Oh it’s likely by design. Getting too invested in politics is a great way to make poor financial and wellbeing decisions if you’re not careful. Then again, they do make very political statements, just in non-political language. They were bashing social security policies that limit wealth accumulation and transfer under certain conditions like premature death or remarriage (at around 20 minutes in). The policies that they were bashing ARE policies instituted by conservatives to decrease government spending by decreasing social spending so that there’s less need for tax increases and so that people have to retire later to have enough savings to live off of. If you don’t see politics in those statements, i encourage you to consider who might have designed social security to have these key deficiencies and loopholes when it’s whole purpose is to keep people healthy and well after they’ve benefited their country for decades.
When did you guys get over 200k subs? Almost to a quarter million. You guys deserve millions tbh. One of the few genuine channels on finance out there.
Three things i keep in mind regarding Social Security: 1. It started being taxed under Reagan 2. The tax exemption limit was not indexed to inflation under Reagan 3. Bush Sr. started transferrimg Social Securoty funding to the general account.
Not mentioned: The trust fund wasn't even set up until the 70s. So, the Silent Generation (Boomer parents) got refunds every year from excess Social Security payments. That generation double dipped from paying way less into the fund, and then by comparison have drawn a lot more out. So, the inequities mentioned here are just the rolling forward of this inbalance created by that generation.
College Financial Aid - many schools consider retirement money "no touch" - that is, it is "safe" from the Financial Aid process. They acknowledge you cannot access those assets without significant penalties. So take care of your retirement before saving for your kids' college.
The amount of seniors I see that just live on SS was my fuel to be financially independent without it before I retire/age 70 etc…they will be in dire straits with this economy and inflation for the foreseeable future. Medicare goes up (part B) and it’s sad to witness with what I do. Too many thought years ago that SS would be enough
I too DCA weekly into my brokerage account, with the markets down currently I actually doubled my weekly investment for the down period. I know I'm buying on sale! Bi-monthly into my 457B , My only exception is we Max out our Roth IRAs on the 2nd of January every year.
529 Cautions - while they are a great tax-saving tool for wealthy families who are confident they will not qualify for financial assistance (note: some schools offer aid for families making $100,000 or more per year)... in the Financial Aid process, more and more schools are simply taking (accepting) the 529 money and asking for more. In other words, you're simply handing over that money and losing potential Financial Aid. This is especially true for "Pre-paid Tuition" 529's, like Michigan's MET.
@@sd0753 perhaps I didn’t say it clear enough, modest and middle income families are often penalized in the college financial aid process when they plan ahead and save for college using 529’s, especially “Prepaid Tuition” 529’s. Unlike traditional 529’s, where you pay the school and reimburse yourself (the school never directly touches the money), “Prepaid Tuition” 529’s tend to pay the schools directly and you never touch the money.
You should also mention social security totalisation agreements. These allow you to use years worked abroad to get over the 40 credits threshold. Great for folks who move to the US when they are older. (Or leave like me) it can be used to double dip if played correctly like teachers.
If a person didn't pay in to SS, they shouldn't receive any benefit. Everyone's benefit should be based soley on their contribution, regardless of their need.
@the money guy show I may have missed it, but didn’t hear you discuss the 0% cap gain tax bracket. For 2022 it’s $83,350 for MFJ, $41,675 for single filers.
I am a 57 y/o with a 15 yr mortgage @ 2.25%. Currently making double payments each month to payoff mortgage before retirement @ 60. Thrilled to have a low interest rate to make the payoff even easier.
Ugh....my mom passed away from lung cancer at 59 and was in the process of applying for social security disability...she worked hard her whole life and got nothing. She had nothing left to her at that point.
Yes it's terrible so many pay in there entire life to end up passing before getting any benefit from ss! I wish they would at least pay the family what was contributed all those yrs! Sorry for your loss. I also lost my mother then dad 6 months apart right before Covid hit.
@@katwilliams2950Your thinking is that one 60 year old was the only person in the country who pasted away early. This happens every day millions of times a year. That money was destined for that one person but is now certainly used for the millions of other elderly people with retirement and disability needs. It's a safety net for many people, actually everyone. That is the way insurance works.
Don't forget about health and quality of life. You can be much more active at 62 with grandchildren and such than you may be at 67. How much is your freedom worth? On your deathbed, you will never say I wish I worked more. You learn to spend less in retirement.
