasing power."

As far as I'm concerned, SS Cola's are based on only a few of the expenses and don't even touch basic expenses which have escalated.

Bill14564
02-06-2025, 06:32 PM
"According to current information, Social Security COLAs (Cost-of-Living Adjustments) have not fully kept pace with the actual inflation that seniors are facing, with many experts stating that the recent 2.5% increase for 2025 is below the inflation rate experienced by older adults, particularly in areas like healthcare and housing costs; meaning seniors are still struggling to maintain their purchasing power."

As far as I'm concerned, SS Cola's are based on only a few of the expenses and don't even touch basic expenses which have escalated.

There are experts and there is data. As I mentioned above, some things exceeded inflation and others not.

It’s probably the case that the current housing market is not good for someone looking to buy in their SS income alone. Okay, that person will have a problem. On the other hand, those already in their home are not affected by increasing home prices.

asianthree
02-06-2025, 06:42 PM
There are experts and there is data. As I mentioned above, some things exceeded inflation and others not.

It’s probably the case that the current housing market is not good for someone looking to buy in their SS income alone. Okay, that person will have a problem. On the other hand, those already in their home are not affected by increasing home prices.

Or sold their home elsewhere and pay cash in TV, or take out mortgage and pay down large % after 30 days and still stay with SS budget. Lots of homes available in TV, should be one available to stay in budget. Then again it’s a hypothetical post, no mention of amount of SS

Aces4
02-06-2025, 11:28 PM
There are experts and there is data. As I mentioned above, some things exceeded inflation and others not.

It’s probably the case that the current housing market is not good for someone looking to buy in their SS income alone. Okay, that person will have a problem. On the other hand, those already in their home are not affected by increasing home prices.

If your SS increase has covered all your living expenses caused by the ballooning inflation recently, you are one in a million.

We haven't even touched costs associated with the home maintenance such as roof needing replacement, power washing, painting if stucco, air conditioning, heat pump... there is always something needing attention. If the OP is receiving the SS max benefit of $61,296. a year, (max benefit to date), and has the funds to buy a home outright, they may be able to squeeze by.

asianthree
02-07-2025, 07:31 AM
If your SS increase has covered all your living expenses caused by the ballooning inflation recently, you are one in a million.

We haven't even touched costs associated with the home maintenance such as roof needing replacement, power washing, painting if stucco, air conditioning, heat pump... there is always something needing attention. If the OP is receiving the SS max benefit of $61,296. a year, (max benefit to date), and has the funds to buy a home outright, they may be able to squeeze by.

Or like some move to a newer home every 8-10 years, no worries on AC,roof,HVAC, power wash only for vinyl, paint stucco more than 10 years unless you CMD on color. Didn’t the hypothetical person live elsewhere with maintenance and all the things you posted.
Why all the gloom on a hypothetical post “can you live on SS in TV” just because you can’t doesn’t mean others aren’t better at handling lifestyle. My dad grew up as a young child during the depression. Once he retired, they lived off just His SS all other income put away eventually for their kids.
They traveled, ate out, updated home as needed, mowed his lawn until 93, lavished their grandchildren with too much stuff. Their home up north cost far more in taxes, maintenance, snow removal, heat, air, then home in TV. He said TV cost was like winning the lottery every year.

opinionist
02-07-2025, 07:31 AM
Social Security was never intended as any more than a helping hand for retirees.
Social Security is indexed to inflation, but that adjustment is based on a lie.
John Williams documents the actual inflation rate at shadowstats.com
That means it may be affordable today but not 10 years from now.

Lottoguy
02-07-2025, 09:38 AM
Ocala National Forest is where you can live on just SS. Many do it there.

Aces4
02-07-2025, 10:40 AM
Or like some move to a newer home every 8-10 years, no worries on AC,roof,HVAC, power wash only for vinyl, paint stucco more than 10 years unless you CMD on color. Didn’t the hypothetical person live elsewhere with maintenance and all the things you posted.
Why all the gloom on a hypothetical post “can you live on SS in TV” just because you can’t doesn’t mean others aren’t better at handling lifestyle. My dad grew up as a young child during the depression. Once he retired, they lived off just His SS all other income put away eventually for their kids.
They traveled, ate out, updated home as needed, mowed his lawn until 93, lavished their grandchildren with too much stuff. Their home up north cost far more in taxes, maintenance, snow removal, heat, air, then home in TV. He said TV cost was like winning the lottery every year.

If one can afford a $30,000. bond payment a year, house jumping is a great idea. Ahem...

