Community Chat

[guatmum]

There are many women who agree that SS should not be passed from spouse to surviving spouse. It is not just something a man would say. Talking about what one's grandmother or great grandmother did as a SAHM is irrelevant to today. Back then, unless you are VERY young, women had no ability to get a job (or open a credit/bank account, own a house, etc.). NOW women can be financially independent of their husbands. Being a SAHM is a choice and a luxury. MANY moms would love to stay at home and devote all of their energies to their homes and families. However, at this point in time, it is almost impossible for most, regardless of how much they downsize. As a woman raising a daughter, I would never teach my daughter that she should rely on her husband's income for her entire life.

While a woman or man is raising young children, allowing them to "inherit" a small income from SS is not a problem in my mind because it is for raising the deceased's child. However, once children are in school, the surviving spouse should at least get a part-time job and when those children are grown, the surviving spouse should be working full-time. This isn't an antiquated idea. Rather the idea that women depend on others to financial take care of them for their whole lives is antiquated. All able adults, whether male or female, being financially self-supporting unless in a short time of crisis or ill-health is a more modern notion. I say this as a woman who does both the jobs of a SAHM and a mom who works outside the home. It's not anything against women or moms or anyone else. It's the reality of today's world which comes with its pros (the OPPORTUNITY for most people to work) and its cons (the NEED for most people to work).

[SuiGeneris]

In response to hckynut's post:

Now that the ladies have or at least are much closer to equal rights with their male counterparts ...

From Huffington Post:

The gender pay gap is alive and well everywhere in America, but it's more alive in some states than in others.

It will take 144 years before Wyoming women working full time and year-round make the same as their male counterparts on average, according to an analysis from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, a think tank focused on women’s economic issues. By contrast, women living in Florida should see the gender pay gap close there in 23 years.

This chart from IWPR shows when the gender pay gap is projected to close in each state:

The researchers’ projections are based on each state’s rate of progress at closing the gap since 1959. American women overall shouldn’t expect to see pay equity until 2058 if progress continues at its current rate, according to the analysis. Progress on closing the pay gap actually stalled in recent years because the earnings of both women and men have stagnated.

Right now, American women working full time and year-round make just 78 cents for every dollar their male counterparts make on average, but that gap varies by state. In Florida, women make 85 percent of what men make on average. In Wyoming, women make just 67.9 percent of their male colleagues’ earnings, the IWPR analysis found.

New York has the nation's narrowest gender wage gap, with women earning 87.6 percent of what men make. Louisiana's women see the widest gap, earning just 66.7 percent of their male counterparts.

There are a variety of reasons why the gap persists. For one, the jobs that are more likely to be female-dominated -- think education, social work and child care -- also tend to pay less. It’s possible that’s precisely because these jobs are female-dominated. As Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men: And the Rise of Women, wrote in an August 2012 Slate piece, "Is it that women are choosing lower-paying professions or that our country values women's professions less?"

Women’s careers are also more likely to be interrupted when they have kids, which can derail their job trajectory and earnings growth.

But even when you control for things like education, career and number of hours worked, women still earn about 5 percent less than their male colleagues, according to a 2011 analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

That’s likely due in part to subtle forms of bias. When women act assertive or decisive, qualities that are often necessary to succeed in the workplace, they’re judged more harshly than their male colleagues, research shows.

[adelle38]

On 3/16/2015 guatmum said:

There are many women who agree that SS should not be passed from spouse to surviving spouse. It is not just something a man would say. Talking about what one's grandmother or great grandmother did as a SAHM is irrelevant to today. Back then, unless you are VERY young, women had no ability to get a job (or open a credit/bank account, own a house, etc.). NOW women can be financially independent of their husbands. Being a SAHM is a choice and a luxury. MANY moms would love to stay at home and devote all of their energies to their homes and families. However, at this point in time, it is almost impossible for most, regardless of how much they downsize. As a woman raising a daughter, I would never teach my daughter that she should rely on her husband's income for her entire life.

While a woman or man is raising young children, allowing them to "inherit" a small income from SS is not a problem in my mind because it is for raising the deceased's child. However, once children are in school, the surviving spouse should at least get a part-time job and when those children are grown, the surviving spouse should be working full-time. This isn't an antiquated idea. Rather the idea that women depend on others to financial take care of them for their whole lives is antiquated. All able adults, whether male or female, being financially self-supporting unless in a short time of crisis or ill-health is a more modern notion. I say this as a woman who does both the jobs of a SAHM and a mom who works outside the home. It's not anything against women or moms or anyone else. It's the reality of today's world which comes with its pros (the OPPORTUNITY for most people to work) and its cons (the NEED for most people to work).

You said that very well. Let's remember a surviving spouse can also be a man, though that's less likely. We also need to consider that the arrival of marriage equality could be an additional strain on the system. I say that, not as an opponent of marriage equality.

[YorkieonmyPillow]

On 3/16/2015 MJ 12 said:

On 3/16/2015 hckynut said: Any person(adult)that has NEVER worked should not receive anyone's SS benefits, deceased spouse or otherwise. If you did not "haul any water" you should not be allowed tom"drink from the trough", PERIOD! That is why the SS safe is filled with nothing but IOU' s.

Thank you for your input.

You think THAT's off-the-wall, I know of a man who said no one should be allowed to collect unemployment insurance!

He was a rather high-profile fellow who has since relocated to Costa Rica (US taxes too high, don't you know).....

[jaburg]

There is an article in the LA Times (I think that is the paper) that is highly critical of this 60 min show. One of the things they mentioned is that that way death is reported to the SSA is not consistent (to put it mildly). Not all states report to the SSA. It varies from state to state. When my Mom Died, it was immediately reported, but some states don't do that. I'm not saying these people shouldn't have immediately reported it,because they should have.