Social security

[bullfrog !]

^^^Agreed, but President Biden has already proposed a series of solutions none of which would affect the people making below $400,000 a year and tax corporations currently paying little or no tax which not only helps the people in lower income levels to meet their basic needs but gives the opportunity for redistribution of wealth.

 

[Gr8ful]

They'll up the cutoff limit you quit paying in before they do that which is right way to fix it. I think Bernie Sanders plan of paying up to $160k then start paying again at $250k will be adopted. They should just pay up to $250K IMHO.

 

[bullfrog !]

^^^In my opinion unregulated corporations have caused most of the problem and benefited by doing so this gets to the individuals that benefited from the corporations and would work it seems.

 

[user 29855]

I have seen lots of people more than my fair share living in poverty. I have met very few if any that conscientiously chose to live that way. There don’t seem to be a lot of people that are jealous of people’s life living in a culvert or on the streets. Many families years ago especially in remote, backwoods Southern Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia,Tennessee and Arkansas would be too proud or too illiterate and having spent a lifetime of subsistence hunting, farming and bartering mainly with close family never understood there might be a government program to help them. Generations of bright, smart children were never given a chance to rise to their potential because they were to busy trying to survive. They grew old quickly doing hard labor. Many were “lucky” enough to get jobs in the coal mines or steel mills but most struggled at minimum wage jobs for a short time before becoming down ridden or depressed turning to alcohol or drugs. Many went into the military but ended up in the field carrying a rifle rather than a desk job due to lack of poor education. Many came back with more problems than they left with but at least they got some help through the Veterans Administration. A few were able to use the Educational benefits and after working hard making up for their lack of a basic education managed a good life with just a few nightmares now and then. Yes there is now quite a few people out there with drug, alcohol, physical disabilities and mental problems that are over 65 years old that need help. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid don’t come close to being enough to meeting the basic needs a human being has to have in order to consider anything besides survival, never the less improving their living conditions by getting a job. Many come to this forum trying to cut costs living in a vehicle and find they can through extreme simple living survive and even prosper. Our government should reflect the people’s desires and insure the opportunity is there, lately seems they just want to take away any hope of helping those that need it. Silly because by doing that it makes everyone’s life better. Kentucky’s state motto “United we stand divided we fall!” Seems to have been forgotten by those quick to judge.

Well, I live in Northern California, and I can tell you there exists a huge population here that chooses to live in "poverty." They have been give the option to receive training, and aid in getting employment, and they refuse. They have been give free housing either in mini-homes, trailers, or sanctioned campgrounds, and leave, either because they "miss their friends" or too many rules. The homeless camps here are of tremendous size, and if you take the trouble and time to view the various photos and videos available, the living conditions are horrible. No running water, very few people use the provided portapotties, and the amount of trash and garbage lying around is astounding. Various groups of do-gooders (we don't need do-gooders, we need good-doers) bring them food, drugs, needles, medicine, and medical and dental care. Yes, they are living in poverty, but why do they have to leave so much garbage lying around? These sites have dumpsters provided by the city, and they are basically empty. As soon as someone tosses something into a dumpster, someone else jumps in to see what it is, and most likely tosses it outside the dumpster if they don't want it. And don't even get me started about San Francisco!

 

[user 22017]

Well, I live in Northern California, and I can tell you there exists a huge population here that chooses to live in "poverty."

This explains the issues with homelessness in California pretty well: https://calmatters.org/explainers/californias-homelessness-crisis-explained/

"Mental health problems, addiction, childhood trauma, interaction with the criminal justice system and poverty all play significant roles in whether someone becomes homeless. But the primary reason? They can no longer afford rent."

 

[Morgana]

I'm sure you could find an explainer online to fit almost any point of view. So it might be more accurate to say it's a good summary of one approach -- or to say why you think this source is especially trustworthy -- rather than to say it explains the issue.

There's really no system, no matter how brilliant, that won't (1) be abused and exploited by some people and (2) leave some people to fall through the cracks. Rich people aren't the only ones who commit #1 and poor people aren't the only ones who suffer #2.

We do not know other people's motivations. Heck, most of us have enough trouble knowing our own. A shrink or social worker (or school nurse or beat cop) might be able to make some meaningful guesses -- and I bet they'd be the first to tell us that we can't make blanket generalizations. There are asshats, and misunderstood good people, in every crowd.