My Dad and Mom could probably have outshone your Dad, lol, if you want to talk about thriftiness, ambition, common sense and financial security. Thankfully, those talents were passed down to their children.

Both you and I know very few people are that adept at managing their finances and life and if this person is down to living on their SS benefits, they missed the financial boat somehow. They're asking for advice for their circumstances and I believe that lecturing someone how to suddenly become capable and proficient at living on very little is a waste of good breath.:mornincoffee:

Bill14564
02-07-2025, 11:39 AM
If one can afford a $30,000. bond payment a year, house jumping is a great idea. Ahem...

Who is paying $30,000/year for a bond payment? It is typically more like $1,500/year.

My Dad and Mom could probably have outshone your Dad, lol, if you want to talk about thriftiness, ambition, common sense and financial security. Thankfully, those talents were passed down to their children.

Both you and I know very few people are that adept at managing their finances and life and if this person is down to living on their SS benefits, they missed the financial boat somehow. They're asking for advice for their circumstances and I believe that lecturing someone how to suddenly become capable and proficient at living on very little is a waste of good breath.:mornincoffee:

Who is asking for advice? The OP asked for opinions on whether it is possible. The numbers make it look like it is possible. Desirable? Maybe not, but possible.

Aces4
02-07-2025, 06:29 PM
Who is paying $30,000/year for a bond payment? It is typically more like $1,500/year.



Who is asking for advice? The OP asked for opinions on whether it is possible. The numbers make it look like it is possible. Desirable? Maybe not, but possible.

They were asking for advice as to whether they could live here on SS benefits alone. Semantics.

Some are paying on a $30,000. bond every year. Again semantics. With your breakout of $1500. once a year doesn't make the budge look any better. Squeaking by isn't fun, in fact, it could probably affect their health if things get too tight.

Dusty_Star
02-07-2025, 07:02 PM
They were asking for advice as to whether they could live here on SS benefits alone. Semantics.

Some are paying on a $30,000. bond every year. Again semantics. With your breakout of $1500. once a year doesn't make the budge look any better. Squeaking by isn't fun, in fact, it could probably affect their health if things get too tight.

Some are higher than that. I just looked at a new bond in district 15 & the total bond is almost $51,000. the yearly payment is $3,357. This was randomly selected. There may be higher & probably lower ones in this same area..

coralway
02-08-2025, 03:25 AM
TV is a middle income community. It’s nothing special. Old people move here because it’s too cold up North for them during the winter months. And, quite frankly, they can’t afford to live in the Northern states. I am one of those older people, and I live here down here from early January through early March. I rent my CYV the rest of the year, while I stay “up North “ , my real home

asianthree
02-08-2025, 07:36 AM
They were asking for advice as to whether they could live here on SS benefits alone. Semantics.

Some are paying on a $30,000. bond every year. Again semantics. With your breakout of $1500. once a year doesn't make the budge look any better. Squeaking by isn't fun, in fact, it could probably affect their health if things get too tight.

OP post is still “can you live on just SS”, and yes one could, my guess is some wouldn’t describe their life as squeaking by. But living within their budget, just like they did prior to moving to TV. We don’t eat out multiple times a a month, because food in the bubble is just mediocre, and can be made better at home. I find many 80yo plus in my parents age are happy with their lifestyle even if those think they live with less than others.

Aces4
02-08-2025, 10:08 AM
OP post is still “can you live on just SS”, and yes one could, my guess is some wouldn’t describe their life as squeaking by. But living within their budget, just like they did prior to moving to TV. We don’t eat out multiple times a a month, because food in the bubble is just mediocre, and can be made better at home. I find many 80yo plus in my parents age are happy with their lifestyle even if those think they live with less than others.

Living with less is far different than squeaking by. I wouldn't want my parents living a mean existence in their 80's and activities for most have greatly declined by the time they're in their eighties. That doesn't make your choice wrong, we just have different goals for the end of life living.

I personally think most elderly living in mixed age society think and do better. Could it be they are sharper being exposed to younger minds and experiences?

Bill14564
02-08-2025, 11:29 AM
Living with less is far different than squeaking by. I wouldn't want my parents living a mean existence in their 80's and activities for most have greatly declined by the time they're in their eighties. That doesn't make your choice wrong, we just have different goals for the end of life living.

I personally think most elderly living in mixed age society think and do better. Could it be they are sharper being exposed to younger minds and experiences?

I see those aged 80+ being much more active here than where I lived in NY or MD. Could be because of the higher numbers here (more to notice) or could be because of the activities here.

