Older retirees may not save Social Security

[RamboLiberal]

Source: MSNBC/AP

WASHINGTON — Raising the retirement age for Social Security would disproportionately hurt low-income workers and minorities, and increase disability claims by older people unable to work, government auditors told Congress.

The projected spike in disability claims could harm Social Security's finances because disability benefits typically are higher than early retirement payments, the General Accountability Office concluded.

The report, obtained by The Associated Press ahead of its scheduled release Friday, provides fodder for those opposed to raising the eligibility age for benefits, as proposed by the leaders of President Barack Obama's deficit commission.

"There's more to consider than simply how much money the program would save by raising the retirement age," said Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging. The report shows an unequal effect on certain groups of people, he said Thursday, and many of them "would have little choice but to turn to the broken disability program."



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40262020/ns/business-your_retirement/

[DJ13]

1. Of course we know the answer they'll come up with

Reduce disability availability and slash benefits.

They will leave no stone unturned to reduce SS outlays (and outlays in every other 'entitlement') so they can continue the absurdly low tax rates on the upper incomes.

[KT2000]

2. Yes - disability has been

in their sites. But can that get much worse? Know a woman who is on her 3rd try for SSI. She has 3 kids and they are living in their car.
What do these people want our world to be like anyway?

[daleo]

3. A Charles Dickens novel

Workhouses, widespread poverty, that sort of thing.

Mind you, Dickens also wrote about the French Revolution in Tale of Two Cities.

[dixiegrrrrl]

11. SSI is NOT Soc. Sec. disability.

Repeat..NOT.

( the OP is talking about Soc. Sec.)

SSI ( Supplemental Security Income) is a STATE disability program.
It is for people who do not have enough work credits to
qualify for Soc. Sec. disability requirements.
It is very hard to get, the standards differ from state to state.
The payment is a Fixed amount for everyone.
And LOW, SSI recipients usually qualify for Food Stamps, and you cannot have anything of value if you apply..it is "means" tested.
No savings account to speak of, house value if you own one has to be very very low, car has to be a clunker, no other income sources, etc.
Your disability eligibility is subject to review on an annual basis, which may or may not happen, depending on the state.

Soc. Sec. Disability is for people who have enough work credits to qualify for it, it is a
FEDERAL program, the standards are supposedly uniform across the country
( the same state to state). No means standard, you can have other resources.
the payment depends on your work income history.
Your disability status is subject to review.

The states, who offer SSI, have a limited budget for it at the beginning of their fiscal year.
I would imagine now that most states have much LESS to offer that program.

I strongly suspect that we often hear of "so and so is having a hard time getting Soc. Sec. disability"
when in fact they are having a hard time getting state funded SSI.

SSI, the state program, is going to be VERY hard to get in this economic and political climate, I agree.

and I expect the Dickensonians ( "dicks" for short) will do their best to cut off BOTH disability programs.

[KT2000]

14. OK - thanks

then she is applying for the SSD.

[PSPS]

6. Thet's their bogus reasoning

Your argument, that this "reduction in entitlements" is necessary to "save the budget," is the lie they will tell. Of course, Social Security is completely self funding and plays no role at all in the deficit. The sole purpose of the republicans here is to abolish Social Security in its entirety. That has been their stated goal ever since it was established under FDR.

[alfredo]

13. Raise the maximum to $250,000 a year, and apply it to

unearned income above a specific amount.

[gimme5]

4. SSI - the Illusion of a safety net

My husband died 15 years ago. He spent the bigger part of 10 years prior to that in various appeals for his SSI claim which was repeatedly denied. His initial claim was for his back, which was injured when he was young. The effects of the car accident that caused his back problems didn't manifest until our youngest child was a year old. But if you take a set of blocks and stack them to represent your spine, and then drop one down on the table next to the stack, you'd get a picture of what his Xrays looked like. One of his vertebra in his back was dislodged so severely, that it was completely out of the stack. How he managed to walk, and why he wasn't paralyzed mystified the doctors. The pain was unbelievable.

And Soc. Security denied his claim over and over. He had a massive heart attack 3 years before he died. He lost a quarter of his heart muscle. And SSI was denied again. He appealed again.

Finally, with the help of a lawyer, it went to a hearing. But by the date of the hearing, he had died. Just before the hearing, he suffered congestive heart failure, and passed away.

I went to the hearing on his behalf, and he was awarded SSI, but only for his heart condition. Nothing for his back. Our kids received $86/a month each for survivor benefits. A slap in the face, but I accepted it.

That was, as I said, 15 years ago. I cannot imagine trying to get through this system today, with the economy in the dumps.

[glinda]

5. I am very sorry that you suffered this way as well as your poor husband.

[Delphinus]

8. So sorry to hear of your

experiences, gimme5. What a rough road you and your husband had to travel.

I hope life brings you and your loved ones brighter blessings. And welcome to DU.

[saigon68]

9. You won't get a dime today

The party line is " get out and work ---you lazy pig"

[JDPriestly]

7. The choice is: Let people die or raise the cap on Social Security taxes,

possibly so that every cent earned in the nation is subject to the Social Security tax. Why not? Every cent that ordinary people earn is subject to that tax. That would be better than means testing the benefits, and certainly much better than depriving elderly people of the most basic necessities and of dignity.

[groundloop]

10. Social Security is solvent for AT LEAST 25 years, repukes only want us to believe there's a "crisis"

And yes, all they need to do is remove the $106,000 cap and social security could be solvent forever. I'd bet they could even afford to sweeten benefits a bit. And the news media needs to quit following the repuke lead of calling it an "entitlement", it's insurance that we've all paid into for our entire adult life.

[mbperrin]

12. Well said! Thank you.

Yes, raise the cap is all that is needed. Period. End of story.

[avaistheone1]

15. You are correct.

:kick: