Does Social Security Means Testing Mean Little Or No Social Security If 401K Too Big.

[TheMastersNemesis]

It looks like that under the GOP idea of "means testing" Social Security is that if you own a house, have too many assets or have a good sized 401K you will get reduced or NO Social Security. The real dirt is in the details. So you have to ask what kind of means are you talking about. Also why do you have to limit your assets to get something you paid for for decades.

Senior should be in a rage over even a mention of screwing with their earned benefits.

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. When you voted for a republican you wanted to give your SS and Medicare away.

This is what 63 million Americans want, they voted for it.

[davekriss]

3. They absolutely did. Sad.

[packman]

2. Have same concern

If pension, retirement, savings is at a certain limit - are they attempting to tie it into your SS payments?

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. Nobody can live on social security. People do it though

I wish the trumps and kushners and ryans and mcconnells could be forced to do it for one year.

I wonder if we would see any changes.

[SWBTATTReg]

5. We are in a rage (or at least I am...

I paid into this system since the early 70s. The money I'm getting is the almost 10% taken from me since day 1 of my work career...I am, and I know a lot of my friends that are on SS, are nervous and angry that this is even an issue when there are simple solutions available to fix...also, we didn't have any 'means' testing that determine if we should even pay into this from day 1, so why 'means' test now?

[TheMastersNemesis]

7. The Trouble Is That They Push The Idea With A Straight Face. But Get Little Kick Back.

The frame that "earned benefit" as an "entitlement" like welfare or communism. It is also coded race baiting as well. And they say it increases the debt which it does not. The media won't challenge it.

Means testing will end Social Security by making it a welfare program which is what the GOP plans.

It is up to senior to go after them at their town halls, though such a challenge means nothing. Unless GOPPERS get voted out there is not much one can do.

[marybourg]

6. And the next step will be "you have to work to get Social Security".

Remember: even discussing these publican talking points gives them legitimacy.

[TheMastersNemesis]

8. They Are Going To Talk It. You Have To Literally Get Mean And Get In Their Face.

Of course no one wants to be unpleasant or rude. My take is that you have to terrorize them in some way otherwise they will never listen. Just like they are not listening now on ANYTHING.

[SWBTATTReg]

10. absolutely...we have a quarterly meeting (a bunch of us/friends (20 or so) on SS) to discuss ...

issues like this (and of course to keep in touch w/ each other)...it's amazing how party differences disappear when your paycheck / SS is being discussed...

[RobinA]

22. Errr....

You do have to work to get social security. Or be married to someone who works. Or in some few cases be the kid of someone who worked. And died.

[Sophia4]

30. Beginning with the baby boomers, most women/wives have worked and have

paid into the Social Security system themselves.

That should mean that the system has enough money to keep it solvent.

If it doesn't, there is something wrong with the way it is set up or with the accounting. When Social Security began, women stayed home for the most part. Some worked, but most did not contribute to Social Security although they received money from it if they outlived their husband who did contribute.

If wages had risen in recent years as they should have in our country, then we would have plenty of money -- a surplus -- in the Social Security trust fund.

It's lousy financial management on the part of Congress if there is not enough money in the fund to continue to pay benefits. Rather than cut benefits, Congress needs to raise the minimum wage as well, perhaps, as the contribution to the Social Security Trust Fund.

If seniors' benefits decrease, the children of the seniors -- the younger generation -- will have the burden of taking care of their parents. It's much cheaper to strongly support the Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid programs than to pay the nursing home to care for your mother or father. Much cheaper to insure your parents are self-supporting because they have Social Security than to take the responsibility (which your state may be able to sue you to pay for -- depending on the state) for paying for their care or taking them into your home yourself.

Why smart people don't vote for Republicans.

In other words, why voting for a Republican is a sign of stupidity.

[marybourg]

32. I meant while you're collecting it, like is starting to happen

with Medicaid.

[nini]

9. So my piddly savings and equity in my home is now a burden?

Amazing how we were always told to buy that home and save only to have it used to hurt us in the end.

[ProfessorGAC]

25. That'll Teach Us For Being Frugal

And being thrifty! That threshold better be really high or lots of AARP members are going to be major pissed. They're facing a challenge next November as it is. Motivate everybody over 55 to go out and kick you to the curb, and well, good luck with that.

[Sophia4]

29. Is this how Republicans try to force seniors into selling their homes just to have

the money to survive?

Cutting Social Security is not the way to provide incentives for people to work.

As it is Social Security is already means-tested because of the income tax laws.

The GOP ended taxing large inheritances but now wants to force seniors to spend down their savings. This is how the American oligarchy plans to force most Americans into a working class dependent on the largesse of the rich.

This is very unAmerican in my view.

This would destroy the ability of many, many people in the middle class to leave any inheritance to their children.

And what effect would it have on the millions of farmers in our country who pay into Social Security (some did it voluntarily) and would be forced to sell their farms rather than to hand their farms to their children?

This is a crazy idea.

[beachbum bob]

11. we don't know what "means testing" is being looked at, in the end its to screw

with people collecting a benefit that they paid to have.

