postman
Diamond Member
- Feb 23, 2017
- 21,682
- 12,458
- 1,400
But as Howard Lutnick said, she wouldn't miss it.She paid into SS just like everyone else and is entitled to the money she gets back
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But as Howard Lutnick said, she wouldn't miss it.She paid into SS just like everyone else and is entitled to the money she gets back
Has anyone verified that this supposed mother-in-law really exists? Did she die after starting benefits? Did Lutnick maybe change the routing of the check so it goes into his account and the MIL really died years ago?
I'm not making any accusations. But some are say, can't say who, but some. So this really needs to be investigated. If every thing is legit? Fine, but some say it should - you know, very smart people - are saying it should be investigated.
WW
She paid into SS just like everyone else and is entitled to the money she gets back
Certainly Lutnick's mother in law. Who is supposed to live with them in their $30,000,000 upper east side mansion.No one will miss them according to the Trump regieme.
Can’t make this stuff up
Trumps Commerce Secretary says only fraudsters would complain if their Social Security check doesn’t come.
Most would just say….Doesn’t matter, they will send two next month
Shows how clueless they are.
Meaning it wont be taken awayBut as Howard Lutnick said, she wouldn't miss it.
But of course you didn't source your comment much less provide the context!
Since you don't care to prove your false assumption and comment... after you read the above... please give me the "context"
Your definition for SSI is 100% incorrect. It is not retirement but Supplemental Security Income. You need to learn the difference.I disagree Rock,
Every since Income Tax has begun to be charged against SS earnings, starting in 1983, income taxes based on SS earnings have gone back to the SS Administration to help pay current benefits. In 1993 the maximum amount of SS that could be taxed was raisedd from 50% (for those earning listed amounts) to 85% of SS benefit being tabable in 1993. The additional 35% goes to help Medicare.
At this point we are already drawing from the SS Trust Fund to meet current benefits payment. Removal of income tax revenue to help fund current benefits means that MORE money would have to be drawn from the Trust to meet current benefits, exhausting the fund earlier. It's basic math flight of the arrows. If revenues go down and benefits remain flat, then more money comes from the Trust to keep benefits flat.
FICA tax is collected at 6.2% which is split to fund Social Security Income (SSI) - which I call SS Retirement to be clear -, SSI is funded by Old Age Survirors Insurance Trust (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI) at 5.3% and 0.9% for both employer and employee portions of the FICA (see below).
Also show below is the SSA receives about 51 Billion a year in revenue generated by taxing some portion of SS Retirement as "income".
WW
.
.
View attachment 1092648
View attachment 1092652
Even if Ludnicks MIL's SS check was taken away, she probably wouldn't even notice.Meaning it wont be taken away
Your definition for SSI is 100% incorrect. It is not retirement but Supplemental Security Income. You need to learn the difference.
I highlighted your error. A simple Google search of SSI will prove I am correct. Nice try, but an epic failure on your part.
It is like that for the families of billionairesEven if Ludnicks MIL's SS check was taken away, she probably wouldn't even notice.
Hey dumbass! I didn't question that part. You are wrong about SSI. Maybe some reading comprehension lessons are in order.There is no error,
Revenues generated from income tax on social security retirement goes back to the SSA to fund current benefits.
Links were provided showing this. That is a fact.
Decreased revenues (if SS benefits are made tax free) while maintaining current benefits would require increased deductions from the trust is also a fact.
That means the trust is exhausted earlier.
I’ve documented and sourced how it works.
WW
In several years now I have never failed to receive my social security check exactly on the day it is supposed to be deposited in my bank account. The only reason that might not happen now is if some malcontent or unethical person in SSA sabotaged the process/system. If such person was caught doing that, he/she should go to prison for a long enough time to impress on other government employees that they better not do that.Can’t make this stuff up
Trumps Commerce Secretary says only fraudsters would complain if their Social Security check doesn’t come.
Most would just say….Doesn’t matter, they will send two next month
Shows how clueless they are.
In several years now I have never failed to receive my social security check exactly on the day it is supposed to be deposited in my bank account. The only reason that might not happen now is if some malcontent or unethical person in SSA sabotaged the process/system. If such person was caught doing that, he/she should go to prison for a long enough time to impress on other government employees that they better not do that.
I suppose you think that is a reasoned response to my post.Why would you care if it is late?
You must be some kind of Fraudster
Thats beside the pointEven if Ludnicks MIL's SS check was taken away, she probably wouldn't even notice.
Hey dumbass! I didn't question that part. You are wrong about SSI. Maybe some reading comprehension lessons are in order.
Have a nice fucking day!
In several years now I have never failed to receive my social security check exactly on the day it is supposed to be deposited in my bank account. The only reason that might not happen now is if some malcontent or unethical person in SSA sabotaged the process/system. If such person was caught doing that, he/she should go to prison for a long enough time to impress on other government employees that they better not do that.