Life Insurance and Soc Security

[Cornelius]

I recently had a friend who was single with no kids never married age 61 who passed. He had a work history to where he could have at least applied for soc security in a few months.

So from what I understand the benefit died with him. So the thought is should everyone at least carry some sort of LI to cover the loss of some of those funds if they pass before 62?

I know its a basic of planning but most of many people especially in middle to lower income don't even consider age 62, 65 or 70 along with what if they do get there.

 

[DHK]

 

[DHK]

There's still a survivor benefit for both widow and children under 18.

[EXTERNAL LINK] - Survivors Benefits | SSA

As John Savage once said: "The government thinks enough of you to put $250,000 in decreasing term insurance on you so you don't have to buy it yourself. Isn't that great?"

 

[Cornelius]

I understand about the survivor benefits but my friend was 61 and nothing unless the small benefit. I'm not sure if he had a plan at his employment as he also did side hustles.

But the main thing is all the years building up a benefit and by being single with no dependents at age 61 nothing the Gov says oh well.

Just hmmm venting.

 

[somarco]

I had a relative that died the month he turned 65. The only check he and his spouse received was debited from their bank account shortly after he died. So he . . . they . . . got $0 from all those years of "contributions".

I don't write life insurance apps any more but if I did my "pitch" would be directed at couples who think they will live past 65 and might even die at some point.

There are a number of clients who are widows and suddenly found their income cut in half, or more, when their spouse died unexpectedly. In one case the spouse was in "perfect" health, no meds, had a complete physical the week before he died playing tennis with his cardiologist.

He died within weeks of turning 65.

Wife sold the house, moved to a smaller city and bought a B&B to have some income.

 

[Newby]

This is the reason why Medicare for all ages would be tough financially.

With Medicare a huge number of people pay in for 40-years and get little or nothing because they die young. That’s what keeps Medicare afloat.

If people have Medicare that never paid into it and no one has to pay 40-years of premiums before that get it, where would all that money come from?

 

[Allen Trent]

There's still a survivor benefit for both widow and children under 18.

[EXTERNAL LINK] - Survivors Benefits | SSA

As John Savage once said: "The government thinks enough of you to put $250,000 in decreasing term insurance on you so you don't have to buy it yourself. Isn't that great?"

I have shared this savage quote many times. With today's incomes & the survivors family monthly maximum of 4k paying( until kids are 18 & to mom until youngest is 16), this benefit could pay up to 45k year for 10 to 18 years. So, in today's dollars, the amount is more like $500k to $800k in survivors benefits decreasing term for those that have kids compared to 250k savage mentioned years ago

PS-. Single people that die before collecting SS or same with a pension plan, help fund the bell curve that also pays someone that collects from age 62 to 105 or those that collect Disability or Survivors. Social Security has never been a "deposit my own money & collect it later". It is more like critical illness term insurance than it is a retirement annuity in terms of being guaranteed to get your premiums back

 

[Allen Trent]

where would all that money come from?

The rich, the rich should pay. The news tells me the rich pay no income taxes & they get all these tax deductions, loopholes, etc.They should have to pay their fair share.

Wait, I just looked on a Google search. Our tax code actually raises income taxes a ton as your income goes up & at the same time, the deductions available to all citizens get eliminated for high income earners.

Maybe I should alert the media & the politicians as I think they would hate to find out they have been given bad info since the beginning of politics

 

[Newby]

The rich, the rich should pay. The news tells me the rich pay no income taxes & they get all these tax deductions, loopholes, etc.They should have to pay their fair share.

Wait, I just looked on a Google search. Our tax code actually raises income taxes a ton as your income goes up & at the same time, the deductions available to all citizens get eliminated for high in one earners.

Maybe I should alert the media & the politicians as I think they would hate to find out they have been given bad info since the beginning of politics

Yes we need to tax those rich until they are poor. That will teach them.

 

[adjusterjack]

Social Security has never been a "deposit my own money & collect it later".

That's right. The money you working people contribute isn't for you. It's to pay me my social security benefits.

For which you all have my sincerest gratitude.