>>>>I went from being a mom-social worker to a mom-teacher. I am a single parent. The day I start to collect my lousy $1100. teachers pension I will lose 60% of my social security because of some legislation that doesn't wnat me to 'double dip'....These 'substantial earnings' charts are gender and racially biased as women and minorities make less consistently...Now I discover that somewhere in Soc Sec. they do not want to encourage people to go into teaching by public policy!!...Go become a teacher as a second career (only 15 years in STRS system) and lose 60% of your Social Security.!!
>>>>And although the 'substantial earnings' limits look like they are based on minimum wage earhings, why would anyone want to eliminate social security for low income people?
I have to disagree with the points you are trying to make. The 'substantial earnings' charts are not gender or racially biased at all. Like you yourself point out, even minimum wage earnings qualify as 'substantial'. SS is not trying to discourage people from becoming teachers. The point is that to the extent you spend 15 years of productive work effort in an occupation not under SS, you should not benefit from the SS 'subsides' for the low-wage employees.
It is not an effort to 'eliminate SS for low income people' that causes this, but just the opposite. To the extent that your teachers wages are not considered under the SS formula's, you look more 'low wage' than you really are. And you are not fully contributing during your most productive years to the pool that creates the money to subsidize 'low wage' earners. And there are people who spend their entire productive lives (over 40 years) under SS whose money would have been used to subsidize your 'low wage' benefits, instead of those for whom it was intended.
Lest you think I don't truly understand what it is like to be in your position, I too am covered by those same provisions (having worked for the federal gov't). These rules will impact me as well, and I will have had even MORE time invested in SS. The rules are by no means perfect, but they do not have the sinister motives you are trying to impart to them.
