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:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

I'm a PP and have been trying to say this since early on, but nearly as well as you have. Agreed, OP has a political agenda.

[Anonymous]

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.

If you live longer you are going to take out more than you paid in

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your dad could have collected it starting at age 62. I don’t understand your complaint.

This!!! For most people, it is a much better deal to just take it at 62. For precisely the example of your dad---you never know when you will die. It's only "better to wait" if you live to 85/90+ (or approximately something like that). But you never know what the govt will do (even pre this Shi$). so always take it early

This is not uniformly true. There are calculators to help determine when best to take one's benefit. And taking at 62 if you don't need it presupposes that the person will invest it, not just spend it. And many people don't even bother with contributing to a retirement plan through their jobs. It's irresponsible to make blind, general statements like this. Stupid people like OP will not do their own research, do it wrong based on your advice, then come back and blame you.

FYI
Before Full Retirement Age (age 67 for most of us here):
Earnings Limit: For 2025, the annual earnings limit for those under full retirement age is $23,400.
Benefit Reduction: If your earnings exceed $23,400, the Social Security Administration will deduct $1 from your benefits for every $2 you earn above that limit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Health insurance, auto insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, home insurance.... many many private companies offer insurance. No one offers old age insurance because a free government program (very low admin fees) already exists.

Actually lots of companies sell annuities

[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:

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.

You each get payments for as long as you live. While you are both living you get both payments. If you live a long time, what you get will exceed what you paid in.

But this is single payer benefit, not a joint benefit. The survivor will get the amount of the higher earner though, not just what they alone paid in.

All to say that it isn't a tax. It is a form of insurance.

If it was insurance and not a tax then they shouldn’t have continued to take the SS “premiums” from OP’s mother after the husband died, since she couldn’t benefit from them. Or at the very least they should have offered her the choice about whether to stop paying and accept his fixed payments or keep paying hers on the chance that she’d earn more and therefore get more later. Forcing her to keep paying makes it clear that it was actually a tax. I see why OP is frustrated. It’s very misleading, at best.

Again, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

It's not SSI responsibility to seek people out and proactively advise them as to what they should do. That is impossible with 100s of millions of people paying in. SSI has a very detailed website with tons of information and calculators. All they had to do was research a plan that they were paying into.

I just did a basic internet search and this was the first link:

If My Spouse Dies, Can I Collect Their Social Security Benefits?

A surviving spouse can collect 100 percent of the late spouse’s benefit if the survivor has reached full retirement age, but the amount will be lower if the deceased spouse claims benefits before reaching full retirement age.

https://www.aarp.org/social-security/faq/when-spouse-dies/

So I really think some of you owe the OP an apology.

I’m sure there’s some caveat in the fine print but why would people go looking for a catch?? Certainly at a level of common understanding, most people would think that they are eligible to receive their spouses SS after they die, whether they’ve worked in the meantime themselves or not.

I think that AARP may owe OP an apology, because they drafted the paragraph you say is misleading.

Nah, scroll down. On the same page:

"However, if you are eligible for your own retirement benefit, you won't get both payments; Social Security will pay the higher of the two benefit amounts."

But that would have required an extra 45 seconds of reading- a bridge too far for some on this thread, apparently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

[Anonymous]

It is rare that I see a post of DCUM where I feel the urge to break through the screen and grab OP by the neck and shake them and tell “OP, stop being so stupid!” But here we are.

Other PPs have already said it. SS is not a savings plan, it is insurance. Nobody really knows how long they will live; it’s a crapshoot. SS is literally insurance so you won’t starve in case you live longer than you are able to work. Nothing more. It is not supposed to provide you with a leisurely or luxurious retirement; if you want that, then save for it yourself.

OP’s parents made more than enough money and should have saved plenty in 401(k) and savings and home equity. If they did not do that, well that is unfortunate but that is not the fault of Social Security.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

Well you were wrong.

[Anonymous]

Your mom’s spousal benefit is higher than her own based on her income so she should claim that.

SS is a minimum benefit, not a full retirement plan. Did she save for retirement outside of SS? If not, she may need to work longer to do so now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

OP is back pedaling here, trying to sound clueless again and not like an operative, so that the thread won't be moved to the political forum where she would be eviscerated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is rare that I see a post of DCUM where I feel the urge to break through the screen and grab OP by the neck and shake them and tell “OP, stop being so stupid!” But here we are.

Other PPs have already said it. SS is not a savings plan, it is insurance. Nobody really knows how long they will live; it’s a crapshoot. SS is literally insurance so you won’t starve in case you live longer than you are able to work. Nothing more. It is not supposed to provide you with a leisurely or luxurious retirement; if you want that, then save for it yourself.

