Skip to main content

#HandsOffMySocialSecurity Well a crap load of you Kossacks and Democrats in Washington DC are talking about SS as if there is something wrong with it, and it needs to be fixed. If you advocate for leaving SS alone, cool. IF not its time to come to terms with what Democrats are saying that enables the GOP long term plan to destroy Social Security.

The only thing wrong with Social Security is the economy. In fact the Social Security Trustees tells us that. Of course for those of you who have never read any actual Trustees report, and continue to repeat this falsehood that the Social Security Trust Fund will be depleted in 20 or so years, and just buying a load of GOP crap.

Photobucket

Stop it. Take your hands off my Social Security. You're not being responsible, I don't trust you, go home, lock the door and turn off the internet. Just stop it.

Lets create jobs, raise the minimum wage, and watch the FICA roll in. Heres a screen cap of the Trustees 2012 report, look very carefully for the footnotes.....

Photobucket

Have you never heard this information before? than I excuse you. IF you have heard this information before, and you choose to ignore it, and you still predict 20 more years of recession, well friends, in light of the Sequester and the debt limit talks that could happen this month and things horribly worse....

This diary and its lack of respect is for you.

Chained CPI and Superlative CPI both mean 130 billion in cuts:

Photobucket

Job creation and raising the min wage go a long way to making Social Security solvent thru 2090. Don't comment here, call up DC and give them an earful. Tell them:

Photobucket

Remember there are Democrats who seem to settle for no real jobs programs and Chained CPI, I know, thats some crazy shit, but its true. 25 million Americans would take a full time year round job if offered, do you have our unemployed backs, or is chained CPI or Superlative CPI ok with you?

If it comes to this trade off, Raise the SS cap, or 25 million jobs and the GOP is only letting you pick one..... which is it going to be?

If it comes to this trade off,  SS benefit cuts, or raising the minimum wage and the GOP is only letting you pick one..... which is it going to be?

Make the call, call Congress and tell you representative this:

Roger Fox told me the Social Security Trustees said if we create lots of jobs and keep raising the minimum wage over 20 years, then my Social Security is good thru 2090.

Photobucket

Dont wait for the grand bargain to hit you, draw a line in the sand right now, get on the phone, email your friends and relatives and make sure they know whats at risk, whats going on this week & the rest of this month and make sure they know what to do & say about it.

2:46 PM PT: Thanks gooderservice, I was rushing.

EDIT

Thanks for the support.

Photobucket

8:18 PM PT: 6 hours after publication still strong on the rec list, now #3 @238 recs. WOW, thanks for all the support. #HandsOffMySocialSecurity

Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:08 PM PT: Holy crap Batman. I woke up this morning and this dairy was 3rd on the rec list with about 200 rec. It dropped to 7th. Now  after 11 1/2 hours its back to 3rd with 374 recs. Amazing.

Thank you everyone for your support, because of you, this diary has enjoyed nearly 12 hours on the front page rec list.

Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 3:14 PM PT: 393 recs and nearly 14 hours on the rec list. I am truly honored.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (337+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, Jim P, gooderservice, greenbell, 420 forever, Black Max, Losty, arendt, devis1, ek hornbeck, TheMomCat, ontheleftcoast, Truedelphi, jedennis, RenMin, where4art, DRo, Mary Mike, detroitmechworks, carpunder, YucatanMan, Free Jazz at High Noon, kevinpdx, Rick Aucoin, zaka1, NonnyO, greengemini, Siri, leonard145b, Quasimodal, Shahryar, hubcap, Renee, AoT, elwior, VirginiaBlue, Dinclusin, phonegery, Bluesee, cwsmoke, Dem Beans, howd, blueoregon, Shippo1776, shigeru, OleHippieChick, nhox42, hester, cfm, Colorado is the Shiznit, maryabein, Hammerhand, BlueDragon, deben, PhilW, Chaddiwicker, Chi, OldSoldier99, ericlewis0, miracle11, Justus, wader, Haningchadus14, la58, temptxan, tegrat, Getreal1246, TomP, gulfgal98, denise b, Williston Barrett, CT Hank, cocinero, bluebrain, rapala, MargaretPOA, pat bunny, vacantlook, Horace Boothroyd III, citisven, Words In Action, SouthernLiberalinMD, TAH from SLC, Alexandre, ratzo, Penny GC, Denver11, kurious, Jim R, xynz, wdrath, MrJayTee, mungley, Illinois IRV, Bob B, peptabysmal, MT Spaces, Pam Bennett, Pescadero Bill, David Futurama, salmo, MufsMom, hooper, muddy boots, Bill Roberts, stevej, 2laneIA, 3goldens, cybersaur, dkmich, joanneleon, Orinoco, kaye, Boppy, MKHector, Willa Rogers, Boston Boomer, Faroutman, Leftcandid, rogerdaddy, StateofEuphoria, chrississippi, peregrine kate, Deep Harm, Ginger1, Dumbo, LucyandByron, ridemybike, Mike RinRI, keikekaze, colleen, whataboutbob, NM Ray, Dave in RI, Alumbrados, cloudbustingkid, Trial Lawyer Richard, Son of a Cat, shaharazade, copymark, poligirl, wildweasels, Mr Stagger Lee, deviant24x, priceman, tofumagoo, Agathena, QuoVadis, BeerNotWar, hamm, Urban Owl, slatsg, cyncynical, Debs2, StonyB, praenomen, Hirodog, northerntier, ATFILLINOIS, laker, Gowrie Gal, greeseyparrot, emal, rivercard, BeninSC, quagmiremonkey, Simplify, CenFlaDem, artisan, blueoasis, OMwordTHRUdaFOG, Big River Bandido, jamess, kerflooey, profundo, rolet, randallt, Gorette, Ian S, Arlys, freesia, whoknu, zerelda, reflectionsv37, Ekaterin, ChemBob, SpecialKinFlag, Azubia, Kentucky Kid, Tommymac, akmk, TracieLynn, worldlotus, Dave925, irmaly, Liberaltarian, scribeboy, Keone Michaels, Aunt Martha, VTCC73, Jeffersonian Democrat, midwesterner, kareylou, kaliope, solesse413, Skennet Boch, k9disc, RebeccaG, RagingGurrl, Oaktown Girl, quill, triv33, also mom of 5, Oldowan, Simian, fiddlingnero, Liberal Thinking, This old man, JekyllnHyde, radical simplicity, WheninRome, magnetics, valadon, Meteor Blades, jbou, mofembot, humphrey, KenBee, GayHillbilly, LaFeminista, AllisonInSeattle, dRefractor, ActivistGuy, JimWilson, La Gitane, coppercelt, agincour, radarlady, Shelley99, FriendlyNeighbor, onionjim, Robobagpiper, commonmass, Superskepticalman, Panama Pete, rivamer, expatjourno, jm214, jcbdem, mok, sunny skies, Showman, Creosote, caul, jrooth, JesseCW, PhilJD, argomd, Glen The Plumber, Rogneid, cslewis, corvo, BlueInARedState, Anima, J M F, cpresley, Involuntary Exile, GeorgeXVIII, MrQA, Aspe4, Angie in WA State, Debbie in ME, Alice Marshall, remembrance, TheDuckManCometh, Grendel, roses, Lilith, thomask, gypsytoo, aughtomatic, felix19, gof, dradams, Sun Tzu, allenjo, CoolOnion, hardhatmama, cobaltbay, Jazzenterprises, Frank Palmer, indie17, bronte17, Michael James, NBBooks, chmood, srkp23, Fishtroller01, legendmn, j0em0mma, FogCityJohn, Lucy2009, jbob, sensetolisten, jediwashuu, JayBat, equern, aliasalias, annan, greenomanic, renbear, anim8sit, Libby Shaw, DanceShaman, p gorden lippy, Bluerall, whaddaya, splintersawry, dankester, psnyder, Jim Domenico, Mickquinas, gharlane, Purplehead, Karl Rover, rantsposition, alnep, Woody, coral, jeopardydd, davidincleveland, SanFernandoValleyMom, auroreden, JamieG from Md, left of center, kurt, splashy

    ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

    by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 01:55:29 PM PST

  •  I don't have a problem talking about Social (51+ / 0-)

    Security cuts, or espousing them if they are needed.

    They are not needed. Gutting Social Security is nothing more than a wet dream of plutocrats who slaver over having the billions to be spent on helping the elderly and disabled live their lives with a modicum of financial security transferred "upward" to their own bulging offshore accounts.

    That's what should be said -- not that Social Security is "untouchable," but that there is no need for the cuts, and such cuts would only enrich the wealthy while doing nothing productive for the nation as a whole.

    •  SS is good thru 2090. thats it. Period. (37+ / 0-)

      Photobucket

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:31:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's not what your first table says, is it? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wader, sebastianguy99, yorkiedoglover

        Perhaps I'm not reading it right.
        According to that table, by 2035,  old age benefits will have to be reduced by 26%, and the Disability Insurance trust fund will run out of funds in 2016, and thus payments (I'm assuming it will depend on funds coming in from current FICA payments) will be reduced 21% .
        You think people planning on retiring in 2035 might want to fix that so that they get the full benefits they paid for, or do you not see a problem?

        “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

        by skohayes on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:50:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You got issues (22+ / 0-)

          That table you are looking at assumes 20 more years of recession. Is that realistic?

          25 years of recession would be the longest economic downturn since the Black Plague killed off half the humans on the planet 500 years ago.

          That table you are looking at assumes civilian workforce growth of .4% thru 2033 , no one sees that as being realistic, the BLS says .7% thru 2050. Not very realistic.

          The table you are looking at assumes a large U6 metric thru 2033, maintaining 15% or so U6 rates - essentially 25 million people without jobs, or full time or year round work. Not realistic.

          I told you to

           

          look very carefully for the footnotes.....
          And then I quoted the Trustees
          The Trustees estimate the Trust Fund will not be exhausted in the projection period.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:02:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Where are you finding that? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            misslegalbeagle, Justus

            Assuming 20 years of recession? And a growth of the workforce at .4%? There are three cost scenarios listed there- low cost, intermediate and high cost. I'm assuming you're getting your numbers from the high cost assumptions, and ignoring the low cost, but I would like to see what you're looking at.
            Also, while the trust fund won't be exhausted, even under the low cost scenario, old age benefits will have to be reduced in 2054. It is only the Disablility Trust fund and the OASDI that won't exhaust their funds, which does not include the Old Age and Survivors Benefits trust fund.
            That is the "b" footnote.

            “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

            by skohayes on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:48:58 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, Roger is absolutely correct (3+ / 0-)

              We are entering an economic scenario unprecendented in the history of humanity where we have to deal with the dual burdens of AGW (climate change for the unintiated) and peak oil.  We should feel very optimistic about the future growth of our economy under these restraints.

              Of course, I could be wrong and the religious zealots of the right wing could be right that all we need to do is "drill, baby, drill" and our economy will behave as if business is as usual.  

              Unfortunatley, as a reality based person I must admit that the trustees report seems overly optimistic in each of their scenarios of growth because they seriously underestimate the resources needed to combat climate change and the massive resources needed to transition to alternative energy.  In addition to that, they seem to think that re-paying the trust funds will not cause any negative repurcusssions to the economy.  

              Sure, nothing to see here.  Move along.

              We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

              by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:29:23 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Actually, we are near the tipping point on carbon (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Clem Yeobright, skohayes

                where renewables cost less. It is already extremely difficult for the industry to get new coal-fired plants funded. Some countries with less political insanity, without subsidies for carbon, and especially with a tax on carbon, have passed the tipping point.