And still, the original question was whether one could live here on SS.
- It was not whether I would need to
- It was not whether I would want to
- It was not whether someone could live better somewhere else
- It was not whether someone could buy the largest house in the newest enclave with the highest bond
- It was not a lot of things that have been argued in this thread

The question was whether one could live here on SS.

Aces4
02-08-2025, 02:01 PM
[QUOTE=Bill14564;2407900]I see those aged 80+ being much more active here than where I lived in NY or MD. Could be because of the higher numbers here (more to notice) or could be because of the activities here.

And still, the original question was whether one could live here on SS.
************************************************** ************************************************** ****************************************
Yeah, the poster was asking for advice. :thumbup:

Seniors may be physically more active but I wonder about brain activity, acuity...

asianthree
02-08-2025, 06:10 PM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel


************************************************** ************************************************** ****************************************
Yeah, the poster was asking for advice. :thumbup:

Seniors may be physically more active but I wonder about brain activity, acuity...[/QUOTE]

Actually the OP (above) posted an article from the other news site. Asking for perspective of the article can one live on just SS.

Aces4
02-08-2025, 08:01 PM
************************************************** ************************************************** ****************************************
Yeah, the poster was asking for advice. :thumbup:

Seniors may be physically more active but I wonder about brain activity, acuity...

Actually the OP (above) posted an article from the other news site. Asking for perspective of the article can one live on just SS.[/QUOTE]

The header to the post is: "Is Social Security Enough to Live in The Villages?" That would be asking for advice. Either way, my advice is no. Easy peasy.

rustyp
02-09-2025, 06:03 AM
I see those aged 80+ being much more active here than where I lived in NY or MD. Could be because of the higher numbers here (more to notice) or could be because of the activities here.

And still, the original question was whether one could live here on SS.
- It was not whether I would need to
- It was not whether I would want to
- It was not whether someone could live better somewhere else
- It was not whether someone could buy the largest house in the newest enclave with the highest bond
- It was not a lot of things that have been argued in this thread

The question was whether one could live here on SS.

Correction the question was "Is Social Security Enough to Live in TV?"
Think about it - room for interpretation to the absolute wording.

OrangeBlossomBaby
02-09-2025, 10:21 AM
Correction the question was "Is Social Security Enough to Live in TV?"
Think about it - room for interpretation to the absolute wording.

And the answer hasn't change:

It depends on the size of your Social Security check.

If you get the minimum, then no.
If you get the average, then - possibly?
If you get the most, then yes.

DAVES
02-09-2025, 12:24 PM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

I don't know why people ask this question. People should know what they have and what things cost. You are always better off with more than you need rather than less.

Heck, ALL are aware of eggs. They were ninety-nine cents a dozen now four dollars plus..

DAVES
02-09-2025, 12:32 PM
Did anyone read the Letter to the Editor piece in the Village Nws titled, "You must have more than Social Security income to afford The Villages’ lifestyle".

The author states, "You cannot afford The Villages without having Social Security, investments and pensions or a combination."

Obviously everyone's financial situation is different and SS payments can vary greatly, but wanted to get other perspectives.

Guzzel

As polite as I can be, I live in reality-strange for many. I count MY MONEY. I spend MY MONEY. Some have less than I do some have more.

Bill14564
02-09-2025, 12:40 PM
I don't know why people ask this question. People should know what they have and what things cost. You are always better off with more than you need rather than less.

Heck, ALL are aware of eggs. They were ninety-nine cents a dozen now four dollars plus..

It was 25 years ago when eggs were 99 cents/dozen.

People may not know what things cost here, especially if they don't yet live here, and sometimes even if they do.

biker1
02-09-2025, 12:41 PM
Nope. It depends on a lot of variables. If you and your spouse make the maximum then you would gross $10K per month. Assuming no other income then you would net about $9000 a month (taxes and Medicare deducted). Yes, you could live on that. That is an outlier but the bottom line is "it depends".

Actually the OP (above) posted an article from the other news site. Asking for perspective of the article can one live on just SS.

The header to the post is: "Is Social Security Enough to Live in The Villages?" That would be asking for advice. Either way, my advice is no. Easy peasy.[/QUOTE]

rustyp
02-09-2025, 01:30 PM
Correction the question was "Is Social Security Enough to Live in TV?"
Think about it - room for interpretation to the absolute wording.

And the answer hasn't change:

It depends on the size of your Social Security check.

If you get the minimum, then no.
If you get the average, then - possibly?
If you get the most, then yes.

YES NO MAYBE - no room for interpretation there.

mco1965
02-11-2025, 10:05 AM
YES NO MAYBE - no room for interpretation there.

Best Answer yet!

BTW: what is the max SS payment? I need to be on that train!