Skip to comments.Is the GOP missing a golden opportunity with this issue? (Vanity)
Posted on 10/08/2010 8:50:27 AM PDT by no dems
Why has the GOP not made a big stink over the fact that the Democratic controlled Congress, for the first time in many years, did not give Social Security recipients a COLA raise in 2010? Huh? That should be a major campaign issue this year.
There probably will be no COLA in 2011 either. Thank the muslim who 45% of people over 60 voted for.
Why has the GOP not made a big stink over the fact that the Democratic controlled Congress, for the first time in many years, did not give Social Security recipients a COLA raise in 2010?
Because SS is nearly bankrupt and the GOP should oppose all automatic budget increases no matter who’s pig’s getting fed.
The GOP should not touch this issue. Clamoring for a COLA will only explode the deficit and long term debt. A major problem with Social Security and federal pensions is the ridiculous COLA.
You’re suggesting that the Republicans beat on the Dims for *NOT* spending money??
um... because we supported it?
There are a lot of issues to hang around their necks.
I agree with Rush. It is fun to sit back and watch them implode.
Maybe because the costs of living has declined. Actually, they didn’t get one in 2009 for the same reason.
It’s a good political brickbat, but there are many problems with it.
Wrong is wrong.
Socialism is socialism.
Unfunded mandates are unfunded mandates.
The money just isn’t there.
There’s a zillion reasons. Ultimately, SS needs to be phased out. Morally, those currently or imminently on SS need to have the promises made to them kept. For the rest of us: ideally, the government would give us our money back. But it’s been spent.
A fine kettle of fish.
Because the GOP is suppose to be the party of limited governement (spending included) and not the party of ever increasing entitlements?
” Maybe because the costs of living has declined. “
Been to the grocery store, lately??
The *Government* statistic (CPI) may have ‘declined’, but what it actually *costs* for a real person to live is going the opposite way.....
I’m more concerned that Congress did not pass a budget, passed a continuing resolution that maintains a 28% increase in spending, and has done absolutely nothing to address the horrendous unemployment across the Country.
Foregoing a cost of living increase for Social Security is not high on anyone’s list that I know of; not to say those folks aren’t out there.
This is an excellent point. Hopefully individual House candidates are making this point in their respective districts.
Why would it be RIGHT to complain Democrats didn’t give a raise to a system that is on it’s way to bankrupting America anyway?
I prefer substance over sound bites.
So you prefer false attacks over substance?
Isn’t that what the liberals do?
I pay more for a gallon of milk than for a gallon of gas........
It never fails to amaze me how many various issues the republicans could use to hit the dems over the head with and yet year after year they miss the opportunities.
Because Congress doesn't control COLA. It's calculated automatically and applied automatically and no COLA was authorized.
Here’s the problem. This isn’t the fault of the democrats, it’s exactly what the law requires, and it’s how it should work (leaving aside the question of whether you believe CPI is a valid measure).
Now, if the situation was reversed, of course the democrats would be making headlines complaining about the republicans and a failure to provide a cost -of-living increase. And the media would go along with their complaints.
But if the republicans tried that, the media would laugh at them for complaining about it, and probably point out that the law as written was supported by the republicans.
In other words, you can only get away with lying to the american people if the media will go along with it, and the media only goes along with it when it’s the democrats that do it.
What’s false about it? There were no COLA increases.
Because Steele, The RNC, The NRSC and The NRCC are DUMBASSES!
False would be the GOP bitching about no COLA raises WHEN IN FACT THEIR SHOULDN’T BE ANY ANYWAY!
Sorry, I’m not for seeing the elderly year after year fall farther behind in their standard of living. Perhaps we can means test any COLA increase, but with more and more elderly living longer and longer, you’re sentencing many to eventual impoverishment by not allowing COLAs. So long as we have a Social Security system in the form that it’s in, COLAs need to be provided or we’re going to have a lot of elderly people eating cat food and/or going onto food stamps. I’m not elderly myself, but one day you will be and will have parents who are as well if you don’t already and you’ll understand what I’m talking about. I’m all for privatizing the thing, but since neither party wants that to happen we have to at least make the current system work for people.
So you want to turn Social Security into even more of a welfare program than it already is...
If you are so worried, why restrict them to a lousy COLA increase. Let’s just make it a good 20%. Heck, it all goes back into the economy as spending and could be called stimulus, right?
Wow, that would encourage people to spend even more in their working years (now) knowing that they don’t have to save a dime because SS will pay them big time. That would also free up spending by their kids now that their kids know they will have zero obligation to financially help their parents and relatives....
Ya, great idea. Maybe you should rethink whether you are a conservative or not.....my bet is not.
It has to be authorized annually by Congress.
Well, I asked the SS Administration about it and they said there was no COLA this year because Congress did not authorize it.
So if the formula said a COLA was justified but Congress said no then you would have an argument. That's not the case here.
I'm a conservative, not a libertarian. Learn the difference before spewing juvenile judgments about my commitment to conservative principles. Believe it or not, you are not the benchmark for what constitutes conservatism--and no definition I know of conservatism includes lacking compassion for those truly in need. I'm a Christian and believe we should as a society help the most vulnerable. That doesn't mean I believe in a liberal notion of a social welfare system. But conservatism never meant being for impoverishing seniors. I don't know where you get this idea that conservatism means leaving the disadvantaged to just die in the streets. Sorry, not even Sarah Palin would be for denying seniors COLA increases. You're not a conservative, you're an extremist, probably a libertarian.