                Bottom line: we get to save the planet and money at the same time.

                Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

                by Mokurai on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:00:29 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Wind is the cheapest new construction (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Clem Yeobright

                  LCOE over 30 years, 6.5 to 3.3 cents per Kwh. Solar is about 11 cents, trending down, and will catch up.

                  ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:04:55 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Details in this comment (0+ / 0-)

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:08:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  It'll need help and it'll need expanding, as the (0+ / 0-)

            fossil fuel rush (and colonialism rush) of the last 150 years wears off.  But it's not in immediate danger as the pirates claim.

            •  The more expensive fossil fuels get, the cheaper (0+ / 0-)

              labor is in comparison.

              This doesn't seem to click for a lot of folks.  There comes a point when shovels get cheaper than bulldozers, and employment skyrockets.

              income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

              by JesseCW on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:24:24 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  When we reach that point though, the 1% (0+ / 0-)

                don't expect to have to actually pay their "employed" serfs those quaint things called wages.

                There comes a point when shovels get cheaper than bulldozers, and employment skyrockets.

                When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                by PhilJD on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:37:04 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Fortunately this is not the case (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Clem Yeobright

                outside of India and other phenomenally low-wage countries. The true transition is when wind and solar cost less than carbon fuels. Some countries are already there.

                Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

                by Mokurai on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:02:26 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  "Fortunately"?? (0+ / 0-)

                  Sorry.  I come from the mindset that jobs are good things.

                  income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

                  by JesseCW on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:30:35 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Fixing it (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jeopardydd

          so that people get their full benefits can only mean increasing revenues.

          Cutting benefits so that people can get their full benefits is nonsensical. And cutting benefits now because we fear we might have to cut them in 20 years is even more nonsensical.

          If it needs fixing, it needs bringing in more money. We should start by raising the cap - not lifting it, because the idea that we will impose FICA on all earnings is pie-in-the-sky. If we can't even raise income taxes on the richest people by a few percent, what are the chances that we will raise them by 13%? And I wouldn't even want it if it could be imposed. Social Security is a worker-financed pension system and I think it should remain that way. But the cap should be higher.

          My two cents: building up the Trust Fund decades in advance of the boomer retirement was an idea that utterly failed. The money had to be invested in government bonds - there was nothing else that could really be done with it - but most people cannot grasp this. They think the Trust Fund doesn't exist because the money was lent out. Since people think the money doesn't exist, we might as well not have accumulated it. For the same reason, it is pointless to build up the Trust Fund now with money that we might need to pay out in 20 years. We should return to pay-as-you-go. If premiums need to be raised in 20 years, we can deal with it then.

          The Trust Fund is an abstraction that is too difficult for people to understand, and it therefore lends itself to political manipulation. It needs to return to its original purpose of smoothing out year-to-year finances. Using it to accumulate huge surpluses to be paid out in the far future does not work.

          We decided to move the center farther to the right by starting the whole debate from a far-right position to begin with. - Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

          by denise b on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:38:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  actually the table shows (7+ / 0-)

        the opposite of what you're trying to say.

        the table has the trust fund being exhausted in 7 of the 9 categories, most of which are exhausted by 2030.

        the only ones that fall under the footnote you're referring to are the low-cost DI and OSDAI.

        I'm with you that SS is important, vastly important, but to claim it's good to for for 75 years, that's just factually inaccurate.

        •  Anybody that has been reading the Trustees (4+ / 0-)

          report for any length of time would tell you that the diarist is..... shall we say, less than forthcoming.

          Overwhelming majorities support the SS system but Republicans try to scare their constituents into thinking that the system is a massive failure.  Meanwhile Democrats try to scare their constitutents into thinking that Republicans want to destroy SS.  

          IMO, for those of us that think that AGW is true and that we are entering peak oil, we need to realize that an entirely different paradigm needs to be envisioned to get us through the next century.   Unfortunately too many of us are invested in the left vs right/ Dem vs Repub paradigm to advance the discourse further.

          (PS It should be interesting to see what, if any, response you receive to your factual statement that SS is not viable for 75 years.  My guess is that you will receive "crickets" or a bullshit recital of what the trustees "actually" reports.  And don't forget that the Trustees report actually assumes that the trust fund is a real thing.  For those not paying attention, Al Gore's "lock box" never got implemented and that means that the system is in far worse shape than the Trustees can report.)

          We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

          by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:42:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  SO we should have kept the Trust fund in a (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            simple serf, Robobagpiper, JesseCW

            lock box,  you propose to put 2 or 3 or 4 (back in Gores Day) trillion dollars in a bank?

            If not US Treasuries, then in paper money?

            ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

            by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:04:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Too bad you havent looked over the (6+ / 0-)

          Selected economic variables,

          http://www.ssa.gov/...

          Immigration

          http://www.ssa.gov/...

          Labor force growth &  real GDP

          http://www.ssa.gov/...

          Compare these projections to CBO or BLS or Council of Economic Advisors. You'll find many the high cost and Intermediate cost assumptions unrealistic.

          But that is the job of an actuary.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:01:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Truer words were never spoken (36+ / 0-)
    Lets create jobs, raise the minimum wage, and watch the FICA roll in.
    Jobs and increasing the minimum wage will also reduce the debt/deficit and increase the GDP.

    Why are the simple solutions so hard to grasp?


    "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
    TheStarsHollowGazette.com

    by TheMomCat on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:18:25 PM PST

    •  Only thing wrong with SS is the economy (34+ / 0-)

      Anybody wants to touch SS they need to pound sand.

      Photobucket

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:33:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  They should be forced (14+ / 0-)

        to try and live on it for a year and get back to us.


        "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
        TheStarsHollowGazette.com

        by TheMomCat on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:46:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Where did the fucking money go? (15+ / 0-)

        I remember when Reagan and his merry pranksters convinced us to pay a higher payroll tax because of the demographic bomb of boomers who would all age at once. We said, "Uh, well OK, we don't like higher taxes, but we'll pay it anyway. We want to keep Social Security."

        So if Social Security is broke, or broken, or will be any time soon, some motherfucker needs to face an accounting. Or maybe an accountant.

        if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:47:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  :-) its all safe in the form of US Treasuries (10+ / 0-)

          And the chances are SS is good thru 2090.

          And if these mother fuckers start changing it a little bit now, SS wont survive thru 2090.

          Photobucket

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:16:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just a small nitpick (0+ / 0-)

            The fund is not secured through standard  US treasuries. Not the ones that can be sold on the secondary market. They are secured by notes. I believe the treasury is supposed to pay 3% interest on money that have borrowed.  I don't know if this is simple interest or compounding. I need to do some research but I believe that the notes that are in the fund are non-negotiable notes that can only be redeemed by the treasury provided the treasury is not being cash limited by congress.

            That to me has the making of a real problem. We have Dems and GOPers intent  on getting rid of the fund. The easiest way, is to have the treasury stiff us  on the notes while maintaining it's credit rating because it's not defaulting on the US Treasuries.

            Once trillions are involved and Wall Street has been given the keys to the treasury, for some odd reason, those notes don't reassure me. I would much prefer them to be the same US Treasuries the Govt sells to finance it's general debt. That way there can be no default.

            •  They don't want to get rid of the fund. They want (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              corvo, Dburn, p gorden lippy

              to force us to roll the debt over forever.

              They don't ever want us to cash it out. It's kind of a worse problem.  It's like you bought CD's to fund your retirement, and the banks swears those CD's are still yours, but keeps rolling them over and refusing to let you withdraw them.

              Meanwhile, the bank manager is giving himself car loans using your CD's as reserves.

              income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

              by JesseCW on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:39:09 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JesseCW

                It could very easily get that way now that the debt ceiling is being used as a hostage taking tool.

                It's hard to understand why though because it actually saves the govt money when they pay down Social Security debt with cheaper borrowings especially with short term treasuries which may have a coupon rate 250 Basis points less than the 3% rate.

                That is a crap load of money if they decided to pay it off and put it in a lock box. That's why it makes me crazy. Saving 2.5% a year on 2.4 trillion equals 60 Billion a year. That's about where the cash deficit is right now.

                It doesn't raise the debt ceiling as it they are just replacing social security borrowing (inter-Governmental) with public borrowing.

                On the other hand if one looks at the debt and sees 5-6 Trillion owed to other parts of the govt, it psychologically lets them breath a bit easier. It's the difference between owing money to the bank and owing money to a family member. Who gets stiffed first if the checkbook is near bone dry?

              •  BTW, Nice sig line (0+ / 0-)

                N/T

        •  All of the excess was forced into special (11+ / 0-)

          treasury bonds.  Now that SS is needing to redeem more of them than in the past, Congress doesn't want to pony up the money to cover the bonds that they purchased from SS.  The bonds went to pay for the 1%'s tax cuts and wars of choice.

        •  Here's the basic facts (0+ / 0-)

          The FICA tax took in more than was needed to pay for the benefits of current retirees.  The "surplus" was designated to buy securities so that the deficit would appear smaller than it truly is.  

          The days that that the system is running a surplus are soon to be over and then when they call in the securities they will realize there is no money there so it will cause our deficit to rise.   It's relatively basic economics.

          It was better for us when we were running the surpluses and now that we will soon be running deficits it will be worse for us.  But Republicans will say that those low tax years were an advantage to us and some Democrats will nod their heads saying that we are about to dip into the "trust fund" and that is no big deal.  Reality has a way to bite the idealogues in the ass.

          But, this is a somewhat ideolgical website and so many people will refuse to deal with reality and will instead argue as if Gore achieved his 'lock box".

          We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

          by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:56:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  See those Super-Carriers? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          corvo

          There's your Social Security.

          income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

          by JesseCW on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:36:21 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Super Carriers? (0+ / 0-)

            are you talking about military spending?

            if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 08:46:13 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You bet. The money was borrowed, and it was (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aliasalias

              blown on useless shit we have never had any legitimate need for.

              A nation needs super carriers and ballistic missile equipped submarines for its own defense like an individual person needs an assault rifle for their own defense.

              income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

              by JesseCW on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:36:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  "Hands Off Your Social Security" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JesseCW

        what it should say..thanks Roger, excellent.

        This machine kills Fascists.

        by KenBee on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:08:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Because their goal is to "Drown the Govt. in the (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      emal, ChemBob, cpresley, indie17

      ...bathtub, and to accomplish their goal, the GOP has to keep screaming their lies:  Deficit! Debt! Cuts needed! Govt. spending cuts necessary!  Etc.

      Despite the fact that these kinds of cuts in the UK (and other European countries) have dragged down the country’s economic growth, European leaders continue to impose more cuts, and US "leaders" are determined to impose cuts.

      Austerity has actually had the opposite of its intended effect in the UK, killing growth while not bringing down debt.

      In Greece, austerity (has) confined ferries to ports, shut schools and left hospitals with only emergency staff...

      ...Six years of recession and three of austerity have tripled the rate of unemployment to 27 percent. More than 60 percent of young workers are jobless...

      "I'm on the brink of going hungry. My life is misery," said Eleni Nikolaou, 60, a civil servant who supports her unemployed brother on her reduced wage...

      So far, that austerity has just brought misery to the people, and not had much effect on the debt, and a negative effect on the economy.  

      Anger at politicians and the wealthy elite has been boiling during the crisis, with many accusing the government of making deep cuts to wages and pensions while doing too little to spread the burden or go after rich tax evaders.

