Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Sekhmets Daughter

(7,515 posts)

16. There are always exceptions, of course.

Reply to liberal_at_heart (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:26 PM

Dec 2012

But taking it early is very costly. Not that long ago, accountants used to advise people to take it early as they would have to live longer than the mortality tables predicted, in order to recover the lost money. Today the story is just the opposite. Currently 70% of retirees began collecting SS at age 62. However, only 51% of the Boomers who have become eligible have chosen to take it early.

Do you father and/or father-in-law have additional income? The inequality in this county is disgusting on so many levels.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

are there any proposals to reduce SS benefits to the wealthy? [View all] liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 OP

Lindsay Graham has put Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #1

They paid in, the contract should be honored. Downwinder Dec 2012 #2

in theory I agree with you liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #4

I don't think there is any proposal to end their benefits, Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #11

I'm curious meanit Dec 2012 #29

I think I am slated for age 82. Downwinder Dec 2012 #30

Social Security income is pretty much reclaimed in full from the wealthy. Loudly Dec 2012 #3

What is substantial investment income? n/t Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #12

It is not very much and it is not just investment income but any additional income one might get. Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #17

I have a modest private pension... Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #24

Wealthy To The GOP Is Anyone Making Over $30,000 A Year TheMastersNemesis Dec 2012 #5

Are there any proposals to reduce the gap between rich and poor? leftstreet Dec 2012 #6

Lot's of proposals for "means testing." Hoyt Dec 2012 #7

I hope not, because there shouldn't be. It's not welfare. lumberjack_jeff Dec 2012 #8

I'm not sure poor people take SS early.... Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #9

my father and father in law both took it early liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #10

There are always exceptions, of course. Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #16

no, no additional income liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #18

Whoa... Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #25

They paid into it and are just as much entitled. duffyduff Dec 2012 #13

it's being discussed because they want poor people to starve while the wealthy use liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #15

Social Security is one of the most popular government programs mythology Dec 2012 #31

Aw, that's sweet but uninformed. First the GOP says YOU are the wealthy. Are you? Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #14

They pay their membership dues with their SS benefits, and laugh about it. Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #19

They get taxed on it as part of their high income. mainer Dec 2012 #20

Well, Obama only wants them to pay a "little bit" more in taxes forestpath Dec 2012 #21

Reagan ProSense Dec 2012 #23

I hope not. Cleita Dec 2012 #22

Speaking for myself Turbineguy Dec 2012 #26

I'm against anything that chips away at benefits. limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #27

Social Security's technical name... Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #28

SS is already means tested buzzroller Dec 2012 #32