Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

How much does social security pay?

What if you had a really high salary and worked your whole life....How much would you get?

by Anonymousreply 6902/22/2015

God forbid you should check the website, OP.

by Anonymousreply 101/09/2013

More than those who didn't make much/work much, but not enough to live comfortably on.

by Anonymousreply 201/09/2013

roughly 2500 a month give or take a couple of hundred

by Anonymousreply 301/09/2013

OP is proof that you do not have to have sense to have $18.

by Anonymousreply 401/09/2013

I love quirky and hilarious. Makes DL so worthwhile.

by Anonymousreply 501/09/2013

Get a fuckin' job and stop trying to mooch off the government's teat.

by Anonymousreply 601/09/2013

OP is an entitled, shit!

by Anonymousreply 701/09/2013

the website was down and I wanted to know the amount to prove a point to a relative that even if you make Mitt Romney type money...SSI would still amount to very little. The relative plans to live off it.

by Anonymousreply 801/09/2013

When I got on it, I just told the SSA how money I'd need for a reasonably cushy retirement and they said, "Mokay, mokey bear."

by Anonymousreply 901/09/2013

OP, don't confuse Social Security with SSI.

by Anonymousreply 1001/09/2013

I get a statement from the Department of Social Security showing how much I pay in every year and what my benefits will be upon retirement and/or disability. So should you.

by Anonymousreply 1101/09/2013

Social Security takes your five highest-earning years and your check is based on that--thank goodness.

by Anonymousreply 1201/09/2013

$2,513 a month.

You're welcome.

by Anonymousreply 1301/09/2013

Really? I guess my parents didn't make muc h but they got $1300. which I was told was the average.

by Anonymousreply 1401/09/2013

R12--the formula is much more complicated that that, and many more working years involved.

by Anonymousreply 1501/09/2013

You can have high earnings, but Social Security only taxes up to $110,100 (for 2012) and $113,700 (for 2013). Everything above that is not taxed for FICA.

by Anonymousreply 1601/09/2013

When a friend applied they had no record of his past ten years at the same job. His employer was sending contributions to an SS number off by one digit. It took six months to get it straightened out. Check your next pay stub to make sure they have the correct number.

by Anonymousreply 1701/09/2013

"the website was down and I wanted to know the amount to prove a point to a relative"

Oh sure.

by Anonymousreply 1801/09/2013

R3 and R13, you both are dead wrong.

The average amount received by millions of recepients is $1200 per month.

I get $1300 per month after working 37 years - 23 years of which were holding an excellent job.

I retired at age 62.

If I had waited until full retirement age of 65 or 66, I would have rec'd around $1900 per month.

It is quoted quite often in articles and literature that most people receive around $1200.

by Anonymousreply 1901/09/2013

In Canada they raised social security to age 67

And you only get about $500.00 a month

by Anonymousreply 2001/09/2013

R17 There's no excuse for that. SS sends everyone a yearly statement of the earnings that have been reported to them. Also, the SSN that is used is shown on the W-2.

by Anonymousreply 2101/09/2013

sorry, recipients (not recepients)

by Anonymousreply 2201/09/2013

Good Lord, is Canada falling apart? $500 per month?

by Anonymousreply 2301/09/2013

R19, Sorry. R13 was right. The question was the highest amount- presumably for someone who maxes out, not what YOU get or what other "average" people get.

The maximum possible Social Security benefit for a worker who begins collecting benefits at their full retirement age will be $2,533 in 2013, up from $2,513 per month in 2012.

by Anonymousreply 2401/09/2013

R24, okay, but you are confusing the issue.

The OP wants to know what an average person would receive after working a lifetime.

The OP does not wish to know what people with the largest salaries (or just large salaries) and well-off people will receive when they retire.

Stop confusing everyone, R24.

Most people will receive around $1200 to $1300.

by Anonymousreply 2501/09/2013

Also, a widely known statistic is that two-thirds of people in the U.S. retire at 62, not at their full retirement age of 65 to 66.

by Anonymousreply 2601/09/2013

"What if you had a really high salary and worked your whole life....How much would you get?"

How is that asking about an average person? Maybe we just have different views of really high salary. I'm not thinking about someone who works a decent-paying ( say union labor) job for 30-40 years. To me, someone with a really high salary, working their whole life is going to max out their top earning years and probably have 50-60 years with earnings ( though they would be mostly irrelevant in the calculations on the low end).

by Anonymousreply 2701/09/2013

The OP explained further in R8 - but the OP is still asking the wrong question(s).

