In the U.S., the monthly payments increase the longer one works—researchers have now examined whether delaying retirement is financially worthwhile.

In the U.S., the monthly payments increase the longer one works—researchers have now examined whether delaying retirement is financially worthwhile.

  • Earlier retirement: Researchers have analyzed data from the United States to examine whether retiring earlier is worthwhile.
  • Findings: The study shows that the financial risk of delaying retirement particularly affects men and low-income groups in the U.S.
  • Making the most of it: For sick individuals in the U.S., retiring early can help them receive some of the benefits they paid for—even if they do not have long to live.
  • MasterBlaster@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    23 hours ago

    SS is not a welfare benefit. That is a lie the Republicans have been pushing for decades.

    We pay our entire adult lives in order to get payout when we no longer work. It is meant to keep our elders out of poverty, not to line pockets of “welfare queens”, despite what you might have been told.

    As it stands now, I’m told I’ll only get 70% of what i am due because of decades of government stealing the money and calling it a loan.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      13·
      23 hours ago

      It is meant to keep our elders out of poverty

      Yes, the definition of a “welfare program” is something that keeps people out of poverty. According to Wikipedia:

      Welfare spending is a type of government support intended to ensure that members of a society can meet basic human needs such as food and shelter.

      That pretty closely matches my understanding of what Social Security is. Here’s the way benefits currently are calculated:

      1. initial amount is calculated as 90% of the first $X you make, 32% of your next $Y, and 15% up to the limit
      2. when you start taking benefits - you get 75% at 62, 100% at 67, and 124% at 70
      3. extra if you’re married

      Poorer people will:

      • get a bigger share of their working-years income
      • take SS later - so monthly checks will be larger

      So yeah, it’s a forced contribution to a welfare program, but the welfare program is not as generous as others because it also functions as a retirement program for middle class people.

      I think we should take this to its logical conclusion:

      • don’t provide benefits for those who don’t need it (i.e. >= 4x the poverty line)
      • base benefits on need, not how much you paid in - the less you earn, the more you get
      • eliminate age restriction - allow poor people (working or not) to get benefits

      I’m thinking it could be used to fund a Negative Income Tax (similar to Universal Basic Income), where if you report income under some amount, you get Social Security benefits, regardless of age.

      I’m told I’ll only get 70% of what i am due because of decades of government stealing the money and calling it a loan.

      Then you’re reading a bit too much into what clickbait articles say. The actual fact is that Social Security will be underfunded if nothing changes, and there’s plenty of time to make changes.