Readers react to the recent New York Times editorial calling raising the Social Security retirement age.
By the way, my response is: That’s so not happening!
Readers react to the recent New York Times editorial calling raising the Social Security retirement age.
By the way, my response is: That’s so not happening!
From the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College:
The first place most people say they would go for information about Social Security’s various benefits is family and friends.
That’s true whether they are Black, White, Asian, or Hispanic. But after family and friends, there are few similarities in whom each group consults. And their preferences, revealed in a new survey, reflect differences in their socioeconomic circumstances and social networks.
White workers, who are wealthier overall than Blacks and Hispanics, stand out for being more likely to say they would ask financial advisers and accountants about Social Security. Black and Hispanic workers more often would rely on social services agencies, and Blacks also ask for help at church. ...
From what I've seen, Hispanics and Blacks may not be suffering because they can't ask their stock broker or accountant about Social Security. I've not found financial advisers or accountants to be knowledgeable about Social Security matters. They may be worse than useless. If you ask the average financial adviser or accountant what the requirements are to get widows benefits from Social Security what do you think the chances are that you'll get accurate and complete information? Do they know the age requirements? Anything about the actuarial reduction? Anything about widows disability benefits?
Click on the link above to read the article for yourself and see how many errors you come up with. Click on the image below to see the problems I found -- beyond the article's pathetic description of disability determination.
In February of this year the Social Security Administration published proposed rule changes to omit food from in kind support and maintenance calculations for Supplemental Security Income benefits. Social Security has now asked that the Office of Management and Budget authorize publication of these changes as final rules.
The description of a bill passed by the House Ways and Means Committee:
The Clergy Act
Introduced by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (CA-20) and Representative Mike Thompson (CA-04), H.R. 6068 creates a window for clergy members to opt back into contributing to and receiving Social Security.
- Creates a time-limited, voluntary open season for members of the clergy to revoke their Social Security exemption and opt into Social Security coverage.
- Under current law, members of the clergy may apply for an exemption from paying certain taxes on income associated with the performance of ministerial services. The exemption also applies to receiving future benefits. Once the exemption is made, it currently cannot be reversed. Roughly 2,000 members of the clergy receive an exemption every year.
If this advances, and I wouldn't bet on even such innocuous legislation advancing, it may attract amendments which would make it more interesting but which could also cause it to fail.
Man receives $20,000 in back benefits from Social Security. Five days later he received an overpayment notice from Social Security saying he owed $11,000.
I'm so inured to this sort of thing that the newspaper article didn't register with me at first. It didn't seem odd. It should but it's not surprising if you work in this field.