What one person can live comfortably on, another person finds it impossible.

I live on $1300 per month from social security but supplement it with 401(k) money from an IRA I have.

That is what the OP needs to tell his relative.

The relative of the OP can live on $1300 to $1900 per month from social security but he needs to supplement it with 401(k) money or other money.

by Anonymousreply 2801/09/2013

People retire at 62 because they expect to die early, are desperate for the money because they blew it all or had some tragedy, and/or have very high time preference.

by Anonymousreply 2901/09/2013

The statistic that two thirds of people start collecting social security at age 62 are NOT people who expect to die early.

All types of people and various socio-economic group members are retiring at age 62.

And it isn't people who blew all their money.

R29, you are completely wrong and you don't have any idea what you are talking about.

That will probably change for those of you who are currently in your 20's, 30's, and maybe early 40's.

But it's true for those currently in their 50's and often late 40's.

And people who have held long-term government jobs often retire at age 55 because govt jobs allow this.

(they, of course, can't start collecting social security until age 62)

by Anonymousreply 3001/09/2013

I get the max and after Medicare it nets at about 2200.00 This with my pension and income from a couple of rentals allows me to live.

by Anonymousreply 3101/09/2013

Sounds like you made high level earnings when you were working -

because more ordinary people like myself pay $104.97 per month for Medicare which is automatically deducted from our social security monthly income -

while you're saying that you pay at least $300 from your monthly social security income and $300 is only deducted from monthly social security income if one has been a high level earner.

You also require quite a bit more to live currently than most ordinary people.

by Anonymousreply 3201/09/2013

[quote]And people who have held long-term government jobs often retire at age 55 because govt jobs allow this.

(they, of course, can't start collecting social security until age 62)

Federal employees who were hired before 1984 weren't covered by SS. I started in 1974 and retired at age 58. I get a nice pension (around 70% of my high-three salary after 37 years) but will never get SS. Even if I work elsewhere and earn enough credits, they'll take away more than 90% of any SS I might eventually eligible to receive.

by Anonymousreply 3301/09/2013

R33, did you also not have to pay into SS?

by Anonymousreply 3401/09/2013

R34 No, just Medicare. But if I went to work now, I'd have to pay into SS and would never receive anything for it.

by Anonymousreply 3501/09/2013

Getting back to R23

Yep Canada is going down the toilet.

No social security until age 67, and only $500 a month.

by Anonymousreply 3601/09/2013

I retired in May at age 62 and would have gotten approximately $1200 a month. I was told I could collect $1700 a month survivor benefits from my husband. The weird thing is he died in 1981 and was only making $25,000 a year. I don't understand how some one who died so long ago and made that little amount, their SS benefit would be more then mine?

by Anonymousreply 3701/09/2013

R37, very weird, so are you collecting $1700 per month now?

I would have gotten only $300 per month collecting my ex-spouse's of 16 years social security.

Weird. I'm going to check with soc sec again.

R37, perhaps you were offered survivor's benefits rather than regular social security retirement? That's what it has to be in your circumstanc......

by Anonymousreply 3801/09/2013


I took the $1700 a month. They told me even if I waited till I was 66 my SS would have been less then the survivor benefit.

I think SS survivor benefits and regular SS retirement benefits are the same thing. It's based on wages earned. His wages stopped when he died 30 yrs ago.

by Anonymousreply 3901/09/2013

R39, no, survivor's benefits and regular social security retirement benefits are not the same thing nor equivalent.

by Anonymousreply 4001/09/2013

ok R40. But can you explain why I can collect more under his benefits considering the circumstances. The woman at SS didn't even know.

by Anonymousreply 4101/09/2013

Here's are some key sections from a summary of what to expect from benefits, including what it takes to achieve the maximum benefit and other factors that figure into the calculation.

[quote]Consider the averages. In June 2011, the average Social Security benefit was $1,180.80 per month. The maximum possible benefit for a worker retiring at age 66 in 2011 is $2,366. But to get this amount, the worker would need to earn the maximum taxable amount, currently $106,800, each year after age 21.

{quote]Familiarize yourself with the formula. Social Security benefits are calculated based on your 35 highest-earning years in the workforce, and are adjusted for inflation. If you don't have 35 years of earnings, zeros are averaged in for the years you didn't work at a job in which you paid into Social Security. The proportion of your income that is replaced by Social Security varies based on how much you earn. Consider a worker who turns 62 in 2011. To calculate his benefit, the first $749 of his average monthly earnings is multiplied by 90 percent, the next $3,768 by 32 percent, and the remainder by 15 percent. The sum of these three amounts equals his initial monthly payment amount. Workers also have cost-of-living increases added to their benefit beginning at age 62, even if they don't begin to receive benefits until a later year.