I have nothing more to say to you since you just want to make ridiculous extrapolations to my argument about the need for COLA. I don't need to waste a perfectly good Friday playing games with someone not interested in a real discussion of these issues. And re-think whether you're actually Christian or not.
NO COLA for 2011, maybe not until 2013, we already know the economy will not improve until at least 2014 IF we can stop the marxist agenda.
USE THE AMMO the enemy gives you! Print the first article out for those seniors that are not online, email the list, print it, hand it out. Tell folks to go read for themselves. I do, then I tell them that my commie rep Steve Cohen gifted them with the $569 Billion tax hike, and the $8.15 Trillion Medicare gut.
Use what the enemy gifted you with to help your candidate!
How ObamaCare Guts Medicare
Health laws heavy impact by Paul Guppy (Taxes)
Monthly premiums to rise for 7 of top 10 Medicare prescription plans in 2011
Social Security: No 2011 increase expected (COLA)
Harvard Pilgrim cancels Medicare Advantage plan
Seniors coverage options dwindle as Medicare Advantage programs close shop
Survey in New England Journal of Medicine 46% of US Doctors Will Quit Obamacare Passes http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2798380/shocking_survey_in_new_england_journal.html?cat=75
ObamaCare has just made me Sicker!
In the notice, EmblemHealth told Gowland, who is healthy, The proposed rate increase includes two components: a basic increase on your type plan and an increase due to the cost of enhanced benefits required by the new federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Mayo clinic stops taking Medicare patients
Principal To Cut Jobs, End Med Insurance Business
Obama: We knew health costs would go up
President Barack Obama insisted he can overhaul the U.S. healthcare system without raising taxes for anyone but the wealthiest Americans
The New Federal Wedding Tax: How Obamacare Would Dramatically Penalize Marriage
1099: The Trojan Horse within Obamacare
Repeal Obamacare: Small-Business Killer
Senate Expands IRS Form 1099 Reporting Requirement to Include All Rental Property Owner
Paperwork nightmare: New 1099 mandate must be repealed
Health care laws massive, hidden tax change( 1099*s)
Lost in Taxation, The IRSs vast new ObamaCare powers.
How do you figure SS is a Welfare program when a nice chunk of people’s pay checks are deducted every pay day to go into their fund. Why is it any more of a Welfare Program than a 401k.
Believe it or not, there are a lot of people out there who through no fault of their own live paycheck to paycheck and don't have a lot of room to save for retirement. Maybe their living this way means a mother can stay home and raise her kids while the husband works so their kids can be raised by a mother and not daycare. Maybe their doing so means they send their kids to private schools rather than crappy public schools. Maybe their doing so means they can send a kid to college. Maybe their doing so means they can pay for their own health insurance rather than government buying it for them. Why do you assume everyone not saving for their retirement is just some profiligate shopaholic, rather than the fact that in the real world it's expensive to live everyday life and to raise a family? Not everyone can be stock or real estate investors or make 6 figure incomes or whatever it is you do that puts you so far above mere humanity in your ability to have a profuse disposable and investable income to use in saving for retirement.
I happen to have a very good retirement plan with my job and have made some modest provisions for my own retirement savings, but I realize I am luckier than many in that regard. Most people DO save for retirment no matter how modest. Most are NOT out wasting money right and left having at the back of their minds that Social Security will make up for their lack of prepardness. And for those who do live that way, their punishment will be the fact they'll have little to live on from Social Security when they retire.
You might also consider how much less robust the economy would be without a Social Security system and how that would negatively impact consumer spending. Do I think the system should be privatized? Absolutely. And doing so would produce a much healthier economy as happened when Chile privatized their system. But since that's not going to happen any time soon, we need to work within the reality we have which is that people rely on Social Security for their retirement---like it or not.
. . .and it's deducted whether the payee wants it to be or not! No choice, you must pay in.
The Democrats control TV. They can easily demonize any republican. Blame idiots who watch tv and view hollywood’s movies. These sheep give the Dems their power. Old people watch network TV and the network news. It is easy to scare their little heads.
Americans also think shi**y 24x7 propaganda TV is like mom and apple pie. TV is just full on, total brainwashing and propaganda in between the “dumb white man” commercials. This is all by design. People are stupid.
I would define a welfare program as getting more out than you put in wouldn’t you?
So tell me, how long does it take a person making $40,000 per year to get all his SS money, his employer’s , and the “interest” on that back? Not a very long time my friend.
OR how about going from 15 working Americans supporting each SS drawee to just 3 working Americans supporting each SS drawee now...
I would call that a pretty solid example of it turning into a welfare program faster than you can say bankruptcy.
Good point, and none for next year either.
But, Fed employees still got a raise ( even tho cut a bit)
Costs, ie food went up at the supermarket for everyone
Obama cuts pay raises for federal workers
By Sam Youngman - 08/31/09
President Barack Obama is cutting federal employees pay increases next year because of the budget deficit.
In an Aug. 31 letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Obama said he would use his power to reduce the federal employee pay raise set for January 2010 from 2.4 percent to 2.0 percent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.