What about taking SS at age 62 instead of 67? Even though you take a 30% hit, you could invest that into an S&P500 index fund and make that up easily. Rule of 72 says: 72 / 10% apr = 7.2 years for the money to double (on average), so it should grow by at least 60-70% in those 5 years, which outweighs the 30% hit you take by starting early…
Social Security was enacted in the first place because too many elderly people were impoverished. So now that the generation that saw that are all dead, here we are looking at Social Security thinking "I can do better". Yes, you can. But the point is the majority cannot.
Then it should be optional. Sure it has slight benefits but the way it's set up by our government has screwed us. They basically stole from the workers when they dipped into those funds. Using funds improperly. If there's nothing or distribution is not close to my contributions for me when I retire, why am forced to contribute and I can't even will it to my family? And if we have a poverty issue, why aren't schools teaching financial education to set the population up for success?
@@katwilliams2950 let's go over what you wrote: so instead of punishing the people who "stole from workers" we change a system that has been in place for almost 100 years that has objectively lifted the elderly out of poverty by enforcing savings. Yes, I could probably do better. You could too in all likelihood. But a scheme like social security only works if everyone participates.
@@gobot4455 the government is free to take all of the interest from SS invested into various funds and GUARANTEE a negative rate of return. Why can’t people be given interest?
@@katwilliams2950 Most people can't do better because they aren't financially literate. Financial literacy doesn't come naturally to most people and since it generally isn't taught in schools, most people will need it.
My FRB is age 66.6 (not 67). I am going to take my retirement at age 65, this is about 89% of my full retirement. 62 would've been too early for me, I think 65 is perfect.
I worked for 34 years, I’m 84 yo now and I am only receiving $42 a month for SS . I got penalized for 49 % for not enrolling when I turned 65 years old, which not true. SS WERE DEDUCTING MEDICARE monthly PREMIUM OF $92 STARTING 2004 to 2008.
I am part of the Teacher’s Retirement System of Texas. Will I receive SS benefits? Or will they garnish some of my SS benefits since I have TRS? Thanks.
What i also hate about social security is that because this country is slow on financial literacy that people don't realize that social security won't be enough to maintain them in retirement and then are surprised when they do start taking it and the amount is extremely low. Also, i but every week too. One of the mistakes ive made until now is buying large quantities at the same time and i admit that i use to do it for the rush. I realized that if i did small amounts across all of my accounts weekly, i could buy on four days of the week. I think it's great and it's gotten rid of my happy trigger fingers.
SS will replace 90% or more of our household expenses. Just mine alone. So having healthy investments will more than see us through. SS is not going away.
I think he may be wrong about his mother not getting anything besides the minor death benefit. If she had dependent children, she was also paid a monthly amount per child up to some limit. Now at 54, all her kids may have been over 18. The main thought is social security is NOT an individual retirement account. It is a social safety insurance. Meaning if you don’t experience a qualifying event, then you did not need the money. So his father die prematurely. He never had a retirement. Therefore he did not get a retirement pay out. Similarly if you have forced car insurance and never experience an accident. You essentially never get a payout or hence lose all your premiums. It is not a retirement account to pass to heirs. It is guaranteed social safety net/ insurance. So there are people out there that instead of forcing higher earners to pay a larger share into a system to get a higher benefit later. We should restructure the system to as a anti poverty system for those who truly need it. And divert the excess cost back into individual retirement accounts. Making that diverted amount mandatory is even better. Considering half of seniors use social security as half or more of their monthly income says we need to keep some for, of social safety net for the general population. Because mass poverty among the elderly is not a good thing for social stability
I take issue with the scenario where the administrator received a bonus and then lost social security benefits in a greater amount. First, how? You said, and I agree, that the rule is every $2 over a certain amount makes you lose eligibility for $1 of social security. Is that true for years following the year in which the money was earned? Does your benefit stay diminished for following years? That was not explained to me. 2. The SSA trumpets that their computers look at the benefits they expected to pay you before the age of 67, and what benefits you actually received, and if you received less, the difference is added back into your social security benefit from 67 onward. That means earning more from 62-66 is NOT losing your benefits - it’s just moving your benefits later in life. There are longevity scenarios where you end up better off for them having done that! How did the Money Guy miss this?
SS is the greatest inflation and longevity annuity on the planet. The system partially correcting people who take it early in order to support them by a greater amount if they live long is a valuable component of how it supports people. If you claimed early, and you earn a lot, you need less social security to subsist, but you may wish you had more later in life, and that’s exactly what the clawback does for you. It’s fantastic at strengthening your inflation and longevity hedge.