[quote]Try different retirement dates. The date you first sign up for benefits also has a large impact on how much you will receive. "The biggest effect you can have on your benefit is when you claim," says Steve Sass, a research associate at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. You won't get the full amount you are entitled to unless you wait until your full retirement age, which for most workers is age 66 or 67. Your payout will be reduced if you claim early, and increase if you postpone collecting your payments. For example, a worker entitled to $1,000 per month at age 66 would get 25 percent less, or $750 per month, if he signed up at age 62. However, if he waited until age 70 to collect, he would get $1,320 per month, 32 percent more. There is no additional benefit for delaying claiming beyond age 70.

by Anonymousreply 4201/09/2013

R21 SS stopped sending out the statements a year or 2 ago.

by Anonymousreply 4301/09/2013

R42 states:

"Workers also have cost-of-living increases added to their benefit beginning at age 62"

R42, the increase for 2013 was only 1.7 percent and we don't expect more than that in future years.

So my monthly social security check went up $23, but $6 of it went for the increase in Medicare which went from $99 per month to $104.97 per month which is automatically deducted from the monthly soc sec check.

And the remaining $17 per month went to purchase a Medicare Part D prescription drug plan which all people on Medicare are required to purchase unless they want to be fined by the federal govt one percent per month (12 percent per year) until one buys a plan or wants to buy a plan.

by Anonymousreply 4401/09/2013

Yeah, mine is about $2400 a month, or at least that's what the summaries they send out on occasion say.

by Anonymousreply 4501/09/2013

R46, that's only if you make a very high salary for many years and work until 66 or 67.

" for a worker retiring at age 66 in 2011 is $2,366. But to get this amount, the worker would need to earn the maximum taxable amount, currently $106,800, each year after age 21."

by Anonymousreply 4601/09/2013

"In June 2011, the average Social Security benefit was $1,180.80 per month."

Just as I stated at the beginning of this thread, the average amount most people get is $1200.

by Anonymousreply 4701/09/2013

Why should young people contribute to this scheme which is not going to exist by the time they retire?

Yes, there should be a safety net for the poor but people who work most of their lives would do better to contribute to a normal life-stage investment portfolio than this scheme.

It's no secret that the outflows are now more than the inflows and in a few decades the money will run out. So why must the young pay into it?

by Anonymousreply 4802/20/2015

It'll be there for the young people, don't be ridiculous, R48.

by Anonymousreply 4902/20/2015

Aren't benefits taxed if you earn over a certain gross income?

by Anonymousreply 5002/20/2015

R50: 85% of SS benefits are taxed if your income is high. Otherwise, there is no tax on SS benefits.

by Anonymousreply 5102/20/2015

If you make $7000 per month, how SS would you receive?

by Anonymousreply 5202/20/2015

R50, I should add, if your income is high, you'll also pay a medicare surcharge.

Crossing each of the following boundaries in income will cost about an extra $1000 in medicare surcharge fees. The boundaries are: $85,000; $107,000; $160,000 and $214,000.

So, it pays to keep your income below each boundary level, if you can, since the surcharge isn't slowly graduated, like the income tax is. It is abruptly raised.

by Anonymousreply 5302/20/2015

It's a silly scheme stemming from the Great Depression V1.0 of 1929. V2.0 hit us in 2008. The young cannot afford to "pay it forward" to the baby boomers who never lived through a depression. All the eldergays will be all over me for saying this, but it's an archaic system and needs an overhaul.

by Anonymousreply 5402/20/2015

I'm a retired Federal employee and not covered under SS. (I was under the old system; employees hired after 1984 are covered.) As such, I don't ever want to work again because I'd have to pay in to SS and will never receive anything (because of a provision that prevents double-dipping.) So why should I bother?

by Anonymousreply 5502/20/2015

There'so nothing wrong with the system, liar at r54. You are faKe, like Paul Ryan.

by Anonymousreply 5602/20/2015

R56 I am not a liar, I just think people (you included) could retire wealthier if your SS money had gone into a defined contribution scheme over the course of your life. Starting with riskier investments early in life and graduating towards a money market/cash portfolio closer to retirement. You are not getting anywhere near that return on the SS you paid in during your life.

