Roosevelt used SS funds to build the Atomic Bomb, Truman used SS Funds, Eisenhower used SS to build the Interstate and Kennedy and every President since has used SS Funds. The so called Social Security Trust Fund exists in name only, and they are comingled with the general fund.
The above is an over-simplification of the SS Fund. Money collected for SS goes to the SS Administration, which uses the proceeds to pay out current claims, then looks to put the surplus funds into some place to save it for future use. The safest place to invest such money turns out to be U.S. Treasury bonds - thus, the SS Administration goes to the bond market, and buys US Treasury bond. These bonds are a U.S. Government "I.O.U." to the holder, to pay them back their principle, plus X amount of interest, 30 years (usually) in the future.
Thus, the funds' AREN'T co-mingled, or "raided", or otherwise. Rather, the SS Administration is the largest creditor of the U.S. government; the impact of this is that Congress has become lazy, being seduced by the easy availability of credit (as they can count on the SS Administration to buy any U.S. Treasury bond that Congress has them float to pay for projects). The concern is that the normal U.S. budget (which does NOT include the SS fund) has failed to account for the fact that the SS Administration is lowering its purchase of bonds (as the yearly expenditures of the SS go up while SS revenue goes down, due to demographic changes), and that the SS Administration will shortly begin to actually cash in bonds (i.e. expecting money back). The normal U.S. budget hasn't taken into consideration that the SS Administration won't be a huge creditor anymore, and, in fact, will begin to "pull out" money from the U.S. government, rather than invest in it.
The above is complex, but, the reality is that the actual SS fund ISN'T directly being raided for anything. Rather, the normal U.S. budget process has become addicted to the easy credit that the SS fund has provided.
As a side note, the time period where the SS annual expenditures outweighs annual revenue is coming soon - likely sometime around 2023. However, the actual Fund itself still has significant savings at that point, and it will take about another 15 years before the fund is actually "broke" (i.e. has redeemed all the U.S. bonds it has, and still expenditures outweigh revenue).
No. Social Security retirement (vs. SSI) is not based on income or assets.
Show the Social Security Administration that you have little or no income/assets and that you are either over age 65 or "permanently and totally" disabled as defined by Social Security regulations.
Social Security benefits are not "means tested" - i.e., there is no limit to the amount of property or other assets you may own. Millionaires receive Social Security benefits. Are you referring instead to Supplemental Security Income?
The Social Security Act of 1935 provided for Aid to the Blind, among other programs. It was for persons with little or no income/assets who were "legally blind" (i.e., as defined in Social Security regulations). It was largely replaced by Supplemental Security Income in 1974,
Social Security guidelines varies by state. Usually it depends on your income and your ability to work, not by your assets, you'd need to talk to a case worker from Social Security office in your state, or Google your states eligibility guidelines for qualification.
No effect at present. Social security trust funds are not being used in the bailout. Of course, there is an ongoing concern that the funds in social security are insufficient to meet future demands. It would be difficult to be more precise than this, because the government will be buying "troubled assets" that may have value in the future.
You need proof of: age (either under 18 or over 65) OR proof of disability (as defined by Social Security - receipt of Social Security disability and/or SSI meets this requirement); residence; income and assets; citizenship.
SSI is Supplemental Security Income, a means-tested form of welfare available only to disabled people and seniors 65 and older whose income and assets fall below a certain poverty threshold. SSI is administered by the Social Security Administration.
No. Social Security Disability payments are not based on assets, but on income. Owning a house may affect SSI (Supplemental Security Income) payments, especially if the house is particularly large, valuable, or the individual owns more than one house.
Yes, if you are a citizen with little or no income/assets and you are at least 65, or not yet 18, or permanently and totally disabled as defined by Social Security regulations.
What Risk is determined from the analysis of available safeguards for IS assets security requirements threats and?
No. There are no penalties for collecting Social Security benefits for an approved disability. If you are also receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which is a form of welfare, there are restrictions on the assets you can own and still receive benefits, but your home is exempt from that formula. The government will not confiscate your home.
Medicare - yes. Medicaid - if the person has limited assets/income and meets other eligibility factors including citizenship.
Only if you became disabled before age 22 and have, or had, a parent who qualified for Social Security benefits under his or her work record. Otherwise, no. If you have little or no income and few assets, you may be able to receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and other forms of federal and state aid, however.
No. Social Security Disability (SSDI) is a form of government-administered insurance that you and/or a spouse paid into through FICA taxes when working, and is not means-tested. You are not penalized for having unearned income, assets, or wages from other household members. Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which many people confuse with SSDI, is a form of welfare available only to disabled (or retired over age 65) people with limited income and assets.
a. Security b. Assets used to produce goods and services c. The goods and assets produced by the firm d. both real assets and financial assets
The taxes that you are paying now for for the social security and medicare insurance program are being used to pay for the benefits that the current beneficiaries are receiving at this time and also some of the amount is being put into a trust fund that has some government assets for use in the future for your insurance benefits.
Possibly - it depends on your total income (including RSDI and SSI) and assets (excluding home, auto and personal property).
No, you file for his social security. Also, if you have limited income/assets, you might qualify for TANF or Medicaid, or the Children's Health Insurance Program.
If the estate has any assets, they can certainly apply to get their money back. They can place a claim with the executor. The executor is responsible for clearing any debt before distributing assets.
Social Security is not designed to take money from a persons estate unless there is fraud involved
Medicare is not means tested; eligibility is not based on income or assets. Medicaid eligibility standards vary somewhat by State.
They are listed as a Non-Current or Long-Term Asset, often below Fixed Assets listed as Other. Why under Fixed Assets? Because Assets are listed in order of liquidity and a security deposit is usually not very liquid.
Since there really isn't any general recommendation concerning security, I would suggest:Implementing a security team to analyze the networkAudit the network for assets to protectIdentify the vulnerabilities with the assetsIdentify the risks of successfully attacking the assetsDevelop an attack vector analysis
Yes, if you are under 18 or over 65; or permanently and totally disabled as defined by Social Security regulations; meet citizenship requirements; and have limited income/assets.