My Mom Worked Her Whole Life, But Only Gets My Dad's Social Security — Feels Like a Scam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think the issue is that if you're upper middle class like my parents, you're likely to be healthier, live longer, and end up essentially subsidizing others. I get that it's supposed to be for the greater good of society, but honestly, I'm not feeling very charitable toward the government these days. I’d rather have the option to opt out.

It’s not about being charitable toward the government. It’s to ensure that your poor elderly neighbors don’t end up living in the streets in old age. What society wants to see its elderly citizens dying in the streets?

I prioritize my family first

But not quite enough to do 4 minutes of research and provide useful advice? My mom collected my late father's SSI (which she didn't realize she was eligible to receive post-divorce) for a decade because I told her to apply. That's prioritizing family. Not understanding how anything works, pissing into the wind, and then whining about how unfair the world is while demanding a separate tax to pay your dry cleaning is not prioritizing your family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think the issue is that if you're upper middle class like my parents, you're likely to be healthier, live longer, and end up essentially subsidizing others. I get that it's supposed to be for the greater good of society, but honestly, I'm not feeling very charitable toward the government these days. I’d rather have the option to opt out.

It’s not about being charitable toward the government. It’s to ensure that your poor elderly neighbors don’t end up living in the streets in old age. What society wants to see its elderly citizens dying in the streets?

I prioritize my family first

But not quite enough to do 4 minutes of research and provide useful advice? My mom collected my late father's SSI (which she didn't realize she was eligible to receive post-divorce) for a decade because I told her to apply. That's prioritizing family. Not understanding how anything works, pissing into the wind, and then whining about how unfair the world is while demanding a separate tax to pay your dry cleaning is not prioritizing your family.

no, the OP meant that she is not concerned with the eldery in society as a whole, but only about her family. A "family oriented" culture instead of civic-oriented culture is her vibe.

[Anonymous]

Probably an anti-SS troll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom is in her late 70s and just applied for Social Security. She worked her whole life, earned about $75K a year, and paid into the system for decades. My dad passed away over 15 years ago in his early 70s, made over $200K a year, and never collected a dime.

Now she’s being told she only gets one benefit — hers or his, whichever is higher. Not both. So all the money she paid in is just gone. If this were a 401(k), she’d have access to everything she earned. Instead, the government keeps it.

It’s infuriating. She should be getting both benefits. Instead, the government pockets tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars they both paid in.

Honestly, I would’ve rather not been forced to pay into this broken system at all. Let people save for themselves. This whole thing feels like a scam. We need to stop pretending Social Security is working — it’s not. It’s robbing people who did everything right.

On your logic, your mom shouldn’t be entitled to your dad’s much higher payment because that was his money…not hers.

I am failing to see how your mom is being cheated in this scenario nor why you are complaining.

Seems like the fair answer is she gets hers only.

Who should get the money my dad put in all his life? If not my mom then who?

or rather who gets all the money my mom put in? This is outrageous.

That's like arguing that the sky shouldn't be blue. It's how the system works to the benefit of many who would have nothing otherwise. I do wonder if you're a troll just trying to make the case to abolish SSI.

No, I thought my mom would get both

Under what reasonably fair world would your mom get both? That’s not the point of SS.

If she is a survivor benefit than she should get both with that logic no one married should put into it after the spouse is dead and they have survivor benefits

Are you drunk? This makes no sense.

If my mom can’t collect her own Social Security because she’s getting survivor benefits, then why was she forced to keep paying in after my dad died? She kept working and contributing for years, even though she’d never be allowed to use that benefit. That’s the problem.

No other system works like this — with a 401(k) or private insurance, what you put in doesn’t just vanish. Social Security wipes out one benefit and keeps the rest. How is that fair?

Ok, she can collect hers instead of his then, feel free to opt for that.

You’re acting like she got swindled, but these are the terms of SSA and have been. You guys owned yourselves by not bothering to educate yourselves. It’s an insurance plan, you pay in a set amount to ensure you have a stipend to live on in your old age until you die.

Would you rather have a system where your mom lives until 95 and was kicked off at 80 bc she ran through her contributions? Because you can’t have it both ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The degree of rage OP feels leads me to believe that her parents did a poor job with financial planning and now Mom is left needing more money and needs help from OP.

That, or she's really trying to advocate for doing away with SSI aka Social Security Insurance.

Yes. For all OP’s moaning about how everyone should be free to invest their own money, sounds like her mom did none of that and without SS mom would be destitute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here — here’s an idea to clear things up: they should rename Social Security to something like “Mandatory Retirement Risk Insurance.” That would make it clearer that it’s not a personal savings plan like a 401(k), but a pooled system with no guaranteed return. The name “Social Security” is misleading — it sounds like your money is secured, when really it’s just another tax for a benefit you might get.

And Fox News should rename itself “Sensationalist Fantasies for the Ignorant” so that you’re clear that you’re watching garbage. The “News” in the name is misleading as it sounds upstanding and factual, when it’s really made up entertainment for morons.

[Anonymous]

There is no mom.

OP is just a stirrer. Thanks Elonia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no mom.

OP is just a stirrer. Thanks Elonia

Seems that way. Plus how can you be so clueless and not take spouse’s ss when they die, or not file until you are 79?

[Anonymous]

OP has to be Musk AI. No way someone doesn’t know to take SS when eligible and no way the fake person’s mom waiting until late 70’s to apply. It’s nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Teach your kids to save 20-50% of their own earnings in an index fund from Day 1 of their working life. Never get takeout food. Don’t buy junk or frivolous items. Don’t rely on government.