[Wellstone ruled]

31. This idea of means testing for

Social Security was first rolled out by William Buckley on PBS decades ago. Part of his Heritage Foundation blather. When the idea of 401k's were being pushed by Senator Roth,this idea again surfaced. Again,just another idea to wipe out FDR's New Deal Programs.

[beachbum bob]

50. No specifics of when and what yet as conservatives too cowardly to announce themselves

[Wellstone ruled]

55. There is one large pool of

Monies that has been untapped form decades,and that pool in the Social Security bond fund(so called trust fund),which has a guess-ta-mated value in the trillions. And you just know the world Banking Industry wants that sucker moved to the riches 400 families via the Stock Market.

By this time tomorrow,we should see just how our POS Republican Congress People plan wreck our Economy with Trump's so called soft Shut Down.

BTW,understand the GOP has put a 500 million dollar theft from Social Security funding for next year.

[wiggs]

54. the point of means testing is not to screw with people who have paid in...the point

is to make SS a welfare system rather than an insurance system. Much easier to convince gop voters that yet another welfare program for brown people should be eliminated.

dem leaders and pundits so far doing a poor job of explaining history and rationale for SS program...one of the most successful and effective govt programs ever. gutting SS is analogous to the invading hordes breaching the last, strongest gate before getting into the castle.

[anneboleyn]

12. Yes, 401k plans plus investments, etc would all be counted as assets. The person will be retiring

and therefore no longer receiving a salary so yes absolutely “means” would be determined by things other than a person’s salary. This would include 401k plans and of course pension plans and investments and savings etc.

They are basically trying to turn SSI into welfare even though it’s a program that every worker in this country pays into. The Repubs ultimate goal (like Paul Ryan) is to get rid of social security, and the first step is making SS into a program that only gets paid out to low-income/low-savings/no pension workers without savings or 401k plans. This (in the view of Ryan et. al) will cause other workers (workers who test out because they have solid 401k plans and/savings, etc) to resent the program and ask for it to be ended since they don’t want to pay into something they can’t receive themselves. Ryan has been saying this for years. It’s his biggest goal politically.

[Hoyt]

13. Is there a link to recent or serious proposals for SS means testing?

Last edited Tue Jan 16, 2018, 05:28 PM - Edit history (1)

[TheMastersNemesis]

14. The GOP Rhetoric Has Surfaced For Several Years. Google It. The Rhetoric Has Come Up Periodically &

consistently.

[Hoyt]

16. A few legislators talk of doing it, but not seriously. They talk of increasing it too, but no one

takes that seriously, either.

The fact that there is nothing new tells me what I need to know. Thanks.

[TheMastersNemesis]

18. I Also Googled "Means Testing".

Like your OP said there is a bit of talk about it, but no serious proposal being advanced. I used to work for DOL and worked in many programs for 24 years. How I described "means testing" before looking it up is pretty much as I described it as I found in some of replies brought up.

Of course, it is nonsense to apply "means" to what is an insurance program. If there is polling showing support for testing it means people do not fully understand what "means testing" would mean or how it would operate. It would be grossly unfair under the SSA system.

Such talk needs to be silenced or rejected out of hand with great prejudice immediately.

[retread]

15. Once you reach 70.5 and have to do the rmd from

your ira's the government will tax up to 85% of SSI.

[sinkingfeeling]

17. Thought the GOP was against redistribution of wealth.

[DeminPennswoods]

19. Social security is already means-tested

Depending on other income, social security benefits may be taxed on up to at least 50% of the total benefit amount. I'm not sure if 50% is the max though.

[TheMastersNemesis]

20. Social Security Is Means Tested Based On How Much You Earn At A Job After Recieving It.

Once you reach a certain earning threshold while on Social Security you lose dollar for dollar. So if you do not have a pension or 401k worth anything your income is capped. So in the end all you have to live on is your Social Security and your earnings to threshold. And if you cannot live on that you are screwed.

[Sophia4]

28. Right. It is already means-tested.

[elehhhhna]

51. But sacred investment income is exempt. So the wealthy get their full ssi payment.

[doc03]

37. Someone finally said it. SS has been means tested since 1983 when RR made 50% of SS

subject to tax above a certain income. Then Bill Clinton raised that to 85%. I have brought that up many times on DU
and all I get from people here is it should be, quit your whining. That income level set back in 1983 has never been adjusted for inflation.
Medicare is also means tested, not sure when it started but after a certain level of income Medicare "B" and I think "D" premiums are increased.

[DeminPennswoods]

42. Medicare also means tested

Don't have a link to the table handy, but yes, Medicare is also means tested. You don't get less coverage, you just have to pay more for it and when there's no COLA given out, which has happened a couple times since 2008, the folks on Medicare above the threshhold bear all the financing of the total Medicare cost increases.

For ex, at the first level over the threshhold, a single person actually pays double for Medicare and Medicare drug coverage, about $300/mo vs $134 + drugs.

