Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But you only get to mooch off of an ex-husband if your own Social Security is not more than half of his.
But in a further scenario, you might be able to mooch off of your ex-husband when he dies. I was told this, but I haven't looked into the details and rules.
I was just making a joke.
I have one ex husband but we were not married 10 years. Even though he always made more than me, I doubt that half of his Social Security payment would be more than I get on my own record (might be close though). I feel fortunate that I earned a nice income on my own and my Social Security plus 401k/IRA monies are more than sufficient to keep me happy.
I believe all women should strive to work enough to have their own Social Security and retirement savings. Being totally dependent on another for all your needs is not smart IMO. You could be left with only that half Social Security payment and nothing else if you don't work and save for your own future.
Just out of curiosity, does SS inform you if an ex claims on your SS?
I vaguely remember when my parents divorced my mom saying to the effect of she didn't want anything to do with him or his money. I think in some twisted way she thought not claiming off his SS would somehow hurt him.
I don't know if she claimed it or not.
No, they don't tell your ex that you are collecting on his record.
I paid into SS directly when I was between the ages of 16-34. Then I stayed home when our first baby was born, went back to work briefly PT, and then continued to stay at home after our 2nd child was born. I got a PT job when I was 54. I'm now 57.
I've never in my life relied on government assistance. The deal has always been that after 10 years of marriage, and as the lower earning spouse, I would be eligible to get 1/2 of my husband's SS benefit upon retirement. I've been married for 23 years now and have raised two really great kids, both of whom work and contribute to society. My husband has worked hard and has done an admirable job of providing for our family. My husband and I pay taxes on our joint, household income.
If SS is being stretched too thin, then the reasons for that should be examined. I do not think the source of the strain stems from situations like mine. And I don't want to be unfairly scapegoated for it.
And that's exactly what we're doing. But again, as your above post demonstrates, there is absolutely no way for you to look at the matter objectively.
But you only get to mooch off of an ex-husband if your own Social Security is not more than half of his.
But in a further scenario, you might be able to mooch off of your ex-husband when he dies. I was told this, but I haven't looked into the details and rules.
Well, with the file and suspend married couples could claim off the other's record and let their SS build until 70 (massively increasing their checks while collecting at least something off their spouse). That loophole was only recently shut down (it was negotiated away for something else // but, if you don't know I'm not explaining That). Exes could also use that loophole if their met the requirements.
No one gets married knowing the SS rules. It's not until much later that people usually learn about that. It's not like they are trying to mold their life around the damn SS rules.
Men and women have benefitted; so, don't make this about Her mooching off Him.
Let's not talk about all the unpaid labor of women (especially historically).
If there is no safety net at all women are crazy to get married and have children unless they are otherwise financially independent. It's really all too much to ask of someone if there are not some reasonable expectations about what happens when men willy nilly trade women in for a younger model.
You have to really trust someone to have kids with them. In my book, it's far too much to ask.
No, but it would be a start. Either workers are going to have to pay more into the system or benefits are going to have to be cut.
Unlike you, I am looking at this issue from a completely objective point of view. I have no dog in this fight because I did not pay into Social Security, and I do not and will not be receiving any benefits from it. Either based on my own working history or as a spouse.
You can't simply say that such and such benefits are deserved because that's the way it has always been. Well, the way it has always been is no longer working and changes have to be made. I fail to see what is wrong with having to pay for a benefit in order for it to be applied.
Exactly. The current inequities in spousal/survivor benefits are glaring.
Practically speaking, a retired, one earner couple can receive an earner's benefit + 50% for decades without a dime more paid into ss, and a two earner couple whose salary is exactly equal (2 equal amounts= total) to the above earner's salary and pays the exact same amount into ss can actually receive LESS benefits- both in retirement and survival benefits.
But ss reform is a difficult topic for most people to discuss logically. Emotions and self-interests are heightened...
I knew you were joking Ansible90 :^). I phrased it wrong - I should have said 'But one only gets to calculate on an ex-husband's Social Security amount if one's own Social Security is not more than half of his.
But in a further scenario, one might be able to calculate on one's
ex-husband's amount when he dies. I was told this, but I haven't looked into the details and rules.
I strongly concur with your belief below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ansible90
I believe all women should strive to work enough to have their own Social Security and retirement savings. Being totally dependent on another for all your needs is not smart IMO. You could be left with only that half Social Security payment and nothing else if you don't work and save for your own future.
I knew you were joking Ansible90 :^). I phrased it wrong - I should have said 'But one only gets to calculate on an ex-husband's Social Security amount if one's own Social Security is not more than half of his.
But in a further scenario, one might be able to calculate on one's
ex-husband's amount when he dies. I was told this, but I haven't looked into the details and rules.
I strongly concur with your belief below:
Most likely her own SS will outperform a dead spouses SS; but, she may be able to collect the survivors from FRA to 70. I hear dead people or nearly dead people are not all that productive (he's dead for a reason if he's dead).
Social Security told me that when my ex-husband dies, I should look into the possibility of my Social Security increasing. I have not researched the rules and details on this. Sometimes Social Security representatives give out inaccurate info. If someone knows or has researched it, they can post.
This is strictly EX-husband (or EX-spouse) - not current husband.
it isn’t the reason but it is part of the issue along with ssdi being misused ….we always have big busts involving social security workers , doctors and lawyers involved in fraudulent payouts here .
we had one man eric conn in i think kentucky responsible for a half of billion in claims
those receiving ssdi has jumped 10x from the late 1970s .
the ssdi numbers should be plunging with boomers going off ssdi and on to social security .
but they aren’t ..they came down a tiny bit when in reality it should have plunged.
we had to transfer a boat load of dough from ss retirement to ssdi when ssdi ran out of money in 2018.
the 2015 patriot act refilled ssdi from ss retirement
The numbers and percentages of awards have beendropping since 2010. BTW, Eric Conn was "successful" because he bribed an Administrative Law Judge. A very old one, at that. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table6c7.html
Social Security told me that when my ex-husband dies, I should look into the possibility of my Social Security increasing. I have not researched the rules and details on this. Sometimes Social Security representatives give out inaccurate info. If someone knows or has researched it, they can post.
This is strictly EX-husband (or EX-spouse) - not current husband.
What if I remarry?
Usually, you can’t get widow’s or widower’s benefits if you
remarry before age 60 (or age 50 if you have a disability).
But remarriage after age 60 (or age 50 if you have a
disability) won’t prevent you from getting benefit payments
based on your former spouse’s work. And at age 62 or
older, you can get benefits on your new spouse’s work, if
those benefits would be higher.
Benefits for surviving divorced spouses
If you’ve been divorced, your former spouse age 60 or
older (or between 50 and 59 if they have a disability) can
get benefits, if your marriage lasted at least 10 years.
Your former spouse, however, doesn’t have to meet the
age or length-of-marriage rule if they take care of your
child who is younger than age 16 or who has a disability,
and entitled on your record. The child must be yours and
your former spouse’s natural or legally adopted child.
Benefits paid to you as a surviving divorced spouse won’t
affect the benefit rates for other survivors getting benefits
on the worker’s record. If you’re the surviving divorced
mother or father, with the worker’s child under age 16 or
with a disability in your care, your benefit can affect the
benefits of others on the record
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