      Even the International Monetary Fund's economists admit that forecasters got it wrong when assessing the impact of sharp spending cuts in places like Greece, Portugal and Spain...

      "Forecasters significantly underestimated the increase in unemployment and the decline in domestic demand associated with fiscal consolidation..."

      The IMF now advocates fewer budget cuts in Greece and other recession-plagued countries...

      Obviously, the GOP isn't concerned about the US economy, or the misery that austerity--including cuts to Social Security--would bring to their fellow citizens.  

      All they care about is decreasing their taxes, and increasing their own personal wealth.  

      •  and Obama is giving them the tub (5+ / 0-)

        and the water at the expense of those who can least afford it.


        "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
        TheStarsHollowGazette.com

        by TheMomCat on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:51:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  people keep forgetting it was Obama who (3+ / 0-)

          threatened to veto any legislation out of the Super Cat Food Commission if it removed the triggered spending cuts and that had been proposed in the committee because these cuts were/are so drastic.
          It was no secret, I made calls to the Chairperson ,my Senator Patty Murray, and signed petitions for them to ditch the automatic cuts. They looked at how ugly the cuts were and just like his other CFC even Obama's latest stacked deck didn't pay off.

          In the meantime Obama goes around the Country blaming Republicans and of course certain people join that chorus about evil GOP forcing all the cuts.

          Also Obama and Congress could cancel the sequester (support Conyers Bill) but you don't hear him calling for that , no this is cover for his 'Grand Bargain' after setting into stone tax cuts for 400k and if that doesn't show his priorities nothing does .

          without the ants the rainforest dies

          by aliasalias on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:19:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've trusted nothing (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aliasalias

            this man had said since he ran for the Senate. His words and actions are very telling about his intentions. I'm certain that eventually Boehner will get 100% of what he wants because Obama wants it, too.


            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

            by TheMomCat on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:44:17 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Cuts were Made! So the Bigger Issue is Lost (24+ / 0-)

    Several years back, Congress got to thinking about ways to reform Social Security and so they moved the age requirement by which people can now get their full Social Security benefits up to Age 67.

    This means that my govenrment has reneged on the contract initially offered to me! When I joined the work force, some 40 years ago, i was told I wold pay in, and then I could have retirement at age 65. not 67, age 65.

    So this is affecting tens of millions of us Baby Boomers, as we have to figure out how to manage our health in order to say working till age 67. And do the math - while experts quibble over whether CPI cuts could be made at a rate of 1.3% or more, these two years means we Baby Boomers are losing out on 100 % times Two Full Years! Yet no one is mentioning this!

    Offer your heart some Joy every day of your life, and spread it along to others.

    by Truedelphi on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:20:19 PM PST

    •  This time they aren't even getting revenue (13+ / 0-)

      Yes, they've already broken faith with us once.  At least in that deal they did bring some more revenue into the program by raising the cap.  This time they are not doing that.  This is purely raiding Social Security to pay for the Iraq War and for the tax cuts for people making as much as $400K in taxable income.

      If they get away with using Social Security as a piggy bank for other purposes, they'll be back again and again.

      Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.  

      My letters go unanswered.  My calls are ignored.  I am not a fat cat with millions to pay you off.  All I have left is my vote and you will not have that again if you do this.

    •  No, you can still retire at 65 (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40, elwior, wader, Robobagpiper

      you just won't get full benefits if you do.
      Here's a good explanation: http://www.ssa.gov/...

      “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

      by skohayes on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:32:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I "retired" at 62, took the low amount (17+ / 0-)

        but will collect 5 more years of dough than those who retire at 67, my philosophy being you could drop dead any minute. Gimme my dough now.

        "He went to Harvard, not Hogwarts." ~Wanda Sykes

        Blessinz of teh Ceiling Cat be apwn yu, srsly.

        by OleHippieChick on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:05:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The math on this is interesting, IMHO (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          indie17, i dont get it, Truedelphi

          According to the linked site, if you have a full benefits retirement age of 67 and retire at age 62 your monthly benefit is reduced by 30%.

          Meanwhile, their actuaries claim that the life expectancy for people who retired in 2000 was 81 for males and 84 for females. So, lets assume that I live to 81 (since I'm a male, but I assume that OleHippieChick is either a female or a poultry farmer) and compare the outcomes.

          81-62 is 19 years of benefits at 70% of the rate, or the equivalent of 13.3 years at the 100% level. 81-67 is 14 years, you can see that you end up slightly worse off if you live to the expected age, but only by about 5%.

          The break-even point is 16.67 years of early retirement vs. 11.67 years of full retirement, or about 2.33 years shorter than average life expectancy. Clearly if you have an inkling about your particular chances based on health, family history, etc. you might well be advised to take one or the other based on that information.

          If you were to live to 90, in the early retirement scenario you collect 19.6 years worth of full benefits, but would have gotten 23 years of benefits if you had waited to 67. This turns out to be about a 15% reduction overall.

          Clearly, the goal is to retire early and die young :-)

      •  Thank you for making that clear. (0+ / 0-)

        People do need to know they can still get some of their benefit monies if they retire early.

        I was just too mad to point this out. I have so little faith left in the system. A few good people still out there - Jackie Spiers, John Garamendi, and Pete DeFazio. Most of the other "elected" people have sold the middle class out again and again.

        The ones at the top are shameless.

        Offer your heart some Joy every day of your life, and spread it along to others.

        by Truedelphi on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 05:13:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It was in 1983 (17+ / 0-)

      And our payroll taxes were also raised while our retirement age went up.

      This 'reform' was supposed to cover the boomer's retirement.  Now we're being blamed (again) even though, like you, I paid this increased payroll tax throughout my working life.

      you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

      by Dem Beans on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:56:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  As a child to you baby boomers (0+ / 0-)

      I'll offer that the historians will not be kind to your generation.  You whine about the government reneging on the deal they made to you but at every opportunity your generation (as a collective) screwed over future generations.  

      The two most obvious examples of this are the debt and our oil reserves.   If you want to refute me go ahead and do the following calculations.

      When you turned 18 what year was it?
      What was the national debt at that time?
      What was the national debt per capita at that time?
      What is the national debt now and what is the national debt per capita at his time?
      When you turned 18 what was the amount of carbon in the atmosphere and when was "peak oil" expected to hit?  What did your generation do to change the outcome?

      Now, if you think I am hypercritical of the boomers, I'll accept that interpretation although that is not my intent.  Because, while I am critical of your generation, I must admit that my generation's (Gen X) response has been woefully inadequate.

      But instead of getting into a finger pointing debate on who's generation is to blame, let's instead talk about how to move on from here.   I would like to do that but there is very little appetite to examine what has (or hasn't been) done and what to do next.  

      We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

      by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:49:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  cute. (7+ / 0-)

        Your first four paragraphs consist of finger pointing. Then your last paragraph says not to get into a finger pointing debate.

        To keep our faces turned toward change, and behave as free spirits in the presence of fate--that is strength undefeatable. (Helen Keller)

        by kareylou on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:31:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I believe I understand your point (0+ / 0-)

          but perhaps you could better understand what I'm saying with this analogy.

          In 2010, I could make the argument that we need to recover from the mistakes of the war in Iraq.  I could perhaps  make arguments about why Republicans were more to blame than Democrats and I could provide vote totals and arguments leading up to the war to prove my point, but the MAIN point would be how to correct the mistake of that war instead of assigning blame.

          I can understand how Republicans would view that as a cute way to assign blame for the run up to the war but that's not my point.  I am merely pointing out, as a matter of historical record, that Republicans were largely to blame for the Iraq war in much the same way that boomers are largely to blame for the deficits of the past 30 years and the policies that led us to our oil current consumption.

          If you want to say that the Republican boomers were more to blame than the Democrat boomers, ok, fine.  My point is that future generations will scarcely care whether they got screwed over by a person with an "R" or "D" by their names but they will remember which generation did it.  And to be frank, there aren't a lot of choices when it comes to the generations that ran up the deficits and burned through the oil and caused global warming.

          Yet another way to put it is, I don't necessarily blame white people for Jim Crow in the 1950's and 60's, if I were alive then I would merely ask for an ending of the policy.  With that said, it's pretty clear that white people instigated those policies, right?  I can understand why white people would view that as an unfair characterization of their group but a dispassionate view of the situation would, I believe, show that this was the case.

          So it is with deficits and global warming vis a vis the boomer generation although, admittedly, there is far more generational overlap in regards to these issues than there was to the white power structure and minorites in the decades of the past.

          Does that make sense?  Or do you want to argue that some other generations have been in charge of the US government for the past 30 years and they ran up the deficits and they pursued policies that led to AGW?

          We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

          by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:58:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Do us all a favor and stuff the generational blame (7+ / 0-)

            It has no place here.

          •  Thanks for the detailed answer (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            indie17, aliasalias

            This is essentially a dead thread, but I feel you went to an awful lot of trouble there, so I should reply.
                 I believe your logical fallacy is in assuming a parallel between a political party and a "generation". A political party is a definable entity. One can identify its members, and even more importantly, one must sign up to be included as part of the entity.
                 A "generation" is only definable by the dates between which the "members" were born. More importantly, one cannot decide to be a Boomer or a Millennial.  The only way to be inducted is to be born on a certain date.
                 I suppose you would label me as a Boomer. But believe me, I have not been in charge of anything. We all know who runs the country, who has been running it for quite some time, and it is not middle-aged unpartnered piano teachers with severe health problems. Yet you lump me in with George W Bush. I could as easily lump you in with mass shooters. After all, my generation didn't engage in such things to the extent that the new generation does. Yet that would never occur to me.  
                 You seem to be under the impression that it is a flaw in the DNA of our generation--if you and your friends had been born in 1958, as I was, you would have prevented global warming and the corporate takeover of our government. I just don't believe that.
                 I believe that humans are humans, beautiful and flawed, and that some of the beauty is places like this, where people of any age, type, etc, can come together and attempt to make the world better. We don't even know what groups others belong to unless they choose to share. That is why it is distressing to me when people try to divide our fragile coalition by, as you put it, "finger-pointing".  
                 

            To keep our faces turned toward change, and behave as free spirits in the presence of fate--that is strength undefeatable. (Helen Keller)

            by kareylou on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 07:17:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Boomers were out in force (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Roger Fox

            Protesting the Wars in Iraq, both in January 1991, and in January, February and March of 2003.

            So the debt from those wars cannot be blamed on those of us who are progressive. And more and more of EVERYBODY, all ages, all political backgrounds, are starting to realize how both Political Parties are  screwing over the Middle Class.

            In any event - the big deal about the deficit is this factoid - when Bill Clinton left office, January 20th 2001, the nation's budget was at a surplus in standing. It was the insistence on fighting against the people  of Iraq, combined with the collapse of the economy in late 2008 that has racked up so much debt. (And consider that the 2008  collapse  should be blamed on everyone in Congress and also Clinton, for their passing the Bank Reform and Modernization Act, of 2000, which eliminated Glass Steagall protections. of course, Clinton was offered his gig of getting some $ 100K per speech for that, so he came out alright.)

            Offer your heart some Joy every day of your life, and spread it along to others.

            by Truedelphi on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 07:23:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Hold on just a minute there, Sparky. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Clem Yeobright, indie17

        The boomers turned over the reins to GenX in 1979, when they turned 18, so everything from 79 to 1991 is their fault.  And of course, everything from 1991 - now is the fault of the millennials.  Because that's how you measure these things, right?  When your generation turns 18, they hand the country over to you and you get to run it as you see fit.