[Anonymous]

If this is such a great idea what private companies offer the same insurance concept?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom is in her late 70s and just applied for Social Security. She worked her whole life, earned about $75K a year, and paid into the system for decades. My dad passed away over 15 years ago in his early 70s, made over $200K a year, and never collected a dime.

Now she’s being told she only gets one benefit — hers or his, whichever is higher. Not both. So all the money she paid in is just gone. If this were a 401(k), she’d have access to everything she earned. Instead, the government keeps it.

It’s infuriating. She should be getting both benefits. Instead, the government pockets tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars they both paid in.

Honestly, I would’ve rather not been forced to pay into this broken system at all. Let people save for themselves. This whole thing feels like a scam. We need to stop pretending Social Security is working — it’s not. It’s robbing people who did everything right.

On your logic, your mom shouldn’t be entitled to your dad’s much higher payment because that was his money…not hers.

I am failing to see how your mom is being cheated in this scenario nor why you are complaining.

Seems like the fair answer is she gets hers only.

Who should get the money my dad put in all his life? If not my mom then who?

It’s insurance. My kid with cancer (or his medical team anyway) got money other people put into insurance payments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My mom is in her late 70s and just applied for Social Security. She worked her whole life, earned about $75K a year, and paid into the system for decades. My dad passed away over 15 years ago in his early 70s, made over $200K a year, and never collected a dime.

Now she’s being told she only gets one benefit — hers or his, whichever is higher. Not both. So all the money she paid in is just gone. If this were a 401(k), she’d have access to everything she earned. Instead, the government keeps it.

It’s infuriating. She should be getting both benefits. Instead, the government pockets tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars they both paid in.

Honestly, I would’ve rather not been forced to pay into this broken system at all. Let people save for themselves. This whole thing feels like a scam. We need to stop pretending Social Security is working — it’s not. It’s robbing people who did everything right.

You have a strange way of looking at things. Your rationale is completely wrong. Social security is an insurance program, not a savings account.

[Anonymous]

Social Security is not a 401k. She received benefits her whole life. If your mom had a disabled child, her SS would have paid SSI and medical for the child or herself if she became disabled before 62. If you become unable to work you could get SSI. It's a great safety net for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom is in her late 70s and just applied for Social Security. She worked her whole life, earned about $75K a year, and paid into the system for decades. My dad passed away over 15 years ago in his early 70s, made over $200K a year, and never collected a dime.

Now she’s being told she only gets one benefit — hers or his, whichever is higher.

Not both. So all the money she paid in is just gone. If this were a 401(k), she’d have access to everything she earned. Instead, the government keeps it.

It’s infuriating. She should be getting both benefits. Instead, the government pockets tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars they both paid in.

Honestly, I would’ve rather not been forced to pay into this broken system at all. Let people save for themselves. This whole thing feels like a scam. We need to stop pretending Social Security is working — it’s not. It’s robbing people who did everything right.

On your logic, your mom shouldn’t be entitled to your dad’s much higher payment because that was his money…not hers.

I am failing to see how your mom is being cheated in this scenario nor why you are complaining.

Seems like the fair answer is she gets hers only.

Who should get the money my dad put in all his life? If not my mom then who?

or rather who gets all the money my mom put in? This is outrageous.

That's like arguing that the sky shouldn't be blue. It's how the system works to the benefit of many who would have nothing otherwise. I do wonder if you're a troll just trying to make the case to abolish SSI.

No, I thought my mom would get both

Under what reasonably fair world would your mom get both? That’s not the point of SS.

If she is a survivor benefit than she should get both with that logic no one married should put into it after the spouse is dead and they have survivor benefits

Are you drunk? This makes no sense.

If my mom can’t collect her own Social Security because she’s getting survivor benefits, then why was she forced to keep paying in after my dad died? She kept working and contributing for years, even though she’d never be allowed to use that benefit. That’s the problem.

No other system works like this — with a 401(k) or private insurance, what you put in doesn’t just vanish. Social Security wipes out one benefit and keeps the rest. How is that fair?

There is no hope for you. This is a you problem.

Your mother is getting more than she put into the system. SS rules are generous and allow your mother to collect MORE than she paid into the system because they top off the amount so it is = to what your dad would have received. Don’t blame the system because you and/or your mother didn’t take 60 minutes to understand the program. I truly don’t know anyone else who is confused by this concept.

NP. I just described this thread to my husband and both he and I are shocked that we don’t get back what we put in. We are “DCUM MC” and definitely not dumb (although immigrants so perhaps less informed than the average American taxpayer). They should just call it a freaking tax if that’s what it is.

Thank you , I thought I was alone but I guess dcum is full of ss experts probably older people like in their 50s+.

I really am not feeling this social security as a good idea I used to be neutral about it but after learning more my opinion has changed and I dislike it and would rather keep my own money to invest. I even don't mind being forced to invest it in bonds or something govt related and not take it out later but this system just seems like a bad deal.

Hmm, after reading this thread, I’ve come away with the opposite conclusion. Insurance is about risk sharing. Everyone pays into a system hoping they never have to use it (e.g: insurance for car crashes, flooding, healthcare). We’re lucky if we grow old and have enough money to live well. But for those who grow old and are poor, SS prevents people from becoming destitute.

It's not just poor people who benefit. I'm not poor, but I definitely benefit by my parents and ILs being more financially secure due to SS. If my ILs didn't have SS, they'd likely be living with us.