Laurence Kotlikoff - Maximize my SS.com

[mathjak107]

The way I see it, they have (rightly so) streamlined the filing process so we are each allowed to file ONCE. Folks have been manipulating the system in order to file TWICE -- first to file and suspend or file restricted application for the spousal benefit, then later file all over again to get their increased benefit at a later age.
So now we will be compelled to CHOOSE when it is we really truly mean it to begin SS benefits and file ONCE and for all. Makes good sense to me from an administrative standpoint, so SSA doesn't have to handle filers twice. Make the call for yourself -- file early and begin spousal benefits, or wait to file later for larger benefits.

i think it gave way to much in additional perks to folks just because they were married .

as much as i liked having those options they were a bit unfair .

if a spouse has no work record why should they be treated different than a single ? being a stay at home mom today is a personal choice .

what should happen is if a spouse has no work record and wants to eventually collect the system should have the working spouse have 2 ss contributions taken out

 

[DEC-1982]

i think it gave way to much in additional perks to folks just because they were married .

as much as i liked having those options they were a bit unfair .

if a spouse has no work record why should they be treated different than a single ? being a stay at home mom today is a personal choice .

what should happen is if a spouse has no work record and wants to eventually collect the system should have the working spouse have 2 ss contributions taken out

I agree about the additional perks. But 2 SS taken out because of a stay-at-home mom or dad

Social Security was designed to help people who might be in dire straits in their old age. Stay-at-home people are at higher risk of living their last days in poverty.

Can you imagine what it would do to take out 6.2*2% or 12.4*2% out of a working person's salary because they have a spouse looking after a child? Many people couldn't manage today.

 

[mathjak107]

well why should a married person get a stay at home benefit when a single person does not ? half of all women have children out of marriage today .

if staying at home is what you do without ever paying in to get a benefit then it should not entitle you to collect anymore then not paying any premium with any type of insurance allows .
if a married couple then one party should contribute in to the system for the other . isn't that how all our insurance works ?

everyone who wans to get money out needs to put money in .

reminds me of the saying when we were teenagers and got our first cars .

gas-grass or ass - no one rides for free . ha ha ha

 

[papadad111]

This discussion will roll down hill fast.

Life isn't fair. Taxes aren't fair. Marriage penalty isn't fair. Being a latch key kid isn't fair.

Heard it all ..

Key point is a loophole that was being abused is closing.

Be happy because it will reduce the chance of SS benefit becoming insolvent !!!

meathead's turn !!!

 

[MichaelB]

Thanks to those who stayed on topic for an interesting and helpful discussion.
.
.