        Look what those damned kids have done to the country!

        Well, let's not point fingers about it.  Let's talk about how rotten those Gens Y and Z will probably be.  I'd like to do that, but this has worn me out, and I gotta go take my nap.

      •  When I turned 18 (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, aliasalias

        and began working soon after, my payroll tax was funding the Social Security of my grandparents who were born in the 1880's and my parents who were born in the 1920's (my mother is still living).  I will only begin to collect Social Security this year.

    •  Speaking of CPI cuts, I think I know what Chained (0+ / 0-)

      CPI is, but the diary also mentions "Superlative" CPI.  What is that?

  •  It does need reform... (15+ / 0-)

    The income cap needs eliminated, and all forms of income (including dividends, interest, capital gains) need to be taxed.

    •  What for? Do you want the rich to pay what they (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright, Ian S, Robobagpiper

      used to 40-50-60 years ago.

      Whats the policy goal, spoil a fine wage insurance plan?

      Create a 14k monthly check for some uber wealthy person who is retired and dont no stinking 14 grand per month.

      Or is it you just want to punish the rich.....and you admit SS is going to be fine thru 2090.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:28:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What? What are you talking about? (6+ / 0-)

        Lifting the cap is NOT the same thing as means testing which is what I'm getting from your rant.

        I get the drift of what you're saying but, quite frankly, this is kinda incoherent. As for "punishing the rich",  it's just an issue of equalizing the system. There's no reason that the income cap should not be raised.  None.

        •  Again, why do you want to lift the cap (4+ / 0-)

          What is the goal?

          Equalizing the system? Have you not heard of capital gains taxes, income taxes?

          TO paraphrase FDR, if we take nothing from capital we owe nothing to capital.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:11:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We need a financial transactions tax... (4+ / 0-)

            before we fiddle with SS and Medicare. That tax would not only raise revenue but would also discourage the kind of financial shenanigans that are detrimental to our economy. It's a two-fer!

            Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

            by Ian S on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:17:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  By the time Congress gets to consider a financial (0+ / 0-)

              transactions tax (It doesn't count unless it gets past filibuster,and gets hearing and such, no matter what Levin does) we should know something about how the newly enacted Euro financial transactions tax is working, the one they literally just put in. So far, the news is that since there are many markets without one, transactions are shifting from the yes tax to the no tax areas. e.g if GB has such a tax and Hong Kong does not, and both are trading centers, the trades get done through Hong Kong.

              •  Congress isn't going to consider ... (0+ / 0-)

                any new taxes. We're arguing over a moot point. What we need to do is cut "loopholes".

                More specifically, what we need to do is come up with very clever ways that we can call raising the tax rate on the rich "closing loopholes". (In fact, this is what Obama did when he raised the marginal rates. The higher marginal rates actually kick in at $300,000; it's just that the first $150,000 are called "phase-out of personal exemptions.)

      •  But Roger! BRIGHT SHINY OBJECT!!!! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        worldlotus, Robobagpiper

        I see MONEY over there! Let's TAKE it and call it ... I dunno ... how about 'Social Security'?

        You say WHAT? SS is a program of WAGE INSURANCE? Built on a foundation of (a) you pays in, (b) you doesn't die, (c) you gets back? And it's worked for 80 years like that?

        Well ... we can change that, can't we? You're sooooo .... 1930s, sooooo ... FDR!

        Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

        by Clem Yeobright on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:36:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with raising the income cap (0+ / 0-)

      or eliminating it.  Absolutely, everyone needs to pay in the same percentage of their income to Social Security at the very least.

      He that chooses his own path needs no map. Queen Kristina of Sweden.

      by Boppy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:31:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Are you sure you want to pull the pin (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        worldlotus, Robobagpiper

        out of that grenade and hand it to your grandchild?

        Don't do it. Leave Social Security alone.

        Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

        by Clem Yeobright on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:40:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  What's 'the pin'? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright

          In your prior 'bright shiny object' comment, you pointed out that it was a 'wage insurance' program, so what exactly is your objection to it being in place on all wages?  How exactly is the 106k cutoff 'sacred', especially since the cutoff has already changed over time, iirc?

          •  It's like this (6+ / 0-)

            The objective of SS is to insure income for all participants to the extent they have participated.

            If you are elderly and poor and did not participate in SS (personally or through a spouse) - you don't collect SS.

            Your benefit is proportional to your contributions. Put more in, get more out, on a monthly basis.

            The cap represents the maximum amount of wages you are permitted to insure.

            Currently, the maximum monthly benefit possible is about $3k. Raise the cap and the maximum benefit goes up - unless you change the nature of SS entirely, of course.

            Once SS is distributing monthly benefits of $10k and higher, the calls for means testing and benefit caps (i.e., abandoning the wage insurance principle) will become louder. Hell, you may hear my voice therein!

            And once Congress starts legislating the SS formula every session ... Social Security is no longer security, it's a welfare program.

            --------------------

            There are lots of ways to tax higher incomes, starting with ... the income tax. Income tax is not an insurance program, and it's legislated every session, isn't it? If income is escaping FICA over the cap, and we think that's unfair, let's very simply add a surtax to the income tax on income above that amount, with no commitment to deliver benefits calculated on that tax (note: not contribution).

            There are also issues with the fact that the largest SS benefits tend to be the ones that last the longest, i.e., those who contribute the most and receive the highest benefits are also those who collect for 30 years or more. So don't be positive that raising the cap on permissible contributions won't turn into a net drag on the system.

            Better?

            Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

            by Clem Yeobright on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:40:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um, when I last looked, the max was a bit under (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Clem Yeobright

              twnety five hundred bucks because of the bends, but do remember that anything over a total of 25K is taxable to the extent of half the SS payments and anything from SS over 34K or so, a bit more for couples, is taxed at 85%, and I am not aware that that has a COLA factor to the number, so it's not so clear the max is available in any event. 25K a year, the taxfree limit for singles is about $2080 per month.

  •  Great message! Now if only... (5+ / 0-)

    you would wrap the proper campaign contribution around it, they'll get right on it.

    /snark

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:22:29 PM PST

  •  Be nice if the leader of the Democratic Party (24+ / 0-)

    would come out with a forceful, passionate, unambiguous defense of the signature historic achievements of his Party.

    Instead we have a man who openly acknowledges he once would have been considered a moderate Republican... just another Austerian who pushes hard every chance he gets for "serious entitlement reforms."

    This is not our grandparents' Democratic Party.

    When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

    by PhilJD on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:24:35 PM PST

    •  SS was cut in 1983 (8+ / 0-)

      That's when congress, with plenty of democratic votes, raised the SS retirement age to 67, robbing us of two full years of benefits, that is two full years of life that we now have to try to hang on to a job. That was, literally, my grandparents' democratic party who voted for that.

      •  I'm not defending the Party. I've never once (3+ / 0-)

        described myself as--or considered myself to be--a "Democrat."

        At least though the Reagan-O'Neill Social Security cuts, unprogressive as they absolutely were, were in response to a real problem with long-term funding of the system. Something had to be done.

        Now though, urgent "reforms" on the off chance the system may be underwater in 30+ years?

        Please...

        Half the country will be literally underwater before then, but no one in the Village feels any urgency about addressing climate.

        When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

        by PhilJD on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:50:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I haven't actually heard anyone say that there's (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PhilJD, Jeffersonian Democrat

          any urgent need to reform SS now. The proposed move to chained CPI appears to be more like an offering, in an effort to get republicans on board with the grand bargain and raise taxes on the rich. It's Obama's way: "I'll do something that pisses off my party (chained CPI) if you will do something that pisses off your party (raise tax revenues)." It doesn't mean he agrees the thing that will piss off his own party is actually necessary. But he does believe it's necessary to give something we don't like in order to get republican cooperation.

          But in any case, losing a few dollars a month with this CPI change is nothing compared to losing two full years of benefits. And although I was too young to care or pay attention at the time, I feel sure there must have been other ways they could have addressed any long-term problems, without doing that.

          And I have to note that disgusting as it was, it did not lead to the end of the program, nor to the end of people voting for the politicians who did it, on both sides of the aisle. And of course they re-elected the president who signed it, the very next year in a huge landslide. Shocking, really. But that is why I have always thought that SS would never be there for me anyway, even if I manage to live long enough to theoretically collect it. It seemed inevitable that they would keep chipping away at it. Now that I'm only... cough... 13 years from age 67 (wow) I have more hope it will still be around.

          •  You might feel differently if you were one of (8+ / 0-)

            the majority of Americans who will retire with virtually no other income stream than SS...

            When 1% take 121% of the gains from "recovery", people actually recovering from lost employment are trading down on wages and benefits. Current strategies by moderates don't even consider winning the Class War.

            by Words In Action on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:53:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actually I will be one of those people, (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Jeffersonian Democrat

              if I make it that far. I could always win the lottery, I suppose, except I don't play it. So yep, looks like I will work til I drop, and try to figure out a way to keep my head above water once I can't work any longer if I don't drop in time to avoid that.

              We are looking into eventually forming a small co-op type of community with some friends, hoping we can all help and look after each other, basically. None of us has squat for money unfortunately. Nice assumptions, though.

            •  Also, it's not about how I "feel" anyway (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              worldlotus, indie17

              My comment was objective. I figured out the numbers earlier today, using the AARP calculator that someone here helpfully posted a link to, and discovered that under chained CPI I would see a reduction in my benefits of about $5500.00, spread over a 15 year period, if I stop working at 67 to earn full benefits, and lived 15 years to age 82. IOW, an average of around $30.00 a month.

              However, the 1983 cut took two full years of retirement benefits, which were reduced to zero, costing me not only two more years of my life either working or scraping for a job, but around $30,000 dollars!

              It has nothing to do with feelings, objectively that was worse by far. And it was passed by democrats along with republicans in congress. And the voters apparently didn't care. What the hell? I remember even then in my early 20s hearing about it on the news and feeling totally cynical about my future, and I became very cynical politics in general for many years to come. I never expected anything to be there for me when I got old. But most voters at the time were apparently fine with it, especially since St. Ronnie won a huge landslide re-election the next year. Why was that? I still wonder.

              •  The Hostage Crisis (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PhilJD

                had a lot to do with it.

                Funny how they were all freed the day Reagan was inaugurated, no?

                When 1% take 121% of the gains from "recovery", people actually recovering from lost employment are trading down on wages and benefits. Current strategies by moderates don't even consider winning the Class War.

                by Words In Action on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:02:07 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  If he was serious about raising taxes on the rich (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            nchristine, corvo, aliasalias

            He wouldn't have let people making up to $400K in taxable income off the hook when he made the Bush tax cuts permanent when he could have simply let them expire.

            I mean seriously can anyone believe they are going to close loopholes?  That's like when they tell you they are going to crack down on waste.  

            And even if they got some tax revenue, he's not directing it into the entitlement programs.  He wants someone getting $12K in Social Security to sacrifice so he can buy another drone or something.  

