is there a planned benefit increase for social security in the US for 2007? How much will it be?
959558
Not that I have heard of
830842
In 1936, the federal government published an informational pamphlet on Social Security.  It stated:   \n\n"…and finally, beginning in 1949, 12 years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year.  That is the most you will ever pay."\n\nhttp://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/ssb36.html\n-----\n\nHELL YES !!!\nBut I guess I'm just too stupid to take care of myself, so politicians will do it for me.  Yep, I'm too stupid to save my money properly.  Yep, I'm too stupid to buy the proper insurances to protect myself from unforeseen events.  Yep, I'm just too stupid.\n\n.
1094768
The crazy truth about social security is that it's not a savings plan for your future. Everything that is deducted from your paycheck now is used to make social security payments to those currently receving benefits. We are paying for the benefits of the previous generation and the next generation will be paying for ours. However, everyone agrees that this is an unsustainable model and that the program will most likely go bust in the next few decades. Although I am not a big fan of Bush, he did attempt to pass legislation that would allow people making payments into a retirement plan to forego paying social security taxes. This idea was shot down pretty quickly...
265552
US economy will increase with following advantages:\n\n1. Fine of 2000 dollars for two million people.  Lot of money!!\n2. We will get tax for last five years, and also for next ten years.\n3. Price for apples will stay same.  Price to cut grass will stay same.  Home prices (construction) will stay same.\n\nRepublicans argue that what is the gurentee that another million will not come to US?\n\nI want to ask them what is the gurentee that woman won't be raped after imposing tough laws?  what is the gurentee that murder won't happen?\n\nIf god can't give gurentee of that, who are you to ask for alien's gurentee?\n\nBackground check must be done to identify criminals.  US has more advatage that aliens.\n\nGuest-worker is a good program, but conservtatives want votes, so they will never approve it.
380569
No, it will not affect your social security benefit as the law is written now. Your SSA payment is dependent upon how much you earned. They are talking about taking it away or reducing it for people who earn more, but I don't think that would pass.
474551
Representatives passed and President Bush praised (and vowed to sign) a budget package that will reduce Medicaid spending by $4.7 billion over five years, largely through increased co-payments and premiums and reduced benefits. A report this week from Georgetown's Health Policy Institute found that the Medicaid provisions in the budget would (1) undo the guarantee that children in Medicaid will be provided medically necessary services, (2) permit states to charge families substantial new costs that many would not be able to afford, and (3) require states to impose new and unnecessary paperwork on eligible children.So, if you have very high prescription drug needs, then you will pay $3,600 a year, plus 5% more on the drugs after that, plus your premiums, which will be over $600. So it will be over $4,200 for prescription drugs only, if you have coverage and use many drugs.\n\nAdd that amount to the other premiums and co-pays of regular Medicare and it will take most of the Social Security check. Some estimate $200,000 for medical costs after retirement each and for a couple, I suppose, that could be double. Unless a couple get a discount. Most elderly Americans are proud, hardworking people and they shouldn't have to be put into poverty to pay their medical bills.  The drug companies get a lot of their research done at colleges and it is paid for with taxpayer money. The elderly should get a better deal. We should all get a better deal.
321667
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/planners/calculators.htm\n\nis their benefits calculator.
89253
besides putting our wallets further into the red, I am not sure. It doesnt sound like its going to be something the "average joe" is going to be able to do... its going to be for the wealthy to find a way to take it off as a tax write off.
356984
You can find benefits here.\n\nhttp://www.mybenefitsplus.com/40374893
220583
No, it is backed by the full faith of the United States government. Having said that, there is kind of a "bulge" of retirees starting right now, because the Baby Boom generation was so large.\n\nThis is going to cause a problem in making all the payments: either taxes are going to have to go up or benefits are going to have to go down and it will probably be a bit of either.\n\nAlready, they have raised the retirement age for young people from 65 to 70. It will probably go higher.\n\nThe real fiscal problem looming is Medicare, not Social Security, but no one wants to try and fix that problem.
13474
The rule is that your aunt's social security check cannot be reduced on a net basis from the prior year, but if her social security increase is greater than the increase in the medicare premium, then her medicare premium can be increased.  The problem lately has been that medical inflation has exceeded the inflation in ordinary prices.  It is likely that she is fixed in income for the rest of her life given the disparity between medical inflation and consumer inflation on which social security is based.  I doubt she will see a net pay increase ever again, based upon the numbers and barring real health care reform.\n\nWhile that looks like a lot, although I am just guestimating, I have recently reviewed employee health coverages.  I suspect the average 82 year old should be paying a monthly premium well in excess of $500 per month.  Her health care costs are being heavily subsidized by workers, taxpayers and future taxpayers.  It sounds like an enormous amount, but it is well below her cost to the system unless she is in very good health.  Medicare is an insurance policy just like any other, except that the beneficiaries do not always have to pay their full share of the premium.
474044
There is currently a YEARLY surplus of Social Security  withholding that is being generated by boomers being at their highest lifetime earning levels, and a not-yet increased demand for Social security payments.  It is decreasing fast.\nThis surplus is 'borrowed' into the general budget of the United States.\nIn order to pay Social security back, taxes would have to be increased, because...we just borrowed that money from ourselves.\n\nIf people stop contributing into Social security and start putting money into Individual Investment accounts, the Social Security payments will not have enough SS withholding to pay them - in other words, the people who paid into Social Security all their lives would face a insolvent fund.\n\nOnce you put your money into a Social Security personal investment (with a contracted outside investment company) your investment has the same pitfalls that private investing has.  It can suddenly lose half it's value during a market correction, it can be lost entirely should the country go through one of the downturns that usually happen about every 50 years...\n\nPanics, recessions and Depression are cyclical economic downturns that have roiled this country on a regular basis since it's birth.  They are characterized by bank failures, bankruptcies, foreclosures, business failures, and declines in property values.  Before the very recent creation of Social security, the term for retirement during an economic downturn was PAUPER.
9651
No.  It's entirely possible that there will still be a program called "Social Security," as names sometimes last longer than things, but over the next few decades technology is going to change so dramatically that very little of the current political and economic paradigm will be able to survive intact.  Social Security is already somewhat anachronistic (it assumes structurally, for instance, that a 65 year old is beyond their useful working life and near death) and as reality continues to change around it there is no question that it will have to be transformed in ways which leave it unrecognizable. <3
565662
Considering that a lot of people are retiring on a social security check that won't support them in the US, my guess is that a lot of people will be asking that question. The Mexicans can move up here and all the old folks can bring the US down there.
550201
What a great question!  A lot of people don't understand that the benefits a company offers will increase your total compensation package.  \n\nAccording to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, benefits\naccount for nearly 35%of an employee’s total compensation. Yet, more than half of all employees don’t understand or\nappreciate the value of their employer-paidbenefits.\n\nBenefits include items such as insurance and health benefits,\nsocial security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, workers’\ncompensation, defined contribution, defined benefit, retirement and savings, supplemental pay vacations, holidays and sick leave.
979159
I don't know of anything in particular, but Social Security only pays a one-time death benefit of $255 to a surviving spouse.  So if he wasn't married, there is no death benefit from Social Security.  My sympathies to you.
121220
No, alot of older conservitives don't want social security messed with, It really is a bad idea to invest in a stock market with its ups and downs. There must be an answer between that and the way it is going.