Unfortunarely, many people cannot build their own wealth "better." Yes, it isnt meant to cover 100% of living expenses, but it is too sad to see seniors living in abject poverty or even on the street. I do not mind paying taxes to help out the "least of these." I like listening to you guys and get a lot of inspiration, but you nearly lost me here.
Just a quick question how can social security disappear? I mean if they are always collecting social security from workers even tho they are paying out more than they are taking in they will still be able to pay but at a reduced payment. So instead of getting the full 100% payment you'll get maybe 75% or maybe 60% the only way they can stop it is if they stop collecting payments for it.
Also I was not awarded for my husband’s SS BENEFITS WHEN HE DIED, for I am receiving more than him. $5 more than him a month. I definitely need a SS lawyer. Someone that knows the Social Security laws. Because I felt this is not right. If I select a Medicare supplemental health insurance that charge a high monthly premium, I only received monthly retirement from SSA BENEFITS OF $ 14.95 a month. I can’t even buy a 2 gallons of milk a month. 34 years of work.
I'm freaking out. I put my funds from cash to the market plan and have lost 27000 of my deposited funds. It's killing me. I think I should have kept it in cash
How do teachers not reach the 40 credits needed? I'm 33 and remember looking at my SSA account in my late 20s and having the credits. I suppose I don't understand exactly what earns these credits.
Do the math. If you put 12.5%(6.25 for your portion and 6.25 for the employer portion) into the S&P for your 45 year working career, you would be able to retire with 100% wage replacement. And if you die early, the money is gone. Meanwhile, social security give you about a 35% wage replacement
What happens for a couple that is married, (HIM the larger earner/HER the lower earner), she doesn't delay takes SS early, but he delays his SS and dies before age 72. (before filing for the delayed SS benefit) - Will she still get the spousal death benefits even though he delayed or will she not receive it because his SS wasn't filed when he was alive? Note: Their entire nest egg portfolio outside of SS consist of ROTH assets, and no pension or other taxable assets they would sell.
From what i can understand, she can file for his SS and get half of what he would have gotten if it's more than what she is currently getting. My father had already passed when my mother filed, and she is getting 1/2 of his SS because it's greater than hers would have been.
I am a 100% totally and permanently disabled veteran. I will be 62 this August 11th. If I chose to start Social Security Income at this age will they reduce my income benefits?
You guys are great and I have learned a lot from you guys... But your take on Social Security is terrible. Calling a "ponzi scheme" is disingenuous because while it is NOT working as intended (due to the last two decades of terrible Senators and very bad President in the 80's) you guys do know the intended use-case was not bad AND it can be fixed (although we need a new slate of Senators that know what they are doing). The idea of a "safety net" that everyone can partake on, especially for those lacking financial literacy, is important for EVERYONE.
You, personally, maybe better at investing your money than government. Is everyone though? Go to Walmart, take a look around, how many will be better at it? And when they get old, gov. will have to keep them from starvation one way or the other. (Because they will be seniors and they will vote). This way at least everyone contributes. It is social insurance, which is a bit different from pure investment. Some people get less, some more. But yes, politicians should stop reaching into this cookie jar.
Pretty sure someone told Bo it’s called ‘Sole’ Security 😂 I have NEVER heard him say the word ‘Social’ Now I’m wondering if he refers to UA-cam as Sole Media…
Guys: Been listening to your show for close to a year now. You guys are smart and are doing a good job educating younger folks. Just came back from vacation and was listening to the show on Social Security Benefits on the podcast (abbreviated version). Very disappointed with Brian's rant on "Ponzi scheme". If you guys stuck to explaining the program as Social Security and not tried to compare it to an Investment vehicle, you would have done great by your listeners. Also, when you tried to explain on program going broke, you mentioned that after 2034, you will get less - you should have clarified that you would get 76% of the benefits, that would have been education. Brian, you are smarter than that. Had to set it right. Other than that, keep doing the good work.
Surprised RMDs weren’t mentioned. The age window of 60-70 is a great time to rollover pre-tax assets to Roth & avoid RMDs at 72. For tax reasons, you probably don’t want to be collecting Social Security while you do that. I say delay SS, do the rollovers, & then consider all the things they described.
Think of all the SS payouts SS won’t have to payout due to COVID Deaths. Funny their longevity hasn’t reflected this. Also, SS benefits increases 8% every year from age 62. Plus early worked years are inflation adjusted. Maybe your own portfolio isn’t so good now with the market crashing?