          •  actually (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PhilJD, aliasalias

            I'm losing $1,900 dollars purchasing power from my $3,400 (todays dollars) VA benefit over the next 20 years.  That, what, cuts my benefit that I live on by more than 50%?  I haven't bothered to figure it out for my SSDI

            But in any case, losing a few dollars a month with this CPI change is nothing compared to losing two full years of benefits.
            I agree that losing two years of benefits that you paid for is an outrage and hurts and was probably unnecessary - they probably could've grandfathered the people who were already in the system, but this cpi change isn't nothing either and affects far more than social security and it compounds much more than people realize, especially if people start getting benefits in their 20s, 30, and 40s like current wounded OIF/OEF vets

            Don't be a dick, be a Democrat! Oppose CPI cuts! Support Social Security and Veteran Benefits!

            by Jeffersonian Democrat on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:56:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  To be fair, I am a little sick and tired of people (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Penny GC, janemas, Boppy, worldlotus

      acting like the Democratic party and FDR of the 1940s were emasculate.  We had the Dixiecrats, which Roosevelt had to appease in order to get Social Security through by staying client about the lynchings going on in the South, which the NAACP still criticizes him about.  He also interimed the Japanese and denied a shit load of Jewish immigrants citizenship who were trying to flee Nazi Germany.  Now I liked FDR's domestic policies but please stop pining about the good ol' days of our grandparents party because it most certainly was not completely fair or progressive to everyone.  Also, after Kennedy and Johnson, we kept nominating school Democrats from Humphrey to McGovern to Dukakis and guess what happened to all of them in their elections?  People bitch about Clinton being the demise of the party, I find that statement to be so full of shit.  We had economic prosperity and job creation under him.  Was he perfect?  No, no Democrat is.  But maybe Democratic voters should've thought about that back in 1994 instead of sitting that election out and letting the GOP have control of congress from then until 2007?  And when did Obama ever say that he would've been a moderate Republican?  When?  Also you do know that the Chained CPI is A RePUBLICAN IDEA NOT OBAMA'S!!!  Do I want him signing onto a Chained CPI?  No, but I'm not going to sit back and pine for the good ol days.  in fact some in the party want to strengthen Social Security and the Daily Kos should be behind this idea 100%:

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      Why this diary isn't on the rec list but all the diaries screaming about Obama wanting to sell us out are?  Some times a change in attitude from "I'm angry about the state of everything" to a proactive get up and do something about it is want this community needs and if it needs a kick in the ass to do it, I'll do the kicking.  This community is so so so much better when it's in active mode instead of "boo too too, we're doomed" mode.

      Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

      by poopdogcomedy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:24:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Or our parents' Democratic party (9+ / 0-)

      My parents both went through the Great Depression.  I am on Social Security now (altho I started out on Disability a few years ago after my spinal fusion surgery that didn't take; I was switched over to SSI a year ago).

      This is the video you're referring to when Obama claimed he was more of a "moderate Republican."  I'd say he's more mainstream Republican..., otherwise he wouldn't consistently and predictably cave to the Repukes EVERY time, nor offer them "bipartisan compromises" before the Repukes even push back.  Too bad I am not a gambler.  I could have made a small fortune since '08 predicting Obama would cave to the Repukes EVERY time a sensible piece of legislation came up for a vote..., or never came up for a vote, such as the not-for-profit single-payer medical insurance program no one even proposed with the silly "justification" that no one from "the other side" would vote for it - like they could read minds; they just rejected any non-corporate plans out of hand.  The corporations won, of course.  First it was the oil, military-industrial-congressional complex, mercenary corporations, now it's the insurance, medical, and pharmaceutical corporations (altho insurance and pharmaceutical corporations started out with Medicare Part D - prescription insurance and being forced to buy private insurance for it - and the Bushistas' Medicare reform).  Corporations + government; can you spell f-a-c-i-s-m?

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.
      -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
      Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.
      -- Benito Mussolini
      See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.
      George W. Bush [Dumbya], May, 2005, when attempting to promote privatizing Social Security

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:36:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is bipartisanship in the 21st century (13+ / 0-)

    Not bipartisanship to save the middle class, to create new jobs, to solve our nation's problems, but to make sure the one percent will always get theirs while and everyone else gets scraps.

  •  The trick is (9+ / 0-)

    combining medicare (which does need to be reformed) with social security (which doesn't need to be reformed).

      There is all sorts of money in Social Security for Wall Street to loot.

    ¡Cállate o despertarás la izquierda! - protest sign in Spain

    by gjohnsit on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:35:14 PM PST

  •  Social Security isn't perfect (16+ / 0-)

    My mom collects SSI and pays taxes, that's funds leaking out of Social Security unnecessarily.

    •  Excellent point, no income tax on SS benefits (15+ / 0-)

      We need to make that happen.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:47:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Disagree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wader, NonnyO

        Not good policy to exempt a type of income from taxation.  Exempting Social Security payments from taxation would, in effect, be another tax cut for those with high incomes.  It does not seem appropriate to me to exempt SS income from taxation for someone with [arbitralily selected high income figure].

        If there is a problem with low income SS recipients paying more income tax than thought appropriate, then that would better be addressed by adjusting income tax brackets.

        •  Its only since 1984 that SS benefits paid income (3+ / 0-)

          tax.

          And its already taxed once, so you want to tax it twice?

          Exempting Social Security payments from taxation would
          Are you talking about FICA or benefits? Or do you know?

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:51:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Taxing it again seems dumb. (0+ / 0-)

            He that chooses his own path needs no map. Queen Kristina of Sweden.

            by Boppy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:33:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, SSI Old Age Pensions (0+ / 0-)

            That's what I am writing about.  If a person has income of say $500K/yr plus their Social Security income, exempting the SS income from taxation is a tax cut for them.

            As NonnyO explains downthread, if a person is scraping by with nothing but SS income, they aren't paying taxes on it now, anyway.  So exempting that income from income taxes is of no real value to that person.

            Exempt SS income from income tax=tax  cut for upper incomes.

            Also, explain how the person has been taxed on that money already.  No one paid FICA withholding into some savings account that they now draw out of.  

        •  Depends on the amount of SSDI (3+ / 0-)

          The income is low, and it's below poverty lines.

          By the time the standard deductions are taken out, the amount is too low to even file income taxes.

          If there is other income besides SSI that is high enough to be taxable when all amounts are added together, then what I said is nullified, of course.

          However, if a person is existing only on SSI or SSDI and has no other income, the total amount received is already too low to pay income taxes on - even before standard deductions are taken into consideration.  The taxes still paid are for merchandise purchased so state and local sales taxes (even federal taxes if they apply to whatever is purchased) are still paid, just not federal or state income tax.

          I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

          by NonnyO on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:54:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  VA compensation benefits have always (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Roger Fox, aliasalias

          been non-taxable.  If you lose a leg and the government compensates you for loss of work ability, you shouldn't have to pay taxes on that compensation for losing a leg in the line of duty.  That's fair and good policy

          Don't be a dick, be a Democrat! Oppose CPI cuts! Support Social Security and Veteran Benefits!

          by Jeffersonian Democrat on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:11:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  If she's on Medicare... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GayHillbilly, aliasalias

      ... she's also paying Medicare premiums.

      Medicare deductions come out of the SSI check before it's deposited in one's account.  Ditto with SSDI if the disabled person is getting Medicare.  We start paying Medicare premiums when we're in the working world and it continues after we have a SSI or SSDI income.

      Medicare insurance premiums do not stop, but it's a not-for-profit single-payer system..., that's actually functioning efficiently, believe it or not (altho Congress should put caps on the medical costs hospitals and clinics charge so people do not have to purchase supplemental insurance; that's all a big rip-off).  We were told prices increase for staff and equipment that's expensive, but at this rate those expensive machines have been paid for a few hundred times over.

      If everyone were allowed to buy into Medicare, there is no overhead to pay for [i.e. corporate executive bonuses and shareholder payouts, money does not go to offshore accounts], staff would have to be increased to handle the extra paperwork so government employees would have to be hired, which means jobs right here in America and FICA and income taxes flowing into the US Treasury, and an immediate impact on local economies as employed persons pay state and local taxes and buy groceries, gas for cars to go to/from work, new cars, clothing, small luxuries, new items for households and their family members, etc.

      The latter could be a win-win situation all the way around....  BUT corporations are standing in the way.

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:47:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  We sit here typing out our angst (24+ / 0-)

    and being ignored by Washington over and over as both Democrats and Republicans slash and burn our houses down.  If we speak out on the streets they spray us with tear gas, arrest us, and threaten us.  

    Being disabled and alone after working for 45 years and putting myself through college while trying to make in a trickle down ecomony and then a global ecomony and now a either your rich or poor ecomony, I tell you I've had enough.  Social Security now isn't covering everything and I have days I'm going without heat.  And I'm not alone, those of us that suffer are well hidden and only appear as someone in a thread begging for the cuts to stop.  There is nothing that is going to save the elderly, disabled, or homeless because that is the society our current politicians are creating.  

    I'm just trying to decide whether I truly want to stick around or not anymore.  And being cold for the last month and wearing my coat in the house continously is truly wearing me down.

    "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolution­ary act. " George Orwell

    by zaka1 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:38:04 PM PST

    •  Stick around, pls. (10+ / 0-)

      "He went to Harvard, not Hogwarts." ~Wanda Sykes

      Blessinz of teh Ceiling Cat be apwn yu, srsly.

      by OleHippieChick on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:08:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  People like me are fighting for you (9+ / 0-)

      fighting for a larger COLA, increase benefits by 5k. No income tax paid on FICA.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:47:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That is an excellent plan. (5+ / 0-)

        Benefits need to be raised by at least 5K and we need larger COLAs.  My God we went without any COLAs for two years and then we got like $17.00 extra dollars a check when we did get a raise.  Which did nothing.  How far does $17.00 dollars go at the gas station or toward food or an eye exam and glasses that is hundreds of dollars, not to mention the dentist.  

        Our government needs to end it's corruption and destruction of its own people.  Because at this point our government is more of a danger to us because they have lost their control over corporations, banks, and a balanced ecomony.  And they think they can blame us for their inability to govern.  They are not here or paid to control the poor, elderly and sick by stealing from them and giving more to the corporations and banks.  It is all wrong.

        "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolution­ary act. " George Orwell

        by zaka1 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:41:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Establish a min SS benefit (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright, worldlotus, zaka1, indie17

          My worst case scenario is to raise the cap to the 90th percentile of income, currently the cap is at 84%. This would raise the max benefit by about 5-6k, from about 31k to 36k.

          Removing the cap opens up a can of worms, details of which I've already posted a few times here tonight.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:14:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  A 5 or 6k (2+ / 0-)

            raise in social security would only bring it up to about $20,000.00 a year.  Where are you getting the 31K to 36K?  Most of us are getting $1,250.00 a month if we are lucky and that is about $14,000.00 a year, and if your lucky a little bit more.  But, I don't know anyone bringing in over $16,000.00 from Social Security.

            Did you know that social security is that low and for most women (and men as well) whom have been cheated out of decent pay and retirement this is all they will have to live on and are living on.  Too many people are facing real difficult lives and some that have been laid off since 2008 and not rehired due to age are going to face even worse conditions without any kind of retirement.  

            Seriously there are a lot of Americans in serious trouble and all being ignored by Washington.

            "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolution­ary act. " George Orwell

            by zaka1 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:45:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  max benefit is almost 31k (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Clem Yeobright, zaka1

              The average is about $1229 a month, about 14.7k

              My step dad gets 28k a year.

              Anyway, raising the cap higher (90%?) could raise the typical benefit about $2,500. This years COLA was IIRC 3.6%?

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:02:46 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm 62 yrs old on SSI, I get $710.00 a month (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Roger Fox, zaka1

                Yesterday when I went to the Food Bank I had a car full of people and only one of them has an address even tho all are on either SSI or SSDI (2 of them told me they get more than I do).

