This one hits a bit close to home for me. My mom is just over 70-years old and I have helped her navigate Social Security (and failed a few times). Due to a number of past events she also has little savings (and no retirement aside from Social Security) so she also works, for the most part, full-time.
The idea of Social Security was to ensure that the elderly would not be homeless or in poverty when they retired (or someone could not work anymore). Also, social security was designed when the average lifespan was all but 65 or so years old.
There are issues with the system for sure. My mom gets about a grand a month from her Social Security which is not enough to even pay the rent on her apartment. Becuase she works she has to pay taxes on her Social Security income (which I think is ridiculous).
Anyway, that is why this piece from the Washington Post hits close to home. This 70-year old woman was homeless because the Social Security Administration messed up (and trust me they mess up a lot). Add to that she was homeless for 16-years while fighting for what was owned her (up to now over $100,000.00). If you want to fight for what is owed you, it is advisable to get an attorney. But when you make so little, and the attorney takes either percentage of what is recovered or several thousand dollars that many elderly can ill afford, many people choose not to fight (my mom is one).
As the article points out there are more claims now than ever due to the Boomers retiring. Add to that budget cuts and staff reductions at the Social Security Administration and we have a recipe for disaster: long waits for appointments, backlogs of claims processing. Is this what we want for our parents (I don’t even say us because Social Security likely will not be there when we retire)? If we don’t want this for our parents what can we do to fix it? That is a big question, one that I don’t have time for in this post, but I think is starts with the following issue that we have to figure out: do we want a social safety net (welfare, and social programs) to be a part of our society? If we do, then we must fund them, which means we must pay for them. If we do not, then we have to figure out a way to transition the soon to retire so we don’t have a generation of the elderly on the streets.
It really does feel that we as a nation are regressing backwards, doesn’t it? That seems to certainly be evidenced by this issue in particular, which you have done a wonderful job here of highlighting. Unfortunately, due to our currently dysfunctional government and political climate, this is a challenge that won’t be tackled in any serious way. There will be more backlog, frustration, and misery, I’m afraid.
One of the greatest takeaways that I took from PAF 9100 was a lecture on the status of Social Security and the factor that without reform it could very well be defunct pretty soon. By the time I am 50 years old(2037), it’s expected that social security benefits will diminish by about $10,000 per year. That forecasting is frightening, not only would this have a traumatic effect on our economy but also on the lives of senior citizens, which my parents will be. I couldn’t imagine my parents losing $10,000 per year and the impact that would have on them and myself as I would undoubtedly attempt to help. The financial burden net that the lack of social security reform would cast is pretty wide and could possibly further other conditions of concern for many elderly adults eg: stress (mental health), blood pressure. I know Hillary would like to spend a lot on mental health, possibly social security could fall under that bracket by means of security and stability as it pertains to the basic needs of housing and food.