Your mother in law must have been receiving SSI, which is a form of welfare for people who have not earned coverage under OASI. It is not paid for by SS taxpayers, but by the general treasury as a form of welfare. A few years ago, your wife would have been obligated to pay for the support of her aged mother. The application of the needs test to the aged poor now exempts dependents for paying for the bill that the dependent, nonprovident aged run up in dying. At least your wife was able to visit and help her without becoming financially obligated to pay all of her bills. Where I come from people put their aged parents out on ice floes to feed the polar bears or on towers of silence for the vultures and the ravens to tear. SS is much better.
As to your wife's disability, I am happy to hear that she is eligible on her own account for disability insurance. If she is able to return to work in March, her long-term disability is only 6 months. Under DI, you must demonstrate a disability that lasts a year, but, if you can, there is no needs test for other income, but of course she could not receive substantial earnings. If I were her, I would go ahead and apply for DI anyway, then if things don't proceed as well as one might hope she would already have her ticket in.
If she is an employee, you might check on temporary disibility insurance. A few of the advanced states (like NY, Hawaii, etc.) pay up to 26 weeks of TDI.) I don't know about Illinois.
I am amazed that you think that U.S. Treasuries are not secure. Everyone else in the world thinks they are better than gold, that's why they hold so many of them. I think they are too safe, and wouldn't own them on a bet. The risk is too low to provide a decent return.
Cheer up, old codger! You or your wife will either receive far more than you have so unwillingly inject or die young and not be obligated to worry about it for years and years while you drift into senility.
It wasn't meant for you, of course, but for the poor people who have not accumulated land and stocks and have to depend on government to get something out of their years of unrequited labor.
You would probably also be annoyed to learn that there is absolutely no connection between employer's taxes and their workers' benefits. It doesn't even matter if the employers don't pay. The beneficiary simply has to prove that he was employed whether his employer paid nor not to get benefits. There is also absolutely no connection between the beneficiaries tax payments and his benefits either. The earnings, which are taxed, are also used to define the benefits. The benefits depend purely on earnings. If you can successly evade paying taxes all your life and still prove that you were employed in covered employment (and ought to have paid taxes) you can still collect. If you believe this, you and I are probably the only two people in the world who know this. Of course, I have read the law very carefully. And you believe in me. Isn't that a gas? |