                I'm also on Food Stamps (debit card) as were two of the people riding with me and like me if they don't hit the food bank  a few times what they get doesn't make it thru the month (I get $138.00 a month btw).

                I guess if my income was 400k per year I would be worthy of attention by this administration, but not so because draconian cuts are being used to attack people like me, the people in the car and the people in the line at the food bank.

                without the ants the rainforest dies

                by aliasalias on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:49:50 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sigh, SS benefits need to be increased (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  zaka1, aliasalias, Clem Yeobright

                  We can do that, and maintain solvency. Its the right thing to do.

                  Thanks for your comment, its a heart wrenching truth.

                  ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:56:44 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Again, (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                aliasalias, Roger Fox

                I think this is the result of men making more money than woman.  And there is still a problem with many single/divorced women who will only get a small amount of social security to support themselves

                "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolution­ary act. " George Orwell

                by zaka1 on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:09:33 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  We are not getting anything we need... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AnnieR, Boppy

    No Social Security

    No Jobs

    No Education.....snacks

    just what we need... More and Worse Republicans

    by snacksandpop on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:39:03 PM PST

  •  Roger, you know what I'm going to be promoting (9+ / 0-)

    and that's the Protecting & Preserving Social Security Act of 2013, it protects SS and strengthens it:

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    I want the Daily Kos to endorse this.  I'll be messaging them all week if I have to.

    Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

    by poopdogcomedy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:49:03 PM PST

    •  might not be the diary you want to show up in (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright
      This diary and its lack of respect is for you.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 02:52:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  ? (0+ / 0-)

        Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

        by poopdogcomedy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:06:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No offense, read the diary (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright

          I'm ranting against folks who want to remove the CAP.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:45:40 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  But Begich's plan calls for lifting the cap so (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Words In Action, NonnyO, wader, aliasalias

            rich people pay more into it.

            Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

            by poopdogcomedy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:49:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sigh I know that. But as I have posted 100's (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Clem Yeobright, kareylou

              of times, SS doesnt need that.

              The only thing wrong with SS is the economy.

              This diary is not the blogathon, as an ally I'm telling you that.

              Removing the cap is a can of worms, it creates a 14k check for some uber rich person, if you cap that benefit, you just made welfare, and the EITC was passed to reward work by making FICA less regressive. Removing the CAP makes FICA a flat tax, no more EITC if the GOP gets its way.

              I'm a SS purist. But in general terms we're allies.

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:03:50 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Ummmm... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                wader, corvo

                When you say,

                The only thing wrong with SS is the economy.
                It's like saying,
                The only thing keeping us from living under water is that we can't breath there.
                The economy is the environment within which Social Security lives. In order to say no changes are necessary, you need to provide a way to fix the economy. You haven't done that.

                Or you can assume that our economy will improve. These days, I have to wonder about that assumption.

                It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

                by Fishgrease on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:00:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  SO you are predicting 20 more years of recession? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Clem Yeobright, indie17

                  cause thats what it will take. On the other hand if GDP averages 2.8% SS is good thru 2090. Most experts agree that 3 to 3.5% averaged over 10 years or more is realistic, that the age of 4-5-6-8% GDP growth is gone.

                  2.8% GDP growth over 20-30 years is a moderate assumption.

                  20 more years of recession and there wont be a banking system to handle the SS benefits checks we're talking about. You'll be worry about planting seeds in spring to get a good crop in. There wont be cell phone service or an internet.

                  Serioulys, think this thru before you say it it loud or post it on the internet.

                  ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:09:25 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I can believe we'll be about here (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    corvo

                    for another 20 years, perhaps worse. Should we be? With you and me in charge? No. But we didn't vote for two wars we couldn't pay for and we won't vote for the next two.

                    Our economy is failing.

                    If it does turn around, when? Next year? No one thinks that. If it does, then fine, I agree, SS can stay as it is.

                    Don't see what harm there is in raising or eliminating the cap in case we don't see a good economy soon. Which we won't.

                    It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

                    by Fishgrease on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:43:53 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  And this? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    corvo
                    Serioulys, think this thru before you say it it loud or post it on the internet.
                    Fuck. Get over yourself. I'm not the only person with a pessimistic view of the next few decades' USA economy.

                    Your entire premise re: Social Security depends on 20 years of growth. Did you think about THAT before you posted it on the internet?

                    It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

                    by Fishgrease on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:48:09 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  I still agree with raising the cap. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wader

              He that chooses his own path needs no map. Queen Kristina of Sweden.

              by Boppy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:34:58 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Chained cap!! (0+ / 0-)

                We should index the cap to the median wage. Or perhaps average income.

                To keep our faces turned toward change, and behave as free spirits in the presence of fate--that is strength undefeatable. (Helen Keller)

                by kareylou on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:40:14 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  IIRC Currently it is Average income (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  kareylou

                  Which doesnt account for increased income disparity.

                  This is why the cap in 1984 was at 90% and now its at 84%. $215,000 vs $113,700.

                  ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:13:56 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Oh. (0+ / 0-)

                    me and my bright ideas.

                    To keep our faces turned toward change, and behave as free spirits in the presence of fate--that is strength undefeatable. (Helen Keller)

                    by kareylou on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 07:19:29 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Right intention though (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      kareylou, Clem Yeobright

                      In 1984 the cap was set at 90th income percentile, today its at 84%.

                      Today 90% is about 215k, 84% is 113k. Raising the cap a little bit is how Seniors got a COLA this year. The cap went from 110k to 113k a 1.7% COLA.

                      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                      by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:54:05 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

              •  "But Honey, it SAYS no payments until 2014!" (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Roger Fox

                "How can that be bad? Let's re-furnish the whole damn house!"

                Sometimes what looks good is really awful, you know. Sometimes it's just necessary to do the math, no way around it.

                Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

                by Clem Yeobright on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 04:51:22 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  I'm sure that's going to help win people over n/t (0+ / 0-)

        "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

        by wader on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:38:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I tipped and Recc'd that and I agree with getting (0+ / 0-)

      Daily Kos to push for that. Good work.

      without the ants the rainforest dies

      by aliasalias on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:30:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Democrat here' and SS needs to be revised. (6+ / 0-)

    Remove the cap and give our seniors a raise.  It's a disgrace how little they get, some having to receive food stamps just to eat.  It's a national disgrace.  I'm sick of the rich and their enablers in congress having all the say.  There's way more of us than them.

    "They love the founding fathers so much they will destroy everything they created and remake it in Rush Limbaughs image." MinistryofTruth, 9/29/11

    by AnnieR on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:05:19 PM PST

    •  What is the goal of removing the cap? Why on earth (4+ / 0-)

      Lets start with Seniors no longer pay income tas on SS benefits, thats a good deal, lets get it passed thru Congress.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:08:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  increasing the $$$ that go into the fund, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wader, Words In Action, aliasalias

        is a good starting place as far as I can see.  Increase the monthly benefit follows.  I know a 90 year old who is getting so little that food stamps are essential for this person to be able to eat.  This is not acceptable.  Sorry.

        "They love the founding fathers so much they will destroy everything they created and remake it in Rush Limbaughs image." MinistryofTruth, 9/29/11

        by AnnieR on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:17:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ok raise the cap to 90% income percentile (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          worldlotus, indie17

          right now the income cap is at 84%.

          About a 20% COLA.

          Repeal income tax being paid on SS benefits.

          Removing the cap is a can of worms, it creates a 14k check for some uber rich person, if you cap that benefit, you just made welfare, and the EITC was passed to reward work by making FICA less regressive.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:43:31 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Yeppers. (3+ / 0-)

    Nice timing!  I sent this out on FB about an hour ago :)

    To all my FB friends:
    First- please keep in mind that I care for all of you;
    Second- understand that it is important to me that all of you are well, in good health and have the opportunity to do what it is that you feel is important;
    Third- I have always been (once I woke up- thank you George Carlin) progressively political. For the sake of peaceful discourse, I have not always said what is burning in my chest. That changes today. The fact that Social Security is being put on the table as part of the 'sequester' negotiations is obscene. The whole 'sequester' concept in it's entirety is obscene. The fact that the same people who were directly responsible for crashing the economy and putting us in the position where unscrupulous operators have the opportunity to present obscenities like the 'sequester' as 'responsible and sane' solutions are 1. not in jail (nor has there ever been the remote possibility of them ever being held accountable for their actions) and 2. Back to making money hand over fist at the expense of the rest of the population is obscene. I cannot with good conscience watch these people quite literally take food out of the mouths of those that I care care for, simply to feed their own voracious, unending, rapacious greed.
    Fourth- You are going to see a change in the frequency and subject of my postings. There will be a lot more political and more unapologetically progressive posts from me. Given the respect that I have for all of you, I hope that you would give them a moment of your time. If not, that's OK too, that's the wonderful virtue of this country and the free speech we enjoy.
    Fifth- Again, hugs to everybody:)
    Sixth- As individuals and as a country, we are in for some turmoil over the next few years. I wish good fortune to us all!
    See you on the front lines-
    Shout it loud!!

    "Life is too short for front-wheel drive." -Sabine Schmidt

    by nhox42 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:10:00 PM PST

  •  It's nice to have another ally. Great Diary. n/t (4+ / 0-)
  •  Social Security... (15+ / 0-)

    Was founded at the height of our worst national financial crisis.    During the 1980's it was changed from a Pay-go system to a surplus system.  So for over 25 years, it has been bringing in more revenue than it has paid out.  Millions of people rely on it for their only means of survival.  Now, all of sudden, we have to change it?  Bullshit.

    'Guns don't kill people, video games do - paraphrased from Lamar Alexander (Sen-R-TN)'

    by RichM on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:26:04 PM PST

  •  The only thing that needs to happen (4+ / 0-)

    Is to lift the contribution cap. Time for the rich to pay the same percentage of their income that the rest of us do. Thank you for the post.

    "Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for a real Republican every time." Harry Truman

    by MargaretPOA on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:39:26 PM PST

  •  Obama working for 1% on Social Security (8+ / 0-)

    Republicans have been after SS since it was first introduced.

    Recent video of income inequality shows it would not only be wrong, but immoral to cut SS

    but that is what the 1% wants

    it would not be PC to say that their goal is to make us slaves

    but they have made most Americans share croppers

    jobs down, income down, taxes up (shifted tax burden to us), etc.

    1% Want To Steal Your Social Security, Pres. Obama Is Helping Them

    excellent diary from last May with the title above

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    •  What happened to the fanbois? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roger Fox

      They're usually out on the attack. Can't say I miss them, but it's weird not having them do their thing. Perhaps the admins finally dealt with them. If so, hooray. They certainly made it unpleasant to have frank discussions here.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bit of history (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kovie

        I like to post the link to KOs's diary about behavior in group diaries, this is a group diary, and according to Kos he will tolerate dickishness the least in group dairies.

        But that also means I dont go into fanbois dairies and shit on the floor.

        Its a good deal I'll take it.

        ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:01:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fine by me (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Roger Fox, Jeffersonian Democrat

          I didn't appreciate their hijacking such diaries or discussions they didn't care for, so perhaps his get tough on blah blah policy is working. Thing is, they aren't getting many diaries on the rec list these days so there's nothing to hijack on their end even if we wanted to. Not that I want to.

          I want this site to be as reality-based, substantive and civil as possible.

