Maybe this should be in the rant thread: However, it has been a big topic of discussion at my wife's school (where she teaches) that retirees from the school who are widowed by a person not of the school system will have to choose their retirement from EITHER the spouses social security OR their teacher pension. I checked, and this is not inconsistent with the treatment if a surviving spouse were to retire under social security. However, what IS vexing is that both my wife and I work and BOTH have contributed to either retirement and/or social security, but upon the death of one of us, only one retirement can be drawn.

 

I will say the only laughable thing out of this is that so many teachers vote liberal (mainly because of the union affiliation), and it is their choices that support this kind of socialism. And, the irony is that social security is a middle class tax - not the wealthy - as contributions are capped as we all know.

I understand your frustration. I'm in the same predicament. Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision affects teachers in about 15 states, including Kentucky. The wife is presently drawing teacher retirement but only gets 40 percent of the SS benefits she earned from non-teaching jobs over the years. The KSTRA pension is up to 100 percent transferrable to surviving spouse, if that is the option you two choose, but Social Security is a different story. Unfair? Yes, I'd say so.

Social Security has always been flawed to put it lightly. The pension offset rules really make no sense and the fact that you and your family are not guaranteed to at least get back what you put in , is a scam in and of itself.

 

Then others wonder why some thinking that giving the option of having your money be private makes sense. It should be a choice.

The social security system was never set up to be fair, it cannot survive being fair.

The social security system was never set up to be fair, it cannot survive being fair.

 

 

Your completely right that it cannot survive by being fair. However that is reason number one why it should be optional.

I agree whole heartedly. Don't see it ever happening because the smart people bailing out would leave the deficit high and dry for paying out those remaining in the system.