Print

[blue2]

SS informs me that I received checks for the last 3 months of 2006 that I wasn't entitled to.   Said they had information I wasn't eligible even though I retired in Dec of 2005 at age 64.  To make it easy on themselves they choose to not pay me for Jan-Feb-Mar of 2010 to get their money back.  No payment options with them.  Actually I could have collected SS for all of 2006 but was going to wait until 2007.  The rep in Monroe talked me into starting in Oct when I filed.
I'm not sure how long this is going to take to get straighted out.   So what does someone do that can't live without this money?  I can manage but I know there are a lot of people that might not recover from an action like this.

[naomi43]

Thats awful....social security has some wierd rules that are hard to figure out!

[Frenchfry]

That's just not right!

They ought to take a little out at a time.

Maybe they found out you're a rightie.

[Aunt Lisa]

That's just not right!

They ought to take a little out at a time.

Maybe they found out you're a rightie.

 LOL you kill me. But I agree they should do a little at a time.

[Sad]

Turn and run when someone says "I am from the government and I am here to help you." 

It sounds like you just learned that lesson.

Turns out the same is true with the IRS.  They give the wrong advice a shockingly high amount of the time, but if they catch it when you file your form YOU are libel for it - even though they are the ones who told you to do it.

I am sure it will be better when the government is calling the shots with health care though....

[Pax]

That's the problem with so-called "entitlements:" we think we're "entitled" and the government knows otherwise.  Self-reliance is a far, far preferable "program" than social insecurity could ever hope to be if it was anything other than a tax on the working stiffs. . .

[blue2]

Not sure why SS has phones.  Call either Monroe or national number and you get recording that lines are busy and they hang up.

[1conservative]

SS informs me that I received checks for the last 3 months of 2006 that I wasn't entitled to.   Said they had information I wasn't eligible even though I retired in Dec of 2005 at age 64.  To make it easy on themselves they choose to not pay me for Jan-Feb-Mar of 2010 to get their money back.  No payment options with them.  Actually I could have collected SS for all of 2006 but was going to wait until 2007.  The rep in Monroe talked me into starting in Oct when I filed.
I'm not sure how long this is going to take to get straighted out.   So what does someone do that can't live without this money?  I can manage but I know there are a lot of people that might not recover from an action like this.

Sorry to hear that Blue2, welcome to the Ponzi scheme. It is not social and there is NO security. The money I pay in goes directly to the SS recipients, there is absolutely no money is a so called SS savings account. I hope you get at the very least what you paid into the "system" over the years.

[Pax]

. . .welcome to the Ponzi scheme. . . .there is absolutely no money is a so-called SS savings account.

Short & Sweet.  We had another acronym when I was in the Army: K.I.S.S. = Keep It Simple, Stupid.  "Social Security" is a payroll tax every US citizen pays.  Period.  If you get a check or two with "Social Security Administration" on it consider it a partial repayment for what they stole from you years ago, not anything you're "entitled" to long after the fact 'cuz that ain't so. . .

[Billy Boggs]

Not sure why SS has phones.  Call either Monroe or national number and you get recording that lines are busy and they hang up.

The only thing the SS answers, are law suits filed in court!!!  We had to get a lawyer and fight them for 3 years!!!  My advice, even thought I don't feel it should be necessary, GET A LAWYER!!!

[Bob Beadles]

Social security could easily be replaced if the federal government would sell all the land that it owns.
Then everyone over sixty could be given annuities that they would privately own and that could be passed on to their descendants.
The government could then reimburse with interest all the people under sixty the money they have paid into social security.
That would allow for massive tax cuts for everyone else.

[Frenchfry]

Social security could easily be replaced if the federal government would sell all the land that it owns.
Then everyone over sixty could be given annuities that they would privately own and that could be passed on to their descendants.
The government could then reimburse with interest all the people under sixty the money they have paid into social security.
That would allow for massive tax cuts for everyone else.

Sure...who needs a government 

[Pax]

Uh.  Where in the hell is "government" authorized to own property in the first place?  They're not.

Why do ignoramouses cry about Social Insecurity?  My goodness, sheeple, if the social insecurity Tax was repealed there'd be a whole lot more cash floating around the "economy: (or in mattresses, pick one.)  Why would that be such a bad thing??  Oh!  But that Ponzi-Scheme that your fiat currency is requires growth!!!  I almost forgot!  No growth = ponzi-scheme failure.  It's fake, it's phony, it's a house of cards; deal with it.

[1conservative]

Uh.  Where in the hell is "government" authorized to own property in the first place?  They're not.

Why do ignoramouses cry about Social Insecurity?  My goodness, sheeple, if the social insecurity Tax was repealed there'd be a whole lot more cash floating around the "economy: (or in mattresses, pick one.)  Why would that be such a bad thing??  Oh!  But that Ponzi-Scheme that your fiat currency is requires growth!!!  I almost forgot!  No growth = ponzi-scheme failure.  It's fake, it's phony, it's a house of cards; deal with it.

Please Pax, don't confuse the commies with the facts!