OP’s parents made more than enough money and should have saved plenty in 401(k) and savings and home equity. If they did not do that, well that is unfortunate but that is not the fault of Social Security.

Right?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

OP is back pedaling here, trying to sound clueless again and not like an operative, so that the thread won't be moved to the political forum where she would be eviscerated.

Please stop the disruption of this thread with allegations about the OP. I have addressed this issue in Website Feedback. If you believe the OP is not legitimate, please skip the thread. This is essentially a version of "troll calling" that is one of my pet peeves. Please don't do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

But why? If you have spent literally any time "navigating" Social Security, what information made you think someone would collect TWO benefits as opposed to the HIGHER benefit or the EARLIER benefit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

But why? If you have spent literally any time "navigating" Social Security, what information made you think someone would collect TWO benefits as opposed to the HIGHER benefit or the EARLIER benefit?

yes i thought she would get both at retirement as a death benefit independent if she did or didn't take it after my dad's death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Social Security hasn’t really evolved with how much life and work have changed. The system was created in a time when most households had one income earner and people didn’t live long after retiring. Now, we have dual-income families, people living decades into retirement, and more complex financial lives — but the structure of Social Security hasn’t really kept pace.

In my mom’s case, she worked her entire life, continued paying in even after my dad passed, and didn’t fully understand how survivor benefits worked. She assumed, like many people probably do, that she’d get both her and my dad’s benefits. But she ended up only getting the higher of the two, which came as a surprise.

And I’m clearly not alone in that confusion. A recent survey found that 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t understand how much of their income it will replace. That’s a pretty big gap in understanding for a program most of us pay into our entire working lives.

This isn’t to knock the system entirely — it has helped many people. But maybe it’s time to start quietly exploring some options that better reflect today’s realities. A little more flexibility or clarity might go a long way.

LOL this is the least authentic "I'm a real person, promise!" post so far - tell me more about these recent surveys you have at your fingertips while you post completely credulous "but surely it's supposed to be a family savings plan that you don't tap until you're 80 years old, right?" hypotheticals.

Totally get the skepticism . But this is my experience and perhaps i am an anomly or maybe i am not? My mom worked her whole life, kept paying in, and was caught off guard when found out she’d only get one benefit, not both hers and my dad’s.

I looked it up just to see if others were confused too turns out 42% of adults don’t know how much they’ll get from Social Security, and 51% don’t know how much of their income it will replace. That’s from a 2023 Nationwide Retirement Institute survey:
https://news.nationwide.com/082223-adults-believe-social-security-benefits-will-dry-up

So yeah, it’s not just me.

Yes this thread doesn't seem legit. First the OP seems like a completely clueless person who has never researched social security, no political agenda just genuine shock at the unfairness of her personal situation but then comes back later with a different tone and researched facts (if that's OP's style my bet is she would have known how SS works to begin with).

And i don't know if others noticed but there are other weird comments in this thread "oh my goodness i didnt know either, but now that i know i am not neutral on SS anymore. i am against it". Won't lose time going back to that post for the exact wording but i flagged it to Jeff. I think we are seeing an organized thread against SS.

This belongs to the political forum and shouldn't be hidden under false pretense and fake personal situations. Take your masks off and go advance Musk's agenda in the political forum if you dare.

OP here this is completely my situation I am helping my mom navigate Social Security and I had thought she would get both my dad's and her benefit.

But why? If you have spent literally any time "navigating" Social Security, what information made you think someone would collect TWO benefits as opposed to the HIGHER benefit or the EARLIER benefit?

yes i thought she would get both at retirement as a death benefit independent if she did or didn't take it after my dad's death.

This sentence makes zero sense. You thought it was a death benefit, but didn't apply for it when he died. How can something be a benefit "independent of" whether it is claimed and provides a benefit? Your supposed confusion is not believable. First it was an account that your dad saved in that your mom should have inherited like a 401k, now it's an insurance policy that pays out at death but wasn't claimed.

Your mom is benefitting by getting a higher payout than she earned. This is the spousal benefit. She could have benefitted much more by claiming earlier, by your father claiming at 62, etc. But at this point it is what it is, and since you're so sure that your family would have come out ahead investing their own SS contributions, I can only assume she's sitting on a significant investment account as well from her own savings/investments during your parents' working lives. So she will be fine, and you have learned something important - you don't understand basic concepts and should work with a financial planner for your own needs going forward.