Talk of The Villages Florida

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)
-   Current Events and News (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/current-events-news-541/)
-   -   Social Security Bill passes for Federal Employees (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/current-events-news-541/social-security-bill-passes-federal-employees-355341/)

Topspinmo 01-04-2025 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pugchief (Post 2398030)
False. You have to contribute for 40 quarters in order to collect SS.

Correct I was confused with SSI.

Topspinmo 01-04-2025 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topspinmo (Post 2397940)
When you turn 65 you get SS whether you paid into it or not. Some spouses never had opportunities to work or have successful career. Beside SS was meant for poor or lower middle class.

I was corrected it’s SSI can get without working a day at 65.

jpvillager 01-05-2025 09:11 AM

Easy SS fix. Pay back all the money the federal government borrowed/took from SS.

Topspinmo 01-05-2025 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpvillager (Post 2398914)
Easy SS fix. Pay back all the money the federal government borrowed/took from SS.


Why? they get more by collecting it. :censored:

retiredguy123 01-05-2025 05:18 PM

Update: The Social Security Fairness Act has now been signed into law.

REDCART 01-05-2025 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpvillager (Post 2398914)
Easy SS fix. Pay back all the money the federal government borrowed/took from SS.

As I understand the issue. The US Gvt borrowed and repaid the funds it borrowed from the SS Trust funds. The scandal, for lack of a better name, was that the US Gvt borrowed these funds at less than the prevailing rate of interest. You think there was a slight conflict of interest? Would the difference in the interest rate have made a serious difference?

ElDiabloJoe 01-06-2025 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REDCART (Post 2399074)
As I understand the issue. The US Gvt borrowed and repaid the funds it borrowed from the SS Trust funds. The scandal, for lack of a better name, was that the US Gvt borrowed these funds at less than the prevailing rate of interest. You think there was a slight conflict of interest? Would the difference in the interest rate have made a serious difference?

Yes, the difference would make a difference. That loss of interest (let's say they paid $3 back in interest instead of the market rate of $5) would compound for years and years and years and would become very significant. Remember, SS is a long-term game, not an overnight loan.

retiredguy123 01-17-2025 02:26 PM

I applied for benefits under this new law, and it was approved within 10 days. Apparently, I will be immediately receiving 6 months of back pay from the application date and a regular monthly check starting in February. But, the SS representative said that the current law only allows the payments to be retroactive for 6 months back, even though the new law requires retroactive payments for 12 months back to December, 2023. I never submitted an application for spouse benefits because I knew that the GPO (Government Pension Offset) would totally wipe out any benefits. So, it sounds like they are applying the new law, but not the retroactivity that was included in it. Hopefully, the Government will correct this discrepancy between the current law and the new law. I would appreciate any additional information that anyone has about this issue.

Topspinmo 01-17-2025 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REDCART (Post 2399074)
As I understand the issue. The US Gvt borrowed and repaid the funds it borrowed from the SS Trust funds. The scandal, for lack of a better name, was that the US Gvt borrowed these funds at less than the prevailing rate of interest. You think there was a slight conflict of interest? Would the difference in the interest rate have made a serious difference?

Federal government won’t pay interest on federal money nor are there any penalties. On the other hand the tax payers one that suffer.

dhsmith 01-17-2025 10:38 PM

Social Security
 
Due we have to apply to SS Administration under this new law or will SS Administration automatically update our records and start paying what we’re due?

retiredguy123 01-18-2025 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dhsmith (Post 2402319)
Due we have to apply to SS Administration under this new law or will SS Administration automatically update our records and start paying what we’re due?

I think that, If you are already receiving benefits, your benefits will automatically increase. But, if you have never applied for benefits, you must apply.

Normal 01-18-2025 06:38 AM

Yes, it was borrowed from
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by REDCART (Post 2399074)
As I understand the issue. The US Gvt borrowed and repaid the funds it borrowed from the SS Trust funds. The scandal, for lack of a better name, was that the US Gvt borrowed these funds at less than the prevailing rate of interest. You think there was a slight conflict of interest? Would the difference in the interest rate have made a serious difference?

The money was borrowed, but never actually returned. It started in 1965 to help pay for the Vietnamese war. It’s kind of like your kids borrowing money, in most cases don’t expect it back. Currently the US government owes almost 3 trillion to the fund.

biker1 01-18-2025 08:18 AM

You are essentially correct. Treasury has issued special T-Bills to the SSA because FICA tax revenue exceeded benefits paid until recently. This is often referred to as the Trust Fund and currently has a value of about $2.8T. SSA began cashing in those T-Bills around 2021, when benefits paid exceeded FICA tax revenue. The Trust Fund will be exhausted around 2033 and benefits will decrease by about 23% as that is the level that can be supported by only incoming FICA taxes. Any suggestion that Treasury isn't going to pay back the Trust Fund is incorrect. Another way to look at the situation is that Treasury has permission to go out on the global markets and borrow $2.8T to provide funds to the SSA as they draw down the Trust Fund. This is obviously a less than ideal situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Normal (Post 2402345)
The money was borrowed, but never actually returned. It started in 1965 to help pay for the Vietnamese war. It’s kind of like your kids borrowing money, in most cases don’t expect it back. Currently the US government owes almost 3 trillion to the fund.


Nell57 01-18-2025 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retiredguy123 (Post 2402282)
I applied for benefits under this new law, and it was approved within 10 days. Apparently, I will be immediately receiving 6 months of back pay from the application date and a regular monthly check starting in February. But, the SS representative said that the current law only allows the payments to be retroactive for 6 months back, even though the new law requires retroactive payments for 12 months back to December, 2023. I never submitted an application for spouse benefits because I knew that the GPO (Government Pension Offset) would totally wipe out any benefits. So, it sounds like they are applying the new law, but not the retroactivity that was included in it. Hopefully, the Government will correct this discrepancy between the current law and the new law. I would appreciate any additional information that anyone has about this issue.

How did you apply? I was rejected in the past….i guess I need to re-apply now that GPO was repealed.

retiredguy123 01-18-2025 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nell57 (Post 2402458)
How did you apply? I was rejected in the past….i guess I need to re-apply now that GPO was repealed.

I completed the application online at SSA.gov.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.