Several of those instances of losing benefits are related to not paying out to those who don’t need it, which we want in a government program. Having earned income as an example, & although antiquated view is the premise behind the remarry rule. I think there should be a wealth limit on collecting benefits as well. I’d favor using it as a redistribution vehicle.
Nope. Everyone who pays into social security gets it or no one gets it. Talk about a plan where people would have zero incentive to save for themselves.
@@kiwikimmyd the original intention of the program is to provide a safety net for old people, and that’s all it should be. Living solely on social security sucks so there’s already incentives to avoid it. Some people still end up there & I’m glad we can keep them from starving. The idea that someone like myself with 7 digit retirement is going to take from those in need is disgusting. I might not ever claim it!
Wasn't the ssdi trust fund established by Reagan just to pay the boomers benefits? So isn't it going broke by design as boomers are now ssdi eligible? The way I understand it is, genx payed extra to fund their parents retirement. I think the issue is, we borrowed from the trust fund and now don't want to pay the interest or the principle.
My mother-in-law is turning 100 in a few days, and she lives at home, walks around with falling, bathes herself, etc. My husband is definitely waiting until 70 to take his SS.
Typical Brian, "gubmnt bad." Nevermind social security disability, the tens of millions of elderly kept out of poverty, and how the "funding crisis" can be resolved by removing the cap on income over $122k. I am sure all these corporations would immediately put that 7.5% FICA money into quality retirement accounts for the employees, right? Corporations love paying benefits, right?
So you think it is run well? The kicking the can down the road on funding is good? May want to look into my background- I have experience in fixing pensions for municipal governments. The pain of correcting funding formulas and structure is always hard but the solution requires action sooner not later. I have been writing and personally talking to elected officials about Social Security since the mid 90s. I didn’t mention taking away any benefits. I mentioned multiple times being for a societal safety net. Not sure where the disconnect occurred 🤷♂️. Thanks for the comment.
What corporations aren’t paying (non-pension) benefits? Who’s to say you couldn’t self fund with the money you would save otherwise? It’s ok for people to take responsibility. Do you have an issue with that?
Not to mention if you’ve put in enough to receive the max $4100…you probably would have had a number north of $2.5MM in the S&P with the same deposits. Even if you start collecting at 72 and die at 102 you only get half of that with nothing to pass on to your heirs.
I love that these guys change with the times and don't talk about politics. Two big reasons I dislike listening to Dave Ramsey
Me too. Dave’s political and religious views do zero for my financial life. Not interested.
Oh it’s likely by design. Getting too invested in politics is a great way to make poor financial and wellbeing decisions if you’re not careful.
Then again, they do make very political statements, just in non-political language. They were bashing social security policies that limit wealth accumulation and transfer under certain conditions like premature death or remarriage (at around 20 minutes in). The policies that they were bashing ARE policies instituted by conservatives to decrease government spending by decreasing social spending so that there’s less need for tax increases and so that people have to retire later to have enough savings to live off of.
If you don’t see politics in those statements, i encourage you to consider who might have designed social security to have these key deficiencies and loopholes when it’s whole purpose is to keep people healthy and well after they’ve benefited their country for decades.
Dave comes off as a giant asshole besides.
When did you guys get over 200k subs? Almost to a quarter million. You guys deserve millions tbh. One of the few genuine channels on finance out there.
Three things i keep in mind regarding Social Security:
1. It started being taxed under Reagan
2. The tax exemption limit was not indexed to inflation under Reagan
3. Bush Sr. started transferrimg Social Securoty funding to the general account.
The amount of knowledge you guys have off hand is incredible- thank you for sharing this with us!
Not mentioned: The trust fund wasn't even set up until the 70s. So, the Silent Generation (Boomer parents) got refunds every year from excess Social Security payments. That generation double dipped from paying way less into the fund, and then by comparison have drawn a lot more out. So, the inequities mentioned here are just the rolling forward of this inbalance created by that generation.
College Financial Aid - many schools consider retirement money "no touch" - that is, it is "safe" from the Financial Aid process. They acknowledge you cannot access those assets without significant penalties. So take care of your retirement before saving for your kids' college.
The amount of seniors I see that just live on SS was my fuel to be financially independent without it before I retire/age 70 etc…they will be in dire straits with this economy and inflation for the foreseeable future. Medicare goes up (part B) and it’s sad to witness with what I do. Too many thought years ago that SS would be enough
I’m so ticked off that I’m 46, working since 14, and have paid into social security all that time to possible not get anything back!!!!!!
