Abstract
While many experts of social security would agree with Levy's premise that social security coverage should be extended to government employees, his arguments are misleading and contain a major ommission. There are several basic controversial points in Levy's discussion that will be addressed. First, the implied assumption that most double dippers are wage earners whose careers, were first and foremost, in the government sector, is not necessarily valid. Secondly, Levy's argument that government employees have high average government employee wages is misleading. The third aspect involves the author's recommendation of covering all military compensation under social security. Lastly, a comparison of OASDHI benefits relative to federal civil-service employees is examined, especially the favorable tax treatment of OASDHI benefits.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