Stop being such a jackass - I know a lot more about investments than you oldtimer.

by Anonymousreply 5702/20/2015

As to R21, I haven't received a summary SS report by mail in 5 years. I was told they discontinued the mailings and urged folks to check the web site.

Others say, the mailings have begun again after a lapse.

by Anonymousreply 5802/20/2015

I look at my parents my father died at 55 got nothing back. My mother died at 60 got nothing back.

How's that at all fair? It's a joke, just welfare for moochers. If they had been allowed to take the money they were forced to put into SS and keep it, they and my whole family would be better off.

by Anonymousreply 5902/20/2015

Ah mo put hit in a lockbox..

by Anonymousreply 6002/20/2015

The average payment is $1300, $120 for Medicare is deducted, so most people receive $1180.

by Anonymousreply 6102/20/2015


My dad was a federal employee with no Social Security benefit either (Medicare: yes). My mom had worked part time here and there so that she gets (I believe) less than $100 per month, which is applied toward to her Medicare premium directly; she pays the balance herself.

by Anonymousreply 6202/20/2015

If you have the money, invest in an annuity and structure it so you get paid once a month instead of annually. Depending on how much money you invest in an annuity, and how long you wait before drawing it, you can supplement Social Security and a pension of you're lucky enough to have one, and be quite comfortable.

You need to try to guestimate how much money you will need to live on each month once you retire. Most people plan on working until they are at least 65. The longer you wait to get Social Security, the better off you are. Try not to apply for SS until you're at least 67.

Anyone who's in their 40's and has not yet started to save for retirement needs to do it immediately. Do not put it off. my mother's post retirement income from all sources was about $45,000, and she lived comfortably. I'm certain it will take at least $60,000 for me to live as well.

If you're getting close to retirement age, try to pay down your debts. Getting debt free by the time you're 65 or 70, is really the best thing. You don't want your money tied up. You want to live with liquidity, so you can do things you want.

With elderly people housing takes up most of their costs. if you can pay off a mortgage do it. By the time you're 50 you need to start thinking about downsizing, getting rid of clutter, and simplifying your life. You never know what kind of curve balls life is going to throw you so prepare.

by Anonymousreply 6302/20/2015

Anyone under say 50 who has not started any sort of retirement planning is likely in for a huge shock. There are plenty of those already on SS who are basically living in poverty. If they are lucky their monthly checks plus whatever else covers their housing payments, utilities, and much of their medical expenses, after that they are on their own.

Growing up in the 1970's remember hearing about seniors eating dog food because their SS checks didn't cover. Today at least in Manhattan you see seniors dumpster diving, that is competing with Freegans going through garbage bags from supermarkets/stores.

by Anonymousreply 6402/22/2015

Ss is not much, but people need to have their housing completely paid for, plus saving and a 401k. People will need to be happy with what they have and overcome the "keep up with the jones" spending habits. don't need as much as you think you need.

by Anonymousreply 6502/22/2015

I don't mean to sound smug. But even at 50, it is not too late. At 49 I have 20k saved. By 62, I now have 500k due to max out contributions, employer matches and even during down markets, I plowed $$$ away in stocks.

Don't let age discourage you. I'm not rich by any means but hopefully won't end up eating cat food sandwiches when I retire.

by Anonymousreply 6602/22/2015

Go to and check out what you'd get at this point of you're earnings.

by Anonymousreply 6702/22/2015

The later you claim ss benefits, the more you will get.

Wait until age 70 if you can afford it

by Anonymousreply 6802/22/2015


Think the problem for many is they cannot afford to wait until age 70. Those over sixty who have been out of work and cannot find another job soon either run through savings (if any) and thus have few options.

Neighbor of mine was just in that spot so said *f* it and claimed soon as he was eligible, even though he will get less. The SS check provides some financial stability and working on the side provides cover. OTOH his early filing screwed with his ex-wife's plans so he's happy.


Paying off housing works well for some, but here in some parts of NYC historically persons rented their whole lives. There is nothing wrong with renting per se, long as you are saving/planning for the future.

There are persons living in rent controlled/stabilized apartments in NYC where at even $600/month housing consumes a good portion of their SS check. These are probably the same persons digging through those rubbish bags for food. In fact know it is so because sometimes you see them inside the supermarket.


Historically Americans have not been great savers. Leaving aside the generations that grew up during, directly after or by someone who lived through the Great Depression everything is spend, spend, spend.

Historically by far the largest retirement savings for most Americans is homeownership.

by Anonymousreply 6902/22/2015
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!