Social Security is a definitive essential that secures at least some income for elder/disabled persons. Income limitations for certain recipients, i.e. those who cannot work at all and do not receive sufficient income to meet basic financial obligations like paying their rent and utilities, etc. translate to routine crisis for such persons that no one should experience...
...Not every senior or disabled person wants to move to a senior/disabled community, however affordable it may be, and, in certain instances, it is not ideal, i.e. if the person has minor children or they have live-in family who help with their care. Other persons cannot typically move into a senior/disabled community with a lessee (with the exception of a spouse and/or, presumably, any minor children they might have), and they should not have to when they would be required to move when the senior/disabled person passes...
Why Employed Social Security Recipients Should Not be Subject to Earnings Limitations
I previously discussed the need for employers to respect earnings limitations for disabled workers. Notwithstanding, Social Security recipients who are employed should actually not be subject to earnings limitations at all unless they opt for the earnings cap because an individual experiencing a serious health crisis can practically in certain instances earn substantial income and should not be discouraged from doing so; rather the amount of their benefits should be adjusted or reduced once exceeding the established amount that a recipient is lawfully allowed to earn and receive full benefits...
Let's say that a Social Security recipient receives a lump sum of money in any given month, i.e. for consulting* or performing any other legit odd job; they would not receive a Social Security check for that particular month, or monthly Social Security checks would be withheld once the recipient has capped their annual income allowance; the stated income must be verified, of course, meaning that the recipient and the SSA must confirm the income, which would be taxed. Stated recipients would be privileged to earn additional Social Security credits and potentially increase their ultimate monthly payout, which would be aggrandized further via returns on investments of mandatory and other payroll deductions.
*If the consultation is to the government, the recipient should receive their regular Social Security income and pay for the consultation. For example, if the government reads my blogs and likes and uses any of my ideas, they would pay me for my consultation/use of my ideas and directly deposit that pay into my checking account with my regular Social Security check. They would simultaneously send me a letter acknowledging this and the specific idea of mine that they are using. The government could additionally provide me with a housing incentive or with assistance in purchasing a home, for regular consultation.
In other words, my income would go from my regular Social Security check one month to several thousand dollars the next, and, again, if the income is for consulting the government, I would be paid without penalty or limitation.
Dormancy vs Active Status
When a recipient's earnings would bring their Social Security income to a $0 amount, they should still be considered on Social Security, in dormant status for whatever period of dormancy. In fact, when any person becomes of age (62 years old at minimum) and/or they become disabled and have income that exceeds an amount that would ordinarily qualify them for Social Security they should be entered into a dormant Social Security status and, like anyone else in this status, they should receive a letter from the Social Security Administration acknowledging this. They simply would not be receiving Social Security pay at that point. If and when the subject individual's income returns or drops to a qualifying amount, they would be entered or re-entered into an active status.
Their benefits would in fact resume without requirement to re-apply for them. The subject individual might be required to notify the Social Security Administration of the change in their income and/or banking information for direct deposit; ideally, the stated income change would be automatically communicated to the SSA via a federal income verification system without need for the subject individual to report it...
A Spouse's Income Should Not Reduce the Other's Benefits
A spouse's income should not reduce the other's Social Security benefits. In most cases it took the employment earnings of both spouses to sufficiently pay their household and other bills, and, typically, it would require the same or circa the same amount to continue paying those bills.
Benefits for Qualifying Adult Household Members Should be Paid to Another When...
Social Security benefits for other qualifying adult household members should be paid to the head of household of their permanent residence, whether or not the subject individual is mentally competent, when a determination of eligibility has been made and the qualifying individual does not accept the benefits and does not otherwise financially contribute or sufficiently contribute to their household...
I have an adult cousin who is eligible to receive Social Security benefits for a physical injury that he incurred as an infant as a result of a doctor's mistake. He won't accept or take necessary steps to acquire the benefits. He resides with his mother (my aunt) who receives Social Security benefits herself and falls within that category of persons who do not receive a sufficient amount of benefits to sufficiently meet her financial obligations. My aunt should receive an increase in her benefits for the full amount that my cousin would receive plus the full amount that she receives for herself unless and until my cousin decides to personally receive his benefits. She and/or my cousin should receive a retroactive lump sum of all payments that they could have and did not receive.
Proper Adjustment of Survivors' Benefits
When a spouse passes, the surviving spouse should receive both their and their deceased spouse's full benefits unless and until they remarry or move into an affordable senior/disabled community.
Any lawfully designated adult (whether a surviving spouse or not) caring for the children of persons who pass should receive the children's and parents' benefits until the children become adults (18-years-old) or graduate college or turn 21 to 22-years-old while attending college.
In Summation and Conclusion
Social Security should in fact financially secure recipients when they are incapable of working or when they are limited in their ability to work. A recipient with any serious, critical illness who is capable of earning income that exceeds the maximum amount allowable to qualify for Social Security should be capable of doing so without penalty or in dormant status. This would help said clients to better meet their financial needs without fear of permanent loss of benefits; it would additionally allow clients the opportunity to earn additional Social Security credit and potentially raise their ultimate monthly payout while saving the government millions of dollars each year and securing an additional influx of tax revenue.
No comments:
Post a Comment