Jump to content

U.S. Topic -- President Biden's Covid Stimulus Plan Includes Temporary $200 Monthly Raise in Social Security


Recommended Posts

  • Jingthing changed the title to U.S. Topic -- President Biden's Covid Stimulus Plan Includes Temporary $200 Monthly Raise in Social Security
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I am on social security.  My first question would be why?  Of anyone who has been relatively unaffected financially by the Covid pandemic it is retired people.  Retired people, me included have got th

This is at the policy proposal stage only.  My understanding is that it will be retroactive to January 2021 if passed and the time span will be one year. I wouldn't spend the extra money yet

The point is that those impacted by Covid have lost their income stream.  Those on social security have not.  Additionally, giving it to seniors does not guarantee it will get spent.  Some will just t

1 hour ago, Thomas J said:

I am on social security.  My first question would be why?

Never look a gift check in mouth. But seriously from a stimulus point of view it's more a question of giving it to people who are more likely to go out and spend it. That would be retiree/seniors more than the employed with an income stream.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
15 hours ago, rabas said:

I doubt all SS recipients live a cushy life on their SS check. I lost significant supplemental income due to covid. 

I did not say SS recipients live a cushy life.  I am on Social Security and that plus my savings is what I live on.  However of the people impacted the barber, beautician, clothing store, waitress, bartender, taxi driver etc. have been far more impacted by Covid than seniors.  The truth is that my social security and there's has been totally unaffected by Covid.  So giving it in the name of Covid is just disingenuous.  Again, if deficit spending has no detrimental impact, why not give everyone $10,000 or $100,000.  The government borrowing from the future is no different than the person who runs up their credit card bill.  The live good for the moment but eventually the bill needs to be paid.  Somehow the public believes that the government is just a goose that lays golden eggs and it can indefinitely provide all citizens with a comfortable lifestyle just by borrowing.  A wise person and country "invests" in things that pay dividends and a return on investment.  A foolish one just throws money away spending it frivolously.  The infrastructure in the USA is badly in need of modernization.  Money borrowed and then then spent in the economy on disposable consumer goods will quickly dissipate and once spent that money is no longer available for those critical infrastructure projects. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
8 hours ago, taxout said:

I suggest we all wait and see what's in the coming tax bill.

Yes, of course.

I only presented this as a current proposal, which it is.

I never suggested that it was passed law yet.

So we'll watch it and see.

On the other hand it seems to me that the idea would be widely popular so I would rate its chances as at least pretty good.

Link to post

As long as we're on the topic of potential President Biden led changes to social security policy, I'd like to mention his other ideas that are more long term and not related to shorter term pandemic relief.

 

Namely, increase the social security checks only for those with very low checks.

 

Also, increasing the checks at age 82. I find that one especially interesting. Based on my research a significant majority of people start their social security claim early age 62 and the most common reason is that they need the money. However, if such people live longer than about age 77 then the decision will come to bite them because of the reduced claim for starting early. Making this adjustment at 82 doesn't entirely remedy that bite, after all it's at 82 not 77, and it doesn't fully replace the money a person would have gotten if they had waited. But considering the reason most people do claim at 62 (need the money) it sounds to me a reasonable compromise to help out some people that ended up living longer than they might have expected. 

Edited by Jingthing
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...