Skip to comments.Under New Proposed Inflation Measure Seniors Would Lose $720 per Year in Social Security Payments
Posted on 07/18/2011 10:04:37 PM PDT by blam
Under New Proposed Inflation Measure Seniors Would Lose $720 per Year in Social Security Payments
Economic Policy Journal
July 18, 2011
As I have pointed out before, as part of the current deficit-reduction talks, White House officials and Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle are advocating changes to the way inflation is calculated by using a method to measure inflation known as the "chained consumer price index."
This method would likely result in a slower inflation adjustment rate payment on social security. So if you think the current CPI doesn't reflect price inflation accurately, just wait until the SS administration starts using a Congressionally approved 'chained consumer index".
According the the Senior Citizens League, the average retiree would receive about $720 per year less in inflation adjusted benefits. But the SCL is assuming real price inflation rates around current levels, if price inflation accelerates, as is likely, the reduction in adjusted benefits based on the current measure of CPI will be much greater on an annual basis.
This fraudulent indexing scheme that will screw seniors is being hailed by some as a method a positive step social security. "This is a start in helping us fix Social Security," says David John, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, according to Smart Money. If Bernie Madoff ever proposed such a thing he would of ended up in the slammer, much earlier on in his Ponzi scheme than he did.
The United States shouldn't be in the savings business at all, as is evident, they will use the money to engage in wars and otherwise siphon money off to the politically collected. That said it is an outrage that the government will play with the promised income of the elderly, many of whom trusted the government and have no other sources of income.
Don't you think so?
We can fund HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS for people who won’t pay for their own children’s meals but can pay for $200 hair-dos, millions of illegals and their children (and the meals noted before) and BILLIONS on “Section 8” (Max Klinger) housing for people who have kids before they even bother to have an apartment.
But for SS, !!!BUGGHA BUGGHHAA BUGGHHAA! YOU ARE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST!!!!!
If the GOP doesn’t take this argument up, they should replaced one and all.
I have noticed the same thing. But many here on FR swear we are wrong and food is static or up less than 5%. I got to wonder where they get their food at cause I need to shop there myself.
Our options with Social Security: Cut benefits now or abolish it later. I’d choose the latter. None of the options we seriously have with entitlements are popular, but at some point we are going to have to the face the fact that the Federal government has run out of other people’s money for most of its quasi-socialist programs.
Well if we are ever to get the deficit beast in order, SS has GOT to be a part of the picture. EVERY single program will need to be cut. NO EXCEPTIONS! And I have members of my family getting SS, so I Would feel the pain also.
I pay over $1300 per month, every month in SS...and I know for a fact that I am not getting one dime back.
I think they will impose this on everyone who gets a federal check supposedly “indexed” to inflation. The difference is that Congressional pensions are so generous as to make such a change barely noticeable.
For most everyone else, whether living off social security or a standard issue federal pension, it will be plenty noticed.
I live alone so shop only for me and my bill hasn’t gone up much. Since I don’t have to worry about anyone else I can vary what I buy if I think the price is out of line. Since apparently I can get fat on air I don’t eat a lot.
And there is a lot of competition for the food shopper in Chicago.
It is tax, not a guaranteed benefit according to supreme court in 1960 or 63 if I remember correctly. I cannot remember case at this time
There is something especially offensive in that they are considering changing one DAMNED LIE STATISTIC with an even more outrageous DAMNED LIE STATISTIC.
A trillion here or there to bail out too big to fail banks... multiple off budget wars...60 billion a year for a redundant Dept. of Homeland Security...A tax rate of 15% for millionaires whose stated income comes strictly from capital gains(interest on investment)...corporations off shoring profits to eliminate paying any taxes at home at all(GE and dozens of other corps.
And Social Security which provides a minimal income to 50 million elderly poor seniors who payed a lifetime of payments into it, and WIC which provides nourishment for new born infants in poverty is on the chopping block, and at at the top of our agenda?
If big banks are “too big to fail” then so is social security.
Want to guess how those 50 million seniors will vote next year.
Heh. I guess I haven’t been paying attention so I missed the part where they were discussing downsizing the federal leviathan. If our newly minted Pubbie congresscritters aren’t able, or willing to rein in Jug Ears and his politburo we might just as well kiss our republic goodbye. May God help them hold the line til we can get them some more help in 2012.
I don’t go to the grocery store much but my Sis back home says it is pitiful to see the elderly check out. They can’t afford much more than junk.
Yet we have money to pay welfare mothers with a pack of children of dubious heritage sired by a collection of strapping youth.
Then the question becomes, what are all the parasites being reduced?
Legislators and their staff; all public employees at all levels. Are their yearly raises still automatic?
Will welfare recipients in all of the hundreds of programs be reduced the same percentage?
How about people who pay no income taxes, will they continue to get "refunds?"
Will there still be 50% plus of the adult working-age population still paying no income taxes at all?
The meme this week seems to be balance. What sort of joke is that?
I'm on social security and if ALL the above named groups accept real reductions (not reduced increases) I'm willing to share the pain.
Just show me that both the shared pain and the "balance" is real.
Of course, I think you’d be wrong. They deserve it so much more because they work so much harder and get so much more done.
Social Security retirement age should be raised one month each year