[doc03]

45. I found that out in 2013 when I turned 65. I transfered $50000 from my

traditional IRA to a ROTH in 2011. So in 2013 when I first got Medicare I found out they based the Medicare premiums on
your income two years prior to when you sign up. So the $50000 included with my other income in 2010 put me over the $85000
threshold for Medicare so the first year I think I paid $145 a month rather than the regular $104 for Medicare. Plus in 2010 I also paid
tax on 85% of my SS benefits.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

21. V.A. medical care started means testing under Reagan. Veterans groups protested, ...

... to no avail.

Now, V.A. benefits are mostly refused for anyone whose income is above the poverty line.

So, yes, seniors' benefits can be taken away by the GOP.

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/02/18/us/issue-and-debate-should-there-be-a-means-test-for-veterans-care.html?pagewanted=all

[doc03]

38. You are right on that I am a veteran and don't qualify for any benifits because

I am considered high income. For a single person I think it is $35000.

[Mariana]

23. Seniors won't be affected.

Current beneficiaries won't be affected. They may do this to younger people, but they won't touch current beneficiaries. There are plenty of RW seniors who don't give a flying fuck about what happens to younger people, including their own children and grandchildren, as long as they get theirs. The Republicans know this.

[TheMastersNemesis]

24. I Would Not Completely Bet On It.sThe Funding Reductions Mean Cuts To Doctors, Hospitals & Provider

Depending on where you live it might be hard or maybe impossible to get a doctor to treat you. And you cannot ;put anything past the GOP. To believe that present seniors cannot be effected may be a little foolhardy.

[Mariana]

27. The post I answered is specifically about means testing Social Security.

It isn't about Medicare or Medicaid or anything else. I stand by my post. The Republicans will not stop payments to wealthy retirees who are already drawing Social Security. They know perfectly well that is a huge part of their voter base.

[TheMastersNemesis]

34. I Agree They Won't. The Fact That Any Of Them Is Talking That Garbage Even For Younger Generation -

should get them the political ax.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

49. I stand by your post too.

It will be another example of the more GOP-friendly elder passing along a worse world to the younger.

[doc03]

39. Oh yea that is the standard answer I get when I mention this to

a Republicon "It won't affect us"

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

48. Well said. GOP can exploit the empathy gap between groups of voters.

It is up to seniors (like me) to protest the attacks on SS/Medicare whatever the affected age. If it doesn't affect ME, it still affects the offspring, the spawn of boomers, our grandkids.

[Sophia4]

26. Means-testing Social Security would be criminal.

We all look forward to retirement. We work to be able to retire without fear.

Words to describe just how mean and awful Republicans are don't exist.

The idea of Social Security is to encourage people to retire when they really aren't healthy and strong enough to work any more. It also encourages people to retire and provide their jobs to younger people.

Republicans are just miserly and mean.

No one with those attitudes should claim to be a Christian.

Social Security is already means-tested in that you pay taxes on your benefits if you earn over a certain amount.

Ridiculous.

[TheMastersNemesis]

33. I Used To Think A Lot Of Ridiculous Political Things Were Not Possible. Now I Really Do Not Know.

Look at all the most unthinkable things being said by the GOPPERS, right wingers, hate mongers, hate radio, Trump /GOP loving private citizens et al that are said almost daily now. Look at ALL the most egregious statements that have been made THAT WOULD HAVE NEVER FLOWN ANYWHERE in recent decades. We are reaching levels of amorality and depravity we have never seen before.

Imagine Eisenhower, Kennedy, even Nixon saying some of the things Trump has said. Imagine the "button" comment during the Cuban missile crisis. We are simply tolerating what should be running Trump right out of the White House wearing tar and feathers.

[doc03]

40. It has been since 1983! nt

[Sophia4]

44. True, but I don' trust the Republicans with the concept at all.

Thrift and saving should not be punished. I don't think it should be means-tested at all.

[doc03]

46. Believe it or not I have heard only one prominent political person

bring this up ever. Rush Limbaugh, back when Clinton took office every day he would start out "American held hostage
for " " days" and I don't remember how he put it now but he complained about SS benefits being taxed every day.
That is all I can say I ever agreed with him about.

[jpak]

35. LOL! I have a relative that voted for Trump and GOP et al

because he didn't want Democrats to "means test him"....

[TheMastersNemesis]

36. ?????????

[Yavin4]

41. Here's the GOP means test for Social Security

Question 1: Do you have a pulse?

If you answer "yes", no SS for you. If you answer "no", you don't need it. You are dead.

[Yavin4]

43. Funny, they never means tested me when they were taking money out of my check every week.

No matter what I made, FICA got its share.

[Demsrule86]

47. Yes fight them with everything you have.

[extvbroadcaster]

52. 1974 my first job

Yep, my first job and my first SS payment. I was a kid, working at the movie theater. Now, after all these years they want to screw me out of it. Thanks GOP!

[Joe941]

53. This doesn't sound too bad to me...

I don't think the rich even need SS - why should the rich get SS when there are those like me that are going to rely heavily on it? Let's save SS for those who actually need it.