Treating people like victims who cannot help themselves from screwing up and harming others is not necessarily respectful or helpful.

IMO it would be much more practical -- IOW it would help more people and create more health and justice -- to focus on actions and consequences rather than on our guesses about other people's internal lives.

 

[SLB_SA]

IMO it would be much more practical -- IOW it would help more people and create more health and justice -- to focus on actions and consequences rather than on our guesses about other people's internal lives.

To some, the "action" of living in a vehicle, tent, etc. is, in itself, illegal and therefore such people have made a choice to be antisocial and deserve whatever negative consequences that arise, even if such laws are later ruled illegal and without regard to why a particular person is "homeless." How is it practical to ignore the reason why someone is "homeless" and simply emphasize the "illegal act" of being homeless?

 

[Dirtrider]

^^^In my opinion unregulated corporations have caused most of the problem and benefited by doing so this gets to the individuals that benefited from the corporations and would work it seems.

BF: Don't blame the corporations, blame the law makers that make the rules/code that corporations go by. They are only playing within the laws that were put into place. Also, if corporation have to pay more in taxes, the goods & service they provide will increase in price and affect you even more.

 

[Zerpersande]

I have seen lots of people more than my fair share living in poverty. I have met very few if any that conscientiously chose to live that way.

Well said. Inherited poverty is the root of many of society’s ills. Those not in that situation have naive opinions often distilled down to ‘Just get a job and work hard’. Being born into poverty means being molded and socially conditioned in ways that limit one’s life choices. ‘Like father, like son‘ is a powerful concept.

Those at the top of the economic pyramid suffer a similar situation. They are conditioned not to give an airborne rodent’s anal sphincter muscle about the welfare of others. Even though they lack nothing and possess far more than they need they ignore the plight of a large sector of society. They ‘suffer‘ from inherited wealth as much of their attitude is a result of their social conditioning.

 

[Gr8ful]

Just posted on You Tube

 

[user 22017]

I'm sure you could find an explainer online to fit almost any point of view. So it might be more accurate to say it's a good summary of one approach -- or to say why you think this source is especially trustworthy -- rather than to say it explains the issue.

There's really no system, no matter how brilliant, that won't (1) be abused and exploited by some people and (2) leave some people to fall through the cracks. Rich people aren't the only ones who commit #1 and poor people aren't the only ones who suffer #2.

We do not know other people's motivations. Heck, most of us have enough trouble knowing our own. A shrink or social worker (or school nurse or beat cop) might be able to make some meaningful guesses -- and I bet they'd be the first to tell us that we can't make blanket generalizations. There are asshats, and misunderstood good people, in every crowd.

Treating people like victims who cannot help themselves from screwing up and harming others is not necessarily respectful or helpful.

IMO it would be much more practical -- IOW it would help more people and create more health and justice -- to focus on actions and consequences rather than on our guesses about other people's internal lives.

My point is that the homeless are not here to defend themselves and neither are any experts. So what is the point of casting blame on them (based on your opinion, or bias)? I'm just doing my lame ass attempt at sharing an article written by several folks who are employed in the field. Since the post wasn't deleted.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

..... President Biden has already proposed a series of solutions none of which would affect the people making below $400,000 a year and tax corporations currently paying little or no tax which not only helps the people in lower income levels to meet their basic needs but gives the opportunity for redistribution of wealth.

They'll up the cutoff limit you quit paying in before they do that which is right way to fix it. I think Bernie Sanders plan of paying up to $160k then start paying again at $250k will be adopted. They should just pay up to $250K IMHO.

The problem with all these schemes (all of them) is that our leaders think it is a zero sum game: transfer $$ from column A, put them in column D, the spreadsheet readjusts and the problem is fixed. But they fail to acknowledge that those numbers represent real people and people when they feel pain (physical, emotional, financial) change their behavior. All of a sudden the results you expect are way off, usually in a bad way.

A good example of that is the 1990 federal tax on luxury yachts, supposedly would bring in $31B in 1991.
https://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/LocalOpt/luxury.html

 

[bullfrog !]

