Question for those who live in California

[two_bit_score]

Same way unemployment is non taxable, no? It's a govt handout so it's non taxable.
Now then, a Social Security payment is not a handout, theoretically you paid in what you are getting out.
SS payments are taxable income.

If you were self employed you paid the entire SS 'contribution'. Employees paid their share and their employer paid a share. But your overall point is excellent!

 

[scootr]

My wife and I are both self employed. We know the pain of SS contributions. Punishment for creating your own job. Plus you get to provide yourself with health insurance.

 

[Hughman]

Now illegal not to count Section 8 voucher amount as income.

So now they say I have to "consider" section 8 applicants, but the last time I read the required contract to join the program, there's no way I would sign it. What's the point?

 

[California]

a Social Security payment is not a handout, theoretically you paid in what you are getting out.

That is the common impression but SS hasn't changed from how it began.

It consists of people working presently, supporting people already retired.

The legislation was passed during the Depression to reduce starvation when the economy collapsed. Soon it became everyone's expectation for the foundation of their retirement planning.

'Getting back what you paid in' is folklore, not real.

 

[jyoutz]

That is the common impression but SS hasn't changed from how it began.

It consists of people working presently, supporting people already retired.

The legislation was passed during the Depression to reduce starvation when the economy collapsed. Soon it became everyone's expectation for the foundation of their retirement planning.

'Getting back what you paid in' is folklore, not real.

Actually most people get back what they contributed plus reasonable interest. And a lot more. Obviously this varies considerably between recipients.

 

[two_bit_score]

'Getting back what you paid in' is folklore, not real.

But it is based on what you paid in. Theoretically.

 

[scootr]

That is the common impression but SS hasn't changed from how it began.

It consists of people working presently, supporting people already retired.

The legislation was passed during the Depression to reduce starvation when the economy collapsed. Soon it became everyone's expectation for the foundation of their retirement planning.

'Getting back what you paid in' is folklore, not real.

I have paid in for 55 yrs. I have just begun drawing out. Your argument holds no water.
It will take 7 yrs for me to get what I put in back at face value. Imagine how much more money it would be today had the govt invested that same $250,000 starting 55 yrs ago. Unfortunate the govt. borrowed the money I put in and spent it on foreign wars and other frivolous crap. Not my problem.
I certainly don't feel like somebody else is working to support me - I'm still working and still contributing to the SS fund.

Show me the money

 

[California]

But it is based on what you paid in. Theoretically.

The formula for your entitlement considers what you put in.

But I expect SS disability, survivor benefits, likely a lot of other factors that send your contributions to others or pay for wars as scootr said, or that adjust entitlements as the rules change, distort one's paid in/get back ratios.

My FIL was a government statistician who assembled employment statistics at one point in his career, so he had insight into how it all works. I don't know if it was SS or something else in his retirement income but he noted he had made a change at some point that meant years later he got back in his first 18 months retired, all the payroll deductions that he had paid in to that category. It may have been that State employees weren't required to join SS in the early days since they already belonged to the state pension program. I never asked him how that worked but I'm sure he knew what he was talking about.

 

[plowhog]

It may have been that State employees weren't required to join SS

A family member of mine worked for the State of CA for 30 years, making zero contributions to Social Security.

 

[ultrarunner]

So now they say I have to "consider" section 8 applicants, but the last time I read the required contract to join the program, there's no way I would sign it. What's the point?

It will be another showdown…

The program bears little resemblance to the early days decades ago… my experience starts 1982.

They use to say totally voluntary but now not.

The water shed for me is Housing no longer has any part in tenant damages… it is strictly between owner and tenant plus now 1 month max is the most for any security deposit for any rental.

I had a roof replaced late in the season… no complaints or issues… just being pro active with exterior paint scheduled for Spring.

December 15 was inspection and I was given 30 days to paint eves and trim… there was frost each morning when not raining… no matter it had to be done or forever loose the rent through abatement until painted and reinspected.

Another was tenant owned stove not working and it was on me to repair/replace

Or another where a tenants ex said he was going to get her thrown out and busted out all the windows at midnight on a Saturday night.

I was out to 4 am boarding up the windows or the city would fit $300 a window…

I have had some wonderful Section 8 but the bad ones were placed in the homes and nothing I could do when head of household passed away and the voucher was given to another family member you would have to be out of your mind to rent to.