          Which obviously ain't for everybody.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:06:40 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I assume when the President (6+ / 0-)

    and Democratic leadership say they're going to cut Social Security--er, excuse me, "reform" Social Security--that they intend to support Rep Conyers' Full Employment bill, funded by a transaction tax on Wall St.

    if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:45:05 PM PST

  •  Democrats must have a death wish. (6+ / 0-)

    They just refuse to let the Republican Party die first.

    When 1% take 121% of the gains from "recovery", people actually recovering from lost employment are trading down on wages and benefits. Current strategies by moderates don't even consider winning the Class War.

    by Words In Action on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:47:47 PM PST

    •  in Rahm Emanuel's words "where they gonna go?" (0+ / 0-)

      I've posted that a few times but it's important because as long as the Dems have some scary Republicans to run against the duopoly is safe. Yes Sen. X voted for that horrible 'X' legislation, refused to support 'X', backed the odious 'X', etc. etc. BUT the crazy Repub is talking about 'legitimate rape!' or the '47% takers/moochers', death panels etc. so I gotta vote Dem!
      We are screwed.

      without the ants the rainforest dies

      by aliasalias on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:01:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tavis Smiley and Cornel West v. Alice Rivlin (6+ / 0-)

    Yesterday -- on Smiley & West, a show I had no idea exists.

    Who is the Democrat? Not Rivlin. She keeps repeating the nonsense of Pete Peterson and the Very Serious People about Social Security. Smiley and West were having none of it. She accused them of setting up strawmen while it was clear that she had an entire straw village to work with.

    Social Security does need some changes in funding, but there is no valid reason to change to chained CPI. If there should be a change, the index should be one that is the greater of CPI-Older Adults (not currently tracked) or average income.

    To pay for that, the survivors and disability portion should go onto general revenue and be paid for by a surcharge on investment income (dividends and capital gains).

    Americans can make our country better.

    by freelunch on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:49:23 PM PST

  •  Virtual rec and tip, Roger (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action, 3goldens, Roger Fox

    My work browser doesn't play well with DK4.

    Well done, sir.

    The "extreme wing" of the Democratic Party is the wing that is hell-bent on protecting the banks and credit card companies. ~ Kos

    by ozsea1 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 03:49:37 PM PST

  •  Republicans have been allowed to get away (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, Roger Fox

    with turning blatant falsehoods into accepted "truths" for so long, even liberal seem to have given up sometimes.
    This is the perfect example of the Republican lie machine having been successful in perpetuating one of the biggest lies of all time...that THE most successful government-run program in world history...Social Security...is in trouble and/or causing problems with our debt.

    The problem is that they are right in saying that adjustments may need to eventually be made to sustain the program long-term, but they've taken that bit of information and blown it so far out of proportion that most even so-called legitimated so-called "journalists" buy into it.

  •  Only under the "low cost" assumption do the trust (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens

    funds never become exhausted.

    Let's play it safe and remove the cap. Even if that means the rich get bigger Social Security, so be it; that won't really hurt the system overall.

    "... because of increasing earnings inequality, the percentage of covered earnings that are taxable has decreased from 90% in 1982 to 85% in 2005. The percentage of covered earnings that is taxable is projected to decline to about 83% for 2014 and later. ... [I]f the maximum taxable earnings amount had been raised in 2005 from $90,000 to $150,000—roughly the level needed to cover 90% of all earnings—it would have eliminated roughly 40% of the long-range shortfall in Social Security."
    Source: summary of: "Social Security: Raising or Eliminating the Taxable Earnings Base", CRS, September 24, 2010; available at http://aging.senate.gov/...

    Furthermore, the table on page 13 of that document shows that eliminating the cap would remove 95% to 115% of the long-term shortfall, depending on how it is implemented.

    •  Listen up pal you got issues (0+ / 0-)

      2033 is based on hugely unrealistic assumptions, of which, I'll bet a cup of coffee you know nothing about.

      This is a topic I know by heart, I've read every trustees report since 2005. Heres the nutshell version.

      Photobucket

      That table you are looking at assumes 20 more years of recession. Is that realistic of you?

      25 years of recession would be the longest economic downturn since the Black Plague killed off half the humans on the planet 500 years ago.

      That table you are looking at assumes civilian workforce growth of .4% thru 2033 , no one sees that as being realistic, the BLS says .7% thru 2050. Not very realistic of you.

      The table you are looking at assumes a large U6 metric thru 2033, maintaining 15% or so U6 rates - essentially 25 million people without jobs, or full time or year round work. Not realistic, not at all.

      Lets play it safe and create 20 or 25 million jobs, and raise the min wage.

      Do you know what the 90th income percentile is today in 2013? DOnt look it up, just gimme an answer.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:24:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I have said it before (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox, Don midwest, aliasalias

    I have received some flack from some when I warn folks not to believe a word that comes out of Obama's mouth. He only said what he wanted us to belief so he could get elected and fulfill his agenda of pleasing republicans. Obama is selling the elderly down the river to please republicans rather than putting more responsibility on  millionaires and billionaires.

    The Democratice Senate needs to tell Obama he is out of luck when it comes to messing with SS, medicare and medicaid. If the Senate supports kicking the elderly to the curb, we need to kick the Senators to the curb and  into the unemployment line.

    •  From your mouth to the Senate switchboard (0+ / 0-)

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:56:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, start with the House (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kareylou

        That's where most of the Obstructicans are. And we could (conceivably) get rid of ALL of them next year instead of just one-third of them.

        Not likely, I know, but I can dream, can't I?

        If it's
        Not your body,
        Then it's
        Not your choice
        And it's
        None of your damn business!

        by TheOtherMaven on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:25:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well......... good point, the HOUSE GOP it is (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          aliasalias



          "Hands Off My Social Security"






          I suggested that it had been a mistake to levy these taxes in the 1930’s when the social security program was originally adopted. FDR said, “I guess you’re right on the economics. They are politics all the way through. We put those pay roll contributions there so as to give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their pensions and their unemployment benefits. With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my social security program. Those taxes aren’t a matter of economics, they’re straight politics.”







          Link - feel free to post on your Facebook pages.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:14:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I am also against Chained CPI. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brown Thrasher, kovie, rolet, aliasalias

    This calculation would create a decrease in benefits.

    He that chooses his own path needs no map. Queen Kristina of Sweden.

    by Boppy on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 04:36:12 PM PST

  •  Is this (6+ / 0-)
    Stop it, stop saying Social Security needs reform, you are a Democrat, right?
    Is this a trick question for the White House?  

    Forget the GOP.  The reality in this is it's the White House who's hot to cut Social Security via their chained CPI, pardon me, superlative CPI.  By the way, if "superlative CPI" doesn't catch on, what's next?  The "super-duper CPI"?

    Republican acting like Republicans don't worry me one GD'd bit.  It's the White House and Obama's dream of a "grand bargain" that scares the hell out of me.  

  •  But... but... but... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox, corvo, aliasalias

    Shouldn't we be the caucus of sanity, here!  Maybe if we bargain away part of SS and Medicare for generations to come, we can trick those Republicans into raising revenue a tad for some chump change!

    Or maybe we could trade it for a magic bean.  I've heard those things are a goldmine.

  •  How you KNOW they're lying (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kovie, Roger Fox, Don midwest

    In a CSPAN interview on July 29, 2011, Bloomberg editor Peter Coy claimed Social Security had a long-term deficit of $211 trillion. But, the chart he brought with him showed a net SURPLUS of $22 trillion, the CSPAN moderator pointed out.  For what must have seemed like an eternity to Coy, he stumbled for an explanation, then said he would have to research it and provide an explanation at his next interview. But, he made no mention of it at his next interview--and a different person interviewed him.

    You could view the CSPAN interview yourself; but apparently that video isn't available anymore.  Pretending to be surprised.

  •  People worked all their lives (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rolet, Roger Fox

    for ss.  They are not mooching off the next generation.

  •  I'm a registered Republican so perhaps I can be (0+ / 0-)

    excused from being portrayed as Democrat that is falling for GOP talking points.  So with that said, I don't want to destroy SS (or Medicare) but I want to strengthen both and make it fair for today's seniors, boomers, my generation (gen-X) my kids, and future generations.

    So let's look at the chart you present.   Under "intermediate" assumptions when does DI exhaust?  When does OASI exhaust?  Given the sequester implications are those results plausible or optimistic?   Given AGW do we need to reduce economic activity or do business as usual (BAU)?  When calculating those exhaustion dates do they assume that tax rates will rise to re-pay the money that has been borrowed from the SS trust fund?   If they don't, what happens to the deficit?

    PS Go look at some Bruce Webb diaries.  He argues that future generations are actually better off than current retirees under the present system.  I don't believe he is factual but if he is correct then cutting benefits for future retirees makes abundant sense and no one can confuse him for anything but a progressive.

    We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

    by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:16:24 PM PST

    •  What does SS have to do with the deficit? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roger Fox, Fishtroller01, aliasalias

      Just because Bush misspent the trust fund like a drunken sailor doesn't put SS in the red. The government still owes SS that money and it's going to have to pay it back even if it means raising taxes on those poor "job creators" who've been suffering all these years. The deficit is SO not SS's problem.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:41:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Kovie, I would argue that your argument (0+ / 0-)

        is similar to people hypothetically arguing on the Titanic saying "what do icebergs have anything to do with this voyage?"

        To date, the surplusses of SS have reduced our deficits.  In the near future, they will do the opposite.  Is that not your understanding?  If not, what do you think happened to the "surplusses" in the FICA taxes?  Now that we are about to go negative in regards to the balance of SS reciepts and SS payments, what is your understanding of the impact on the national deficit?

        We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

        by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:09:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That SS had nothing to do with it--NOTHING (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Roger Fox, Fishtroller01, aliasalias

          Is it my fault that the bank I deposit my money at misspends it and goes into deficit as a result? They still owe me that money and I expect every last cent of it back, plus interest, and I could give a rat's ass which exec's bonus gets docked to make it happen. I'm dead serious. I don't care if they have to jack up top marginal rates to 70% and double the CG tax, that trust fund is gold and it's going to be paid back, PERIOD.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:18:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  In an ideal world, you are correct. (0+ / 0-)

            Of course, in an ideal world there would have been no slavery nor a holocaust.  But we don't live in an ideal world.

            The SS surplusses reduced the deficit of the past 25 or so years.  The SS deficits are going to balloon the deficits in the future.  That is reality and I don't understand the point of arguing against reality.  As I recall, math doesn't have a political orientation.

            And just to be clear, you exactly made my point.  The trust fund will (likely) be paid back and that will lead to increased deficits.  To close those deficits we may need to, as you suggest, raise taxes on either income or capital gains but you just proved my point regarding the impact of SS deficits in the future.

            It's a hollow victory that you proved my point but we do need to get serious about the implications of this reality.

            We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

            by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:36:44 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  There IS no SS deficit!!! (5+ / 0-)

              It has enough to cover its outlays for at least 20 years, and most likely well beyond that. It's the government that's in deficit and SS has ZERO to do with it, just as it had nothing to do with those surpluses. Where do you get these RW talking points? If I'm in deficit it doesn't go down just because I got a big loan. It just got shifted forward a bit but it's still there. The SSTF was a LOAN, not revenue. And, again, I give a rat's ass how it's paid back. It HAS to be paid back. Are the T-bills we sold to China also part of the deficit? No, the spending we sold those T-bills to finance was.

              "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

              by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:54:43 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  2.6 trillion over 20 years is not ballooning (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              indie17, aliasalias

              Thats 130 billion a year, less than 1% of GDP.

