Five years. I got this info Friday afternoon so haven’t had time to call my doc to clarify, but the endoscopy center said that it’s because they found polyps during my last colonoscopy that it’s not preventative and therefore not covered.
fwiw, I’ve had polyps every colonoscopy (3 now) and yet insurance always paid as preventive.
4 Likes
Me too…and that includes my Medicare Advantage Plan.
Every insurer has its own rules - which is why it’s really important to find out in advance. Hopefully, the negotiated rate won’t be too awful.
Some polyps are just benign, the pop up kind, but doctors remove them anyway.
Yes, we will check to see about what Part D plan is most cost effective for our medication lists, but for a minor cost difference, not worth the ‘change’ for us. I figured the one plan that went up some (after having everything set up Oct 2021) from same med list - I figured the other plans would change accordingly. After having everything set up along with automatic withdrawals, just didn’t want to go through the trouble so soon.
We can see if our med lists stay the same. During this year, DH had some new medications but will be off of them soon.
One doesn’t know with med changes during the year if one had done well with ‘new variables’.
I have seen that the spousal collection is outdated at best.
It does seem unfair to you that you collect $220 instead of the $600 ( that’s a considerable sum over time).
1 Like
What do you mean by this statement?
Example #1: A married man/woman who works their entire life and has a high income is married to someone who never has worked. Their spouse is entitled to a fairly hefty SS based on their spouses high income. Even though their spouse has never worked or does not qualify based on # of years worked.
Let’s say I work all my life and I’m single all my life. My income is moderate. I then collect SS. My SS can be less than example #1.
I get the math. You just basically feel it is unfair for someone who has never, “worked,” to collect on a spouse’s record. You’d like the policy changed because it’s unfair that people who don’t, “work,” collect anything at all. I know you aren’t alone in your stance on this. I have a friend who feels like spousal benefits are basically fraud.
I imagine it’s a holdover from a society where women didn’t work. I think about my niece, who has a more than full time job taking care of her disabled son, and I am glad that it’s still in place.
9 Likes
I will benefit based on how it is set up but don’t really need it as a main source of income. But I don’t have strong feelings either way. I do think it’s outdated as many couples both work and there are so many other permutations.
I’m glad to see per @kelsmom that there are people who can benefit from this policy. My husband thinks all SS will eventually be needs based only and phased out for high income folks in retirement. I’m not sure.
I’m sure that there are so many variables for SS. For someone who is using SS as their main income, any factor could be a huge variant in their quality of life in their later years.
2 Likes
Well even in cases where both spouses work, it’s often the case that the lower wages earner (who often but not always worked fewer years) end up taking 1/2 of the larger spouse SS …. right (?)
Yes, that would be me. Even if you are/were a high income earner but worked fewer years, if you are married to someone who is/was a high income earner and worked many years: it’s likely you will be taking 1/2 your spouses SS.
2 Likes
I didn’t work for a number of years, and when I did, it was often part time & low pay. I will still have a payment of my own that is more than half my H’s - while I consider us well off, I suppose we aren’t necessarily considered well off by some, because my H’s payment is not at the top of the scale. Regardless, I am comforted to know that should he die first, my SS payment won’t decrease as much as it would if it decreased to my payment only. My expenses won’t decrease all that much without him, because most of our costs would be the same whether there was one or two of us.
1 Like
The UK has already phased out, you qualify for UK SS base on your own records. In the past, spouses get 60%, I believe they do give credit for people staying at home with children, people go to school and such.
1 Like
SS is already means-tested at some level.
WEP is one form of it. Taxing benefits is another. With the current brackets, we will likely lose 22-24% of our benefits to income tax, and this could easily go up once the current rates expire. We’ve already paid taxes on this money once… at least my state doesn’t tax it.
I fully expect more drastic means testing in the future as one component of keeping SS solvent.
It helps to remember that SS is not a pension, even though most people think of it as one, and your average politician wants you to think that way. Benefits, or lack thereof, are subject to the whims of Congress, and you have no legal right to benefits based on the taxes you’ve already paid.
4 Likes
I’m glad it’s in place for people like your niece.
It is true however that the SS system was not set up for 2 earner couples. The surviving spouse in that case gets a choice to take their own benefit or the deceased spouse’s. But since both paid into the system it seems as if maybe they should be able to collect both.
For example:
John and Jane are a couple, both work outside of the home, both pay in the maximum amount.
Sam and Sally are a couple, Sam pays in the maximum amount, Sally works as a full time homemaker and does not pay into the system.
Both couple retire and John and Sam die. Jane and Sally are able to collect the same amount even though John and Jane paid more in (in this case double).
This was not anticipated back when SS was set up, but it’s a pretty common scenario now.
5 Likes
Actually, I am one who is subject to the offset and windfall provisions. I honestly think it’s fine that someone who never worked will have some financial support in their golden years based on spouse earnings.
My issue is…I contributed to SS for a number of years before I moved to a state where this didn’t happen. My benefit would be just over $600 a month but it’s reduced to $220. I contributed to SS…all I really would like to see is me getting my full benefit based on what I contributed.
6 Likes
And if my husband dies first…I won’t get anything from SS after his death except the death payment for spouses which is about $250…one time payment.
But we did consider all of this in our retirement planning.
1 Like