Financial systems are complicated but there are groups of experts and leaders that I believe can unite to get the job of insuring that Veterans programs, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Education and Housing start to improve. The number of families dealing with older members living on low wages insures this will be a generational problem if solutions are not found and acted on. This is the reason I suggested we look for leaders that produce results and support them, not ones that just complain about all the problems and do nothing or make the problems worse while making themselves rich and powerful at the corporation’s bidding.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

....."Mental health problems, addiction, childhood trauma, interaction with the criminal justice system and poverty all play significant roles in whether someone becomes homeless.....

It is my observation that each succeeding generation after WWII is more emotionally fragile than the last. When I was very young our church sponsored two families from Poland. Those children witnessed horrors that kids now need trigger warnings to avoid reading about. They all became productive members of society. Whatever demons they dealt with it hasn't affected their getting on with life.

 

[rvwandering]

Well, I did it. I applied for social security benefits, to begin on my 69th birthday. At the end of the online process, I had to agree to inform social security if I visited another country for 30 or more days and to inform them if I started working or changed my residence address. With so many nomads on social security, what are the effects of these SSA rules? Do you keep the SSA informed of your address? Do you notify SSA if you become employed or self-employed?

Please reply to the question that SLB_SA posted and avoid political statements or comments on homelessness. Those topics cause bickering and eventually the thread will have to be closed.Thanks!

 

[LargeMarge]

...As the rules change...

.
Show of hands:
* how many remember the olden days, laws written in stone?

 

[LargeMarge]

That $2.9B isn't worth $1.48T today because Treasury Notes haven't kept up with inflation most years; and SS paid out $1.2T last year (2022). In 2022 SS payed out more than it took in so it started cashing in the IOUs in the 'lockbox'. That is projected to run dry in ~2035. Then SS will revert to distributing what it takes in, which will result in a reduction of benefits. That is what needs to be fixed before we start to talk about increasing benefits.

.
Please.
Answer the questions in Post Number One:
* "Do you keep the SSA informed of your address?
* Do you notify SSA if you become employed or self-employed?"

 

[egilbe]

.
Please.
Answer the questions in Post Number One:
* "Do you keep the SSA informed of your address?
* Do you notify SSA if you become employed or self-employed?"

I didn't think there was a need to inform SSA of working until you went over a certain amount of yearly income? I think its somwhere ~$20,000. I don't believe working as little as I do that I will ever be a danger of making too much money.

Years ago, a class I was in did an exercise on avoiding taxes. Once you hit $250,000 a year in income, you can start investing money to make money if you live somewhat frugally. Max out your 401K or 503c plan and 529. Live in a modest house and drive a new car for 10 years before replacing. You get to a point where the majority of your income becomes capital gains and your taxes drop dramatically. You are no longer paying into Social security at the higher tax bracket and you are taxed at 15% capital gains. The tipping point was pretty consistant at $250k a year. Its probably higher now.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

.
Please.
Answer the questions in Post Number One:
* "Do you keep the SSA informed of your address?
* Do you notify SSA if you become employed or self-employed?"

Yes.
Yes.

 

[G0ldengirl68]

It's not that they cut your benefits if you earn money, but that they can tax you on those benefits if you also earn over a certain amount. I think you'd need an accountant to figure out exactly where your cutoff point would be -- at least, my head explodes if I try to figure it out -- but I was able to get a vague ballpark idea and I've stayed within it (haha, stayed well below it actually).

IIRC in the first year you retire you get a lot more leeway on how much outside income you get to keep. So that gives you some time to figure it out.

I'm self-employed so I just report work income if/when I get any and am responsible for paying taxes and Social Security on it. If you're working for someone else, they'll be withholding those payments, and sending that information to IRS/SSA -- so IRS/SSA would know if you started working. Whether they'd do anything about it, I don't know.

Lots of people want your up-to-date address (IRS, DMV, etc.); I imagine you'd handle that the same way you do for any other agency.

By the way, belated congrats!

This is true as I had to look it up before I get hired somewhere. I only want part-time or maybe 3 or 4 month seasonal (temp work through agencies). I can make up to X amount of money without paying any taxes, and, my SS remains the same. One thing I didn't check was the supplemental payment so I need to do that as well. That's also through Social Security site, and I may have been looking at my total income already, just need to double check. Thank you for the thread and reminder.