9 thoughts on “Forbes post, “Biden And Warren Want To Eliminate The Windfall Elimination Provision. Here’s Why They’re Wrong.”

  1. Yes..all public employees should be able to pay into Social Security! I’m currently trying to decide if I should leave public service so I can increase my substantial earning years. However the GPO seems much more puniative than the WEP, hopefully you’ll write about that too.

    Like

  2. I read your article on the WEP provision and why it is wrong to have this law repealed. I disagree with you.
    When a worker pays their FULL Social Security taxes and meets the 40 quarter requirement, they should
    receive their Full Social Security monthly benefit and not be penalized by WEP.

    There are over 1.9 million retired workers affected by WEP even though they paid their FICA taxes.
    Lets go after the people who payed NO FICA taxes and receive Social Security and Medicare benefits.
    There are spouses that NEVER worked nor paid into Social Security and they receive 1/2 of their
    spouse’s benefit. This is wrong and is another reason why the Social Security funds are going to run out.

    Like

  3. I think this is simple, don’t be a teacher, firemen or government worker! If you do, you are supporting capitalistic freeloaders living off the services you provide, but complain about the retirement benefits which you paid for.

    Remember, you paid 100% during the time you were required to pay Social Security. So, if they only want to give you 50% of the benefits that you paid for, then they should give you the 50% back that you overpaid. Simply put, if you qualify for Social Security benefits which WEP cuts in half, they are cutting what you paid for. No one is giving you anything, instead they are stealing what you paid for, nothing more, nothing less. And, while doing so, putting a cap on the maximum limit rich people have to pay into the system. This is social justice?

    Let me tell you something about teaching and government service. My sister taught elementary school until she retired. She now qualifies for welfare to supplement her retirement benefits. Anyone who thinks teachers will get to much money in retirement, is too stupid to teach, even if they have the education to do so!

    My brother was thrown out of the military in a reduction of force process after serving 17 years in the Military, which left him months short of the sanctuary zone of 18 years. The government needed to save money!

    I am a retired USAF officer, who paid 23 years into the Social Security system, but lost 50% to WEP.

    My mother had 8 children, 3 are military retirees. We all have convinced our children and anyone who will listen to us, not to go into government service of any kind. This is not appreciated, and WEP shows this better than any law I can imagine.

    So, if you want to support American capitalistic freeloaders, who have never even thought about helping other people or their country, do so. But, please leave your children out of this equation, because they do not deserve the rudeness that these financial, greedy freeloaders expound, because most of them have served nobody but themselves!

    Like

  4. i totally disagree with you ..since your not affected yourself and maybe nobody you know is? its so easy to say keep it as it is…but if your a law enforcement officer…teacher…fireman etc that devotes there life to public service often at great risk..and if your government employer without your consent goes off Social Security your suffer a great penalty for all the years you did put into Social Security
    I agree with eliminating the windfall tax provision..which has by the way bi partisan support in the Senate and House…With President Biden in office in January we can soon see this happening..

    Like

  5. Jane, you are completely wrong on this. If I paid into social security for the required quarters just like someone else did, I shouldn’t be penalized. For one thing, if I worked that many years in the private sector, my state pension is likely to be very small since I wouldn’t have worked as many years for the state government. Having experience in both types of employment sectors enhances your knowledge and ability to do your job – no reason to penalize people. It’s not double dipping…your state pension is based on years of service and those years won’t be so long because of spending so many years working in the private sector. You are outright wrong.

    Like

  6. You are not well informed or you’re ignoring other facets about the WEP. People who are, for example only, auto workers or iron workers receive well earned pensions upon retiring. They also get rightfully earned social security because they paid into the system for the requisite amount of time. Yet a postal worker, just for example, under the civil service system, paid into the CSRS system and rightfully earns a CSRS pension upon retirement. However, that postal worker may also have worked in private employment and paid social security taxes on substantial earnings quarters for many years and those benefits are unfairly slashed at unbelievable rates. If that household has 2 postal workers under those same circumstances, they’re hit with the double whammy of the GPO, which means neither can claim social security survivor death benefits. All that money they paid into social security during private employment reverts back to the government. Our leaders always preach to us that hard work is rewarded, yet this is a gross example of hard work penalizing honest, motivated, career workers. These are 2 extremely unjust laws. As for the part about social security being designed to primarily help the poor, then why do the very wealthy receive SS benefits when they pay far less, percentage wise, into the system? Again, unfair and unjust. These laws do little except attack the middle class worker and should be repealed with bipartisan support.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I am a retired federal CSRS and have a SS WEP penalty. After federal retirement I worked another 10 years in a SS covered job, for a total of 62 credits. I do not have a total of 35 years of SS wages, so a lot of zeroes are factored in to my AIME. That is fair. I did not pay in to the SS trust fund, so I do not expect to receive benefits for those years. Yet I have an additional reduction because I chose government as a career. It is a penalty for public service.
    Had I not worked in government, and instead quit working after 62 credits and drew welfare, I would receive a benefit double what I have now. All I request is to be receive the same SS as anyone else with similar SS salary history. Private sector pensioned workers do not have their SS benefits reduced for having a pension. Fairness is treating a government pension the same way.

    Like

  8. Jane, it is obvious that your background and experience has not given you enough information to determine that the WEP is wrong. I paid into Social Security for 35 years, but of this only 28 was considered by Social Security to be substantial earnings. Then I worked for 5 years as a teacher in a state that did not pay into Social Security so now I am getting penalized. This is my money pure and simple and I expect the retirement to be fair and equitable. In addition, if you are putting your money into a retirement account in addition to Social Security,Jane, I think when your retirement is close, you should be penalized for having different accounts and “double dipping” as you state in your article. Do you then think that would be fair and equitable if done to you? I think not.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s