I too DCA weekly into my brokerage account, with the markets down currently I actually doubled my weekly investment for the down period. I know I'm buying on sale!
Bi-monthly into my 457B , My only exception is we Max out our Roth IRAs on the 2nd of January every year.
How you feeling now!? Let's goooo
529 Cautions - while they are a great tax-saving tool for wealthy families who are confident they will not qualify for financial assistance (note: some schools offer aid for families making $100,000 or more per year)... in the Financial Aid process, more and more schools are simply taking (accepting) the 529 money and asking for more. In other words, you're simply handing over that money and losing potential Financial Aid. This is especially true for "Pre-paid Tuition" 529's, like Michigan's MET.
Some states plans are horrible
@@sd0753 perhaps I didn’t say it clear enough, modest and middle income families are often penalized in the college financial aid process when they plan ahead and save for college using 529’s, especially “Prepaid Tuition” 529’s.
Unlike traditional 529’s, where you pay the school and reimburse yourself (the school never directly touches the money), “Prepaid Tuition” 529’s tend to pay the schools directly and you never touch the money.
You should also mention social security totalisation agreements. These allow you to use years worked abroad to get over the 40 credits threshold. Great for folks who move to the US when they are older. (Or leave like me) it can be used to double dip if played correctly like teachers.
If a person didn't pay in to SS, they shouldn't receive any benefit. Everyone's benefit should be based soley on their contribution, regardless of their need.
@the money guy show I may have missed it, but didn’t hear you discuss the 0% cap gain tax bracket. For 2022 it’s $83,350 for MFJ, $41,675 for single filers.
You guys are the best
I am a 57 y/o with a 15 yr mortgage @ 2.25%. Currently making double payments each month to payoff mortgage before retirement @ 60. Thrilled to have a low interest rate to make the payoff even easier.
Ugh....my mom passed away from lung cancer at 59 and was in the process of applying for social security disability...she worked hard her whole life and got nothing. She had nothing left to her at that point.
The contribution amount should go to the family. I'm sorry for your loss and the unfortunate circumstance
Yes it's terrible so many pay in there entire life to end up passing before getting any benefit from ss! I wish they would at least pay the family what was contributed all those yrs! Sorry for your loss. I also lost my mother then dad 6 months apart right before Covid hit.
@@katwilliams2950Your thinking is that one 60 year old was the only person in the country who pasted away early. This happens every day millions of times a year. That money was destined for that one person but is now certainly used for the millions of other elderly people with retirement and disability needs. It's a safety net for many people, actually everyone. That is the way insurance works.
Social security should not be means tested. A person's benefit should be based entirely on their contribution.
This show was very helpful thanks.
Don't forget about health and quality of life. You can be much more active at 62 with grandchildren and such than you may be at 67. How much is your freedom worth? On your deathbed, you will never say I wish I worked more. You learn to spend less in retirement.
Excellent information! Thank you so much !
What about taking SS at age 62 instead of 67? Even though you take a 30% hit, you could invest that into an S&P500 index fund and make that up easily.
Rule of 72 says: 72 / 10% apr = 7.2 years for the money to double (on average), so it should grow by at least 60-70% in those 5 years, which outweighs the 30% hit you take by starting early…
Social Security was enacted in the first place because too many elderly people were impoverished. So now that the generation that saw that are all dead, here we are looking at Social Security thinking "I can do better". Yes, you can. But the point is the majority cannot.
Then it should be optional. Sure it has slight benefits but the way it's set up by our government has screwed us. They basically stole from the workers when they dipped into those funds. Using funds improperly. If there's nothing or distribution is not close to my contributions for me when I retire, why am forced to contribute and I can't even will it to my family? And if we have a poverty issue, why aren't schools teaching financial education to set the population up for success?
@@katwilliams2950 let's go over what you wrote: so instead of punishing the people who "stole from workers" we change a system that has been in place for almost 100 years that has objectively lifted the elderly out of poverty by enforcing savings.
Yes, I could probably do better. You could too in all likelihood. But a scheme like social security only works if everyone participates.
@@gobot4455 the government is free to take all of the interest from SS invested into various funds and GUARANTEE a negative rate of return. Why can’t people be given interest?
