Community Chat

[Lynnster67]

---

@millieshops wrote:

@ShowMeI didn't know that. 

I sort of remember my SS actually going down once when Medicare went up more than SS did, but I don't remember when.  And maybe I remember wrong!  Will see if my bank records go back far enough to see.

---

~70% of beneficiaries are subject to "hold harmless" provision where your net SS check cannot decrease, even in years with minimal/no COLA.

[Lynnster67]

---

@Ms tyrion2 wrote:

---

@Lynnster67 wrote:

Based on the most recent actuarial report, the standard Medicare premium is expected to increase by $1.50/mo, to $135.50/mo.  If you have Medicare Advantage, those premiums are expected to decrease by 6% on average.

So you should be able to keep most of your COLA in 2019.  The exception being for ppl who aren't already paying the std prem of $134 (like my mom) - their premiums will increase by more than the $1.50/mo until you are caught up.

You will receive the official notice in late Nov/early Dec.

---

Yes.

Do the math. If your SS is $1800 per month, a 2.8% increase is $50 per month. A one dollar Medicare  increase most certainly does not leave you with "nothing".

If your Advantage plan goes down by 6%, you are even more ahead.  What's with all the complaining?

---

The average benefit is $1,425/mo, so the 2.8% increase equates to almost $40/mo.  So if Part B increases $1.50/mo, you are still ahead by $38.50/mo.  Try not to spend it all in one place.

[Lynnster67]

---

@Kalli wrote:

Here’s the way I look at SS:  About 10 years ago workers my age who’d been assuming we’d get SS in our older years realized that based on info we were hearing, our age group and younger might not get anything at all.  So the fact that I get some money every month for me is a bonus that I’m very happy to receive as my parents’ generation has lived and collected much longer than the original calculations predicted. 

Going forward, my brother who’s an accountant, has explained to me the SS program is already showing signs of being unable to sustain at the current rate. I accept that SS distributions will have to change or the program could likely go bankrupt. Yes, we’ve all given into it but due to extended life expectancies in our country, it’s being forced to pay out much more than ever anticipated. 

I’m thankful for what I get. 

---

My late grandfather paid in from day 1, when FICA was 1% of 1st $3,000 of earnings.  He worked and delayed collecting until age 70 and lived to 93.  He calculated that his benefits were 25x what he paid in.

Ever since 2010, beneficiary payments have exceeded FICA tax receipts thanks to the "silver tsunami" - 10,000 ppl turn 65 every day!

SS is a Ponzi scheme that would be illegal if anyone else did it.  The longer Congress twiddles its thumbs to fix it, the more painful the remedy will have to be.  I'm not counting on ever collecting SS either, which is why I max out on my 401k and Roth IRA.

[Lynnster67]

---

@ccassaday wrote:

---

@libbyannE wrote:

 Social Security was never designed to live on. When we got out of college and got married in the mid-70s, we did a lot of reading and research on everything from economics to demographics and assumed that by the time we retired there probably would be no Social Security. We did a lot of investing! Given all that, I’m grateful for anything we get, although we could live without it. . (We actually applied for it earlier than we had originally planned to because we were concerned that the govt might raise the age at which one could apply. We figured we had paid into the system all those and should get something back before it’s too late.)

“Raises?” Just be glad if you get your current amount.

---

One thing some don’t know is SS started out as a scam. People were expected to die before collecting it. Now with people living so much longer it puts the entire thing at risk.

---

FDR created SS during the Great Depression to encourage older ppl to "retire" (a new concept at the time for most ppl) to lower unemployment among younger ppl.

[Lynnster67]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@luvmybeetle wrote:

---

@SeaMaiden wrote:

---

@feline groovy wrote:

 @SeaMaiden

The COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) for 2019 is 2.8%.

For retirees plus Supplemental Security Income, disability, and survivor beneficiaries

Positive news, as even the smallest amount of extra money is something to be thankful for. 

---

  They will do what they did last time... raise my medicare costs... so I end up with nothing more....

---

@SeaMaiden That is exactly what happened to me last year.  They gave me a raise and then raised my medicare payment.  I cannot believe those of us on SS get FAKE raises.

---

@luvmybeetle

Social Security was created to be just a supplement to our retirement income, covering no more than 50% of monthly expenses.   Not to be compared to salary increases when you were working.    Prices have always gone up .....  and will continue to do so.   It is what it is.

---

SS is an INSURANCE program and was never intended to be a pension.

[Lynnster67]

---

@ShowMe, yep, that’s part of the problem, too.  But here’s a major concern that is ongoing: when you live a lot longer than the gov program stats originally calculated, you collect a lot more $.  At what point do we start taking out more than we put in?  I don’t know. Many years ago, maybe 15, can’t remember definitively, I watched a segment on 60 minutes and at that time it was stated that in much less than 10 years of collecting, you start taking out more than you put in. Old program so not sure what is true currently.  My parents are 88 and 90. Guess it’s more likely than not that they’ve taken out more than they ever put in.

My discussion with my brother focused on what could be done going forward to ward off potential doom for SS. We talked about the possibility of the gov reducing payments, raising minimum age much higher for collecting, increasing the amount now being taken off paychecks of current workers, or maybe even having some type of evaluation of individual financial situations to reduce payments to those whose retirement income is above a certain amount.  

This was simply a conversation between us where we tossed around possibilities. I can’t tell you what’s going to happen.   Most of us acknowledge something will need to be done.  🤷‍♀️

---

Yes, the actuarial tables are set up for a breakeven age of roughly 80.  So if longevity runs in your family, you should defer it; and if you're unhealthy you should take it sooner than your full retirement age.

[Lynnster67]

---

@MoJoV wrote:

The problem of SS going "broke" could be easily solved.  Raise the cap on when they stop taking out of your salary.  I believe it's now after $150,000 or 155,000 they no longer take out.  If one is making that money one can afford to still pay in.  Just my take. Also,have our "leaders" both parties keep out of the funds.

---

YES!!! Why should I pay as much in FICA taxes as athletes and entertainers?

[ShowMe]

@Lynnster67........Well if the government would pay back the SS money they took to pay for other things, we wouldn't be hurting as much as we are now.  Money should never be taken out of SS to pay for other things.....never, never, never.  

Also, they need to be checking up on those that are on Disability to be sure they still need to be on it.  I know of one individual that has been on it for a number of years now.  She goes up and down the steps to go to the laundry area to do laundry for others, goes out shopping, goes out to have a good time, etc., and yet she is still on Disability.

And, I know someone else who was on Disability that had improved so much that she even tried to get off of Disability and they wouldn't let her.  Her doctor told her she was no longer disabled and was able to go back to work.

This is just 2 different instances, and am sure they are many many more.....