I’ve commented before how surprised I am that a high percentage of emails I get come from the relatively small group of people in this country who don’t even pay into Social Security. Most of those questions come from retired…
into Social Security. Most of those questions come from retired or soon-to-be retired educators in those states where teachers have a separate retirement system other than Social Security. And I have written maybe 100 columns over the years explaining the offsets that apply to those folks if they have worked on the side paying into Social Security or if they have a spouse who is covered by Social Security. And I’m not going to go over that topic again today.
When the Social Security laws were first passed in 1935, Congress figured that federal government employees did not need to be covered by the new program. Why? Because federal employees were already covered by the civil service retirement system. That retirement program has been around since 1920. Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | RSS Feed | Omny Studio But over the years, Congress felt an increasing amount of pressure to bring federal employees into the Social Security fold. There were two main reasons. First, you could make the case that all workers in the country should be covered by the same retirement system.
Anyway, by the 1980s, the political pressure to bring federal employees into the Social Security tent was too great. So, in 1983, a law was passed saying that all federal employees hired after Dec. 31, 1983, would be covered by the Social Security system. At the same time, the law decreed that effective Jan. 1, 1984, all members of Congress, the president, the vice president and federal judges would also start paying into Social Security.
Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Most oppose Social Security, Medicare cuts: AP-NORC pollMost U.S. adults are opposed to proposals that would cut into Medicare or Social Security benefits, and a majority support raising taxes on the nation’s highest earners to keep Medicare running as is.
Read more »
Most oppose Social Security, Medicare cuts: AP-NORC pollInstead, a majority support the idea of increasing taxes on households making over $400,000 yearly to pay for Medicare.
Read more »
Fact and fiction: Trump super PAC attacks on DeSantis on Social Security and MedicareA super PAC backing Donald Trump launched an ad last week attacking GovRonDeSantis on his record on entitlements, including Social Security & Medicare. But, how much of it is true? We investigated the claims.
Read more »
Young or old, the coming shortfall in Social Security should worry youOld-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI), which pays retirement and survivor benefits, will be unable to issue full benefits starting in 2033. Here’s what you should know about the financial state of Social Security and Medicare:
Read more »
Most oppose Social Security, Medicare cuts: AP-NORC pollAmericans are deeply opposed to cutting into Medicare or Social Security benefits, and most support raising taxes on the nation’s highest earners to keep Medicare running as is. The new findings, revealed in a March poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, come as both safety net programs are poised to run out of enough cash to pay out full benefits within the next decade. Few Americans would be OK with that: 79% say they oppose reducing the size of Social Security benefits and 67% are against raising monthly premiums for Medicare.
Read more »
Most US adults oppose Social Security, Medicare cuts, poll showsA recent poll found that the majority of American adults are opposed to cutting Medicare or Social Security benefits. More than half are against raising monthly premiums for Medicare.
Read more »