@@katwilliams2950 Most people can't do better because they aren't financially literate. Financial literacy doesn't come naturally to most people and since it generally isn't taught in schools, most people will need it.
@@victorialadybug1And they alone shoukd suffer due to their ignorance. Why punish high achievers?
Love you guys thank you for all you do!
The best show Thank you 🙏
My FRB is age 66.6 (not 67). I am going to take my retirement at age 65, this is about 89% of my full retirement. 62 would've been too early for me, I think 65 is perfect.
I live in Maine and we had a horseshoe pit growing up.
Fresh content. Thumbs up.
Horseshoes aren't southern. Grew up in NJ playing it. Wife's from NY and they had it there too.
I worked for 34 years, I’m 84 yo now and I am only receiving $42 a month for SS . I got penalized for 49 % for not enrolling when I turned 65 years old, which not true. SS WERE DEDUCTING MEDICARE monthly PREMIUM OF $92 STARTING 2004 to 2008.
Mom passed away at 61 and 10 months from breast cancer. So true she lost her ss
My dad passed @54 & my mom is collecting his social security
I do my ROTH IRA weekly and my brokerage account biweekly on paydays. Not sure why I don't do them both at the same times, but it works!
The issue is most will not save and many can’t handle the risk of the market. I’ll take the 4 grand a month in SS. I consider it a pension.
You better be close to retirement age to rely on that plan
Withrowing from 401k or roth also affects social security payments?
I live in the San Francisco and, one of the parks in the town I grew up in had a house shoes area.
I’m 20 and have disability and I wish I didn’t get it at this time but I do since 3 months old
I am part of the Teacher’s Retirement System of Texas. Will I receive SS benefits? Or will they garnish some of my SS benefits since I have TRS? Thanks.
Why would assets matter whose name they are in, in the case of divorce? All investments will be split during the divorce correct?
What i also hate about social security is that because this country is slow on financial literacy that people don't realize that social security won't be enough to maintain them in retirement and then are surprised when they do start taking it and the amount is extremely low. Also, i but every week too. One of the mistakes ive made until now is buying large quantities at the same time and i admit that i use to do it for the rush. I realized that if i did small amounts across all of my accounts weekly, i could buy on four days of the week. I think it's great and it's gotten rid of my happy trigger fingers.
Great idea
SS will replace 90% or more of our household expenses. Just mine alone. So having healthy investments will more than see us through. SS is not going away.
Buying every week isn't sick. I have auto investments go in every day of the month darn near
At 2:00: social security DOES pass on to your kids or spouse if you die. You get survivor benefits...
Not if the person passes when they are 61
I'm down with the sickness.... I buy weekly too.
I think he may be wrong about his mother not getting anything besides the minor death benefit. If she had dependent children, she was also paid a monthly amount per child up to some limit. Now at 54, all her kids may have been over 18.
The main thought is social security is NOT an individual retirement account. It is a social safety insurance. Meaning if you don’t experience a qualifying event, then you did not need the money. So his father die prematurely. He never had a retirement. Therefore he did not get a retirement pay out. Similarly if you have forced car insurance and never experience an accident. You essentially never get a payout or hence lose all your premiums.
It is not a retirement account to pass to heirs. It is guaranteed social safety net/ insurance. So there are people out there that instead of forcing higher earners to pay a larger share into a system to get a higher benefit later. We should restructure the system to as a anti poverty system for those who truly need it. And divert the excess cost back into individual retirement accounts. Making that diverted amount mandatory is even better.
Considering half of seniors use social security as half or more of their monthly income says we need to keep some for, of social safety net for the general population. Because mass poverty among the elderly is not a good thing for social stability
👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼...
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦..🅿️🇨🇦
I take issue with the scenario where the administrator received a bonus and then lost social security benefits in a greater amount.
First, how? You said, and I agree, that the rule is every $2 over a certain amount makes you lose eligibility for $1 of social security. Is that true for years following the year in which the money was earned? Does your benefit stay diminished for following years? That was not explained to me.
2. The SSA trumpets that their computers look at the benefits they expected to pay you before the age of 67, and what benefits you actually received, and if you received less, the difference is added back into your social security benefit from 67 onward. That means earning more from 62-66 is NOT losing your benefits - it’s just moving your benefits later in life. There are longevity scenarios where you end up better off for them having done that! How did the Money Guy miss this?
SS is the greatest inflation and longevity annuity on the planet. The system partially correcting people who take it early in order to support them by a greater amount if they live long is a valuable component of how it supports people. If you claimed early, and you earn a lot, you need less social security to subsist, but you may wish you had more later in life, and that’s exactly what the clawback does for you. It’s fantastic at strengthening your inflation and longevity hedge.
Unfortunarely, many people cannot build their own wealth "better." Yes, it isnt meant to cover 100% of living expenses, but it is too sad to see seniors living in abject poverty or even on the street. I do not mind paying taxes to help out the "least of these." I like listening to you guys and get a lot of inspiration, but you nearly lost me here.
Just a quick question how can social security disappear? I mean if they are always collecting social security from workers even tho they are paying out more than they are taking in they will still be able to pay but at a reduced payment. So instead of getting the full 100% payment you'll get maybe 75% or maybe 60% the only way they can stop it is if they stop collecting payments for it.
Also I was not awarded for my husband’s SS BENEFITS WHEN HE DIED, for I am receiving more than him. $5 more than him a month. I definitely need a SS lawyer. Someone that knows the Social Security laws. Because I felt this is not right. If I select a Medicare supplemental health insurance that charge a high monthly premium, I only received monthly retirement from SSA BENEFITS OF $ 14.95 a month. I can’t even buy a 2 gallons of milk a month. 34 years of work.
Nobody:
Bo: “Soul Security”
😂
When the money guys say save 25% of your gross income, are they talking about 25% from each paycheck or 25% of your annual gross income.
I'm freaking out. I put my funds from cash to the market plan and have lost 27000 of my deposited funds. It's killing me. I think I should have kept it in cash
How do teachers not reach the 40 credits needed? I'm 33 and remember looking at my SSA account in my late 20s and having the credits. I suppose I don't understand exactly what earns these credits.
Teachers in Texas do not pay into SS. Some states do. Depends where you live.
I wish Bo would of finished saying “social INsecurity” because that’s what it is
Do the math. If you put 12.5%(6.25 for your portion and 6.25 for the employer portion) into the S&P for your 45 year working career, you would be able to retire with 100% wage replacement. And if you die early, the money is gone. Meanwhile, social security give you about a 35% wage replacement
OMG TBH ATW right on
What happens for a couple that is married, (HIM the larger earner/HER the lower earner), she doesn't delay takes SS early, but he delays his SS and dies before age 72. (before filing for the delayed SS benefit)
- Will she still get the spousal death benefits even though he delayed or will she not receive it because his SS wasn't filed when he was alive?
Note: Their entire nest egg portfolio outside of SS consist of ROTH assets, and no pension or other taxable assets they would sell.
From what i can understand, she can file for his SS and get half of what he would have gotten if it's more than what she is currently getting. My father had already passed when my mother filed, and she is getting 1/2 of his SS because it's greater than hers would have been.
I am a 100% totally and permanently disabled veteran. I will be 62 this August 11th. If I chose to start Social Security Income at this age will they reduce my income benefits?
I think you can go to the SS website and you can see what you will get up to 70 1/2 years old.
At 62, you can qualify for early retirement but check with Ss to see if your disability "entitlement" is greater than your early retirement amount t
You guys are great and I have learned a lot from you guys... But your take on Social Security is terrible. Calling a "ponzi scheme" is disingenuous because while it is NOT working as intended (due to the last two decades of terrible Senators and very bad President in the 80's) you guys do know the intended use-case was not bad AND it can be fixed (although we need a new slate of Senators that know what they are doing). The idea of a "safety net" that everyone can partake on, especially for those lacking financial literacy, is important for EVERYONE.
You, personally, maybe better at investing your money than government. Is everyone though? Go to Walmart, take a look around, how many will be better at it? And when they get old, gov. will have to keep them from starvation one way or the other. (Because they will be seniors and they will vote). This way at least everyone contributes. It is social insurance, which is a bit different from pure investment. Some people get less, some more. But yes, politicians should stop reaching into this cookie jar.
Pretty sure someone told Bo it’s called ‘Sole’ Security 😂
I have NEVER heard him say the word ‘Social’
Now I’m wondering if he refers to UA-cam as Sole Media…
Guys: Been listening to your show for close to a year now. You guys are smart and are doing a good job educating younger folks. Just came back from vacation and was listening to the show on Social Security Benefits on the podcast (abbreviated version). Very disappointed with Brian's rant on "Ponzi scheme". If you guys stuck to explaining the program as Social Security and not tried to compare it to an Investment vehicle, you would have done great by your listeners. Also, when you tried to explain on program going broke, you mentioned that after 2034, you will get less - you should have clarified that you would get 76% of the benefits, that would have been education. Brian, you are smarter than that. Had to set it right.
Other than that, keep doing the good work.
We got to 6.3% 30 years fast.
Surprised RMDs weren’t mentioned. The age window of 60-70 is a great time to rollover pre-tax assets to Roth & avoid RMDs at 72. For tax reasons, you probably don’t want to be collecting Social Security while you do that. I say delay SS, do the rollovers, & then consider all the things they described.
Do you mean doing Roth conversions?
@@lalew2 yes
Maybe if you're retired at 62, but if not retired it would be unwise to roll over assets, making a taxable event, in your highest earning years ever.
@@anotherdedchannel precisely, if you have heavy pre-tax assets, you likely want to take some low income years to roll over those assets
I paid down my mortgage. Then I could use cash for my children's college. No government rules!!!
.....what you say now you should have this talk 30 years ago now by 63....everyone is broke and . ...Sour ....
What if you have terminal illness
has Brian ever been approached about playing John Wayne in his biopic?
Ugh. So what 4 IF You Already Have It?
Ain't gonna namr no names, but someone seems to like making sure we KNOW, that the "Good" tax changes came in 2018 ah?
If they're going to be out of money by 2034, shouldn't you pull as much as you can before they go broke?
Brian is clearly a very smart guy but "asteriCk" is not a word. The word is "asteriSk."
The stories about your mom and your employee both boiled my blood!!
Read “The Simple Path to Wealth” by JL Collins. He frames Social Security a little less cynically than TMGS.
Think of all the SS payouts SS won’t have to payout due to COVID Deaths. Funny their longevity hasn’t reflected this. Also, SS benefits increases 8% every year from age 62. Plus early worked years are inflation adjusted. Maybe your own portfolio isn’t so good now with the market crashing?
Several of those instances of losing benefits are related to not paying out to those who don’t need it, which we want in a government program. Having earned income as an example, & although antiquated view is the premise behind the remarry rule. I think there should be a wealth limit on collecting benefits as well. I’d favor using it as a redistribution vehicle.
Nope. Everyone who pays into social security gets it or no one gets it. Talk about a plan where people would have zero incentive to save for themselves.
@@kiwikimmyd the original intention of the program is to provide a safety net for old people, and that’s all it should be. Living solely on social security sucks so there’s already incentives to avoid it. Some people still end up there & I’m glad we can keep them from starving. The idea that someone like myself with 7 digit retirement is going to take from those in need is disgusting. I might not ever claim it!
Wasn't the ssdi trust fund established by Reagan just to pay the boomers benefits? So isn't it going broke by design as boomers are now ssdi eligible?
The way I understand it is, genx payed extra to fund their parents retirement. I think the issue is, we borrowed from the trust fund and now don't want to pay the interest or the principle.
My mother-in-law is turning 100 in a few days, and she lives at home, walks around with falling, bathes herself, etc. My husband is definitely waiting until 70 to take his SS.
onw hour and 42 minutes to say four things?
Typical Brian, "gubmnt bad." Nevermind social security disability, the tens of millions of elderly kept out of poverty, and how the "funding crisis" can be resolved by removing the cap on income over $122k. I am sure all these corporations would immediately put that 7.5% FICA money into quality retirement accounts for the employees, right? Corporations love paying benefits, right?
So you think it is run well? The kicking the can down the road on funding is good? May want to look into my background- I have experience in fixing pensions for municipal governments. The pain of correcting funding formulas and structure is always hard but the solution requires action sooner not later. I have been writing and personally talking to elected officials about Social Security since the mid 90s. I didn’t mention taking away any benefits. I mentioned multiple times being for a societal safety net. Not sure where the disconnect occurred 🤷♂️. Thanks for the comment.
@@MoneyGuyShow love to see Brian going off on a troll, you go king
What corporations aren’t paying (non-pension) benefits? Who’s to say you couldn’t self fund with the money you would save otherwise? It’s ok for people to take responsibility. Do you have an issue with that?
Not to mention if you’ve put in enough to receive the max $4100…you probably would have had a number north of $2.5MM in the S&P with the same deposits. Even if you start collecting at 72 and die at 102 you only get half of that with nothing to pass on to your heirs.
@@MoneyGuyShow I'm sorry Brian. This episode came off 99% "gov bad rant" to me, which is disappointing.
The best show Thank you 🙏