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:12:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  I never suggest raising taxes to close a deficit (0+ / 0-)

              You raise taxes to decrease income disparity. I am a Keynesian.

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:48:06 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Nothing, for decades those treasuries (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          indie17

          get replaced with other treasuries. In this case some Treasuries have higher rates of return, and will be paid for by Treasuries with much lower rates, so thats a really good deal for the Government.

          AS far as the Titanic, its was corruption, the high quality steel rivets were replaced by low quality Rivets, it is entirely possible that if the Titanic was built properly she would have survived. See RMS Olympia.

          http://news.softpedia.com/...

          http://www.titanicuniverse.com/...

          http://www.writing.eng.vt.edu/...

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:25:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  You do realize the Boomers are dead by 2062? (0+ / 0-)

      SO instead of 3 people supporting one retiree, 6 or 7 people will be supporting one retiree.

      DO you understand what that means?

      It means Bruce Webb is correct, and your cognitive ability is unable to understand why......

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:52:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Two points (0+ / 0-)

        Bruce is well informed on these subjects and I admit he may be right and I'm wrong.  I don't think so but intellectual honesty requires me to say he might be right and that I'm wrong.  Data and analysis will eventually decide the matter, and I'm fine with that.

        Secondly, we recently had a mini-debate over chained CPI.  If Bruce is correct, that would mean that changing the calculation is a no-brainer.  Bruce argues that future generations of Americans will be better off under a 75 percent reduction in promised benefits as compared to current retirees.  If that is the case, then changing the CPI calculation doesn't harm future retirees vis a vis current retirees.  

        So if you accept Bruce's argument the irrefutable argument is that you can change CPI and future retirees will be better off than current retirees.  So which is it?  Is Bruce right that you can cut benefits by making a CPI change and do so in such a way that the benefits that future retirees actually receive are actually higher than current retirees or is Bruce factually wrong?

        We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

        by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:22:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Link ? (0+ / 0-)

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:27:44 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Are you asking for a link to Bruce being well (0+ / 0-)

            informed or are you asking for a link to Bruce stating that future generations will be better off under the current system, even with a 75 percent reduction (which is the current expected impact under current law)?

            Bruce's writings on this topic are easily accesible via the search function on this website regardless of which angle you are requesting the link to.

            But before you search, it would be interesting to hear your opinion on the subject.  I submit that SS is a worthwhile system that should be fair to all generations.  Bruce says that even if no changes are made to the system and future generations are only paid 75 percent of what is promised that those generations are better off than current retirees.  

            Assuming that I have accurately described the argument, where do you stand?  

            (For the record, if Bruce is correct, I would actually be happy.  I'm not out to screw my parents generation out of their SS.  But the math seems to indicate that my parents (boomers) are better off than my generation (Gen X) and we are better off than my young kids and their posterity.)

            We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

            by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:51:05 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I dont think you've (0+ / 0-)

              accurately described what Bruce was writing, it makes no sense to me and Bruce always makes sense to me.

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:55:25 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I would suggest you read Bruce a little more close (0+ / 0-)

                then.

                Here's a quote from him:

                "Which does raise a little complication to the neat black and white story of the Defender. Because when you combine the two graphs and run the numbers the end result, even if we do Nothing and have the gramma of 2035 take a 25% overnight cut in benefits both she and her daughter of 2060 STILL end up with a bigger slice of pie than 2012 gramma"

                That's a quote from his diary from Dec 31st of last year.

                So, after the first reading, you ignored my question and went into denial mode.  Can you please answer the question and then we can deal with the issues of whether my description of what Bruce says is true?  

                You can couch your argument in hypothetical's if it is intellectually easier on you.  For example, you could say, "hypothetically speaking, if Bruce did say that, then....."

                But the crucial point is to form an opinion regarding your viewpoint before the data comes in.  What I mean by this is that, for example, we have performed scientific experiments on, say, Einstein's theory of relativity.  People could make arguments one way or the other but ultimately the incoming data from those experiments would support one interpretation over another.  The point is that we should be intellectually strong enough to state that if the data says "X" we will believe "Y" but if it says "Z" we will believe differently.

                Bruce say's the data shows that we can cut benefits by 25 percent and those recipients will still be better off than current retirees.  It doesn't sound right to me but I will change my mind based off of an analysis by the Trustees and not some diaries on a left-wing blog, if you know what I mean.

                We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

                by theotherside on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:33:21 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Which yields zero in google (0+ / 0-)

                  Which does raise a little complication to the neat black and white story of the Defender. Because when you combine the two graphs and run the numbers the end result, even if we do Nothing and have the gramma of 2035 take a 25% overnight cut in benefits both she and her daughter of 2060 STILL end up with a bigger slice of pie than 2012 gramma

                  ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:09:02 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And what are the inflation assumptions for the (0+ / 0-)

                    years between now and 2060 in Bruce's formula? And the effect of taxes on net SSI?

                    •  Bruce doesnt have a formula (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Clem Yeobright

                      The large order effects are GDP, job creation, labor force growth and wage growth. Inflation is a small order effect, taxes are hardly above the noise level in the data.

                      All of us Social Security Defenders use the SS Trustees data and or the CBO scoring. Bruce Webb is the founder of the Social Security Defenders.

                      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                      by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:46:00 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you, Roger Fox. Many "(D)s"aren't really(D)s (9+ / 0-)

    You are right. You're also right on Superlative CPI. It will not blunt the impact because there hasn't been an elderly index fully studied and put out there by the BLS, but both chained CPI and Superlative CPI which is chained CPI with taking in no substitution bias for seniors because seniors can't substitute hip surgery, but a 130 billion cut nevertheless. They also don't have the mobility for substitution bias. They are also both relied on the false assumption that the CPI -W and the CPI-U understates inflation on average when it does not. That is a Neoliberal lie.

    The trust fund will not be exhausted and we just need to raise the minimum wage at least to $10.55 as well. Accepting BS reforms not needed and talking about SS with regard to the deficit when it is a transfer program is something I have heard around here in the comments section and that makes those commenters to the right of Reagan.

    And the trust fund could be irrelevant as well. If we wanted to fund SS like we do the military and all our wars we could, btu deficit terrorists and their sycophants want us to be afraid and to be scared of deficit lies about default when as a sovereign issuer of the USD that is impossible.

    I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

    by priceman on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:17:20 PM PST

  •  Am I missing something here? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    worldlotus

    Here's what I don't understand. Social Security was solvent when Obama was elected. Medicare was less solvent. Then HCR passed and  I thought that a good sized FICA and Medicare tax increase for the wealthy was part of the bill, to kick in this year.

    That should have made both systems more, not less solvent. Do I have the wrong info on the tax increase?

    If my soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the ranks. -Frederick the Great

    by Valatius on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:40:07 PM PST

    •  Yes you are missing something (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright

      Actually the person who wrote the article you linked to is misrepresenting the facts....From the link you provided

      That’s because under health care legislation the Medicare portion of the FICA tax will increase for wealthy taxpayers.
      Thats inaccurate, my paycheck has an entry for FICA (6.2%), and a separate entry for Medicare (1.45%). Explanation here:

      http://www.suburbancomputer.com/...

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:46:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

        Thanks for the clarification. It seems clear enough that if FICA and Medicare tax were progressive and included all income, both systems would be well-funded. No doubt the very wealthy have objected to that kind of reform.

        If my soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the ranks. -Frederick the Great

        by Valatius on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 05:30:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  remove the cap and FICA becomes a flat tax (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright

          One of the reasons we got the Earned Income Tax Credit was to address the regressive nature of FICA, I dont want to give the GOP an angle here and risk the EITC.

          Remember SS is wage insurance, its not intended to insure some uber rich person with a 150k a year,  who is retired and whose investments are providing a return. And if we remove the cap, we create a 150k benefit for some uber rich person.

          We can increase benefits without removing the cap, we can insure solvency thru to the day the Boomers are all dead, by creating jobs, raising the min wage. If need be in 10 or 12 years, we can increase FICA a tad, or raise the cap to increase revenues and increase benefits, if things look close.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:41:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  reform has become (7+ / 0-)

    a dirty word that means, uh oh here comes another big screw. Dodd Frank didn't 'reform wall street, the ACA isn't going to 'reform our extortionist health care industry. Reform in most cases means privatize and increase the profits for the ownership society that were all supposed to sacrifice for. SS does not need to be reformed what needs to be reformed is this extreme nasty ass 'free market' economy that ordinary people have to work and live in.

    If people had jobs, jobs that payed decently and the economy was functioning for something other then the globalized profits of these 'too bigs' and their bogus casino, SS would be fine. As for the deficit the other cooked up financial crises they are nothing but disaster capitalism and the implementation of the Shock Doctrine doing what it needs to so that Jimmie Dimon stays richer then you.

    Sacrifice for what and who? Were all getting chained to cat food as our best choice for the money were alloted  and trickle down austerity affects everyone as it normalizes a cruel anti-democratic economy that has no redeeming value. Using SS or any social program as a chip to be traded for punitive austerity is just pure Orwellian double think/speak.

    What kind of society screws you out of anyway to make a decent living and then steals the 'pittances' the most vulnerable among it citizens need to stay alive and calls this reform? Just sick and so undemocratic it blows my mind.

     

  •  solution but no political will (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rolet, Boppy

    The solution to this issue is beyond obvious, but it will never even be presented.

    What is our national debt?  Where is our national debt.
    The government owes $2 trillion to the SS. fund. But it does not show in the debt number when the politicians on the right or left clutch their pearls. Right now it stands in the ether as $14 trillion.  Anyone with a brain ever think we can "grow" our way out of that?  No, of course not.

    So a no cost way to solve the s.s. shortfall is to make a simple accounting transfer of that $2 trillion from the general budget to the s.s.fund fully funding it and another accounting line item transfer of $2 trillion to the general debt.  14-16 who cares.  debt is debt.  at least we will be talking about the same number.

    The income cap needs to be eliminated entirely.  It is based on the outdated assumption that anyone making more than $110,000 a year is making enough to save for their own retirement and not need to rely on s.s.  Thats a crock.
    Just ask the thousands of middle aged, middle class, midde management types who lost their jobs and have not found a new job or a new job paying anything close to what they were making.  They burned thru their savings,
    their investments, and will most likely depend on s.s. when the time comes to retire.  

    its a perfectly easy fix.  too simple for politicians. and certainly not what the kochroaches want.  i have ranted here before - this whole s.s. is bad meme is the direct result of their greed.  the 7-1/2% they and their big biz pals are mandated to kick in to the s.s. fund per employee is the thorn in their side they hate the most.  Think of the cash they could save if they didn't have to fork it over to the government.  

    •  Cap is $113,700 (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright, kareylou, Boppy

      And the government does not owe over 2 trillion to the SS trust fund. In fact right now, today the government owes nothing to the SS trust fund.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:39:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Due to its success, Social Security must be killed (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rolet, Roger Fox, kareylou, 3goldens

    After all, every dollar that goes to seniors is a dollar that's taken out of the economy sumpin' sumpin'. Why do old people hate America? They smell, too.

    Enough of this free ride, you freeloading involuntary farters!

    /snark

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 05:52:47 PM PST

    •  Not funny but true snark (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kovie

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:36:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Some humor isn't meant to be funny (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Roger Fox, 3goldens

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 07:01:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Looking for writers SSD blogathon (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kovie

          March 25-29th. Interested?



          "Hands Off My Social Security"






          I suggested that it had been a mistake to levy these taxes in the 1930’s when the social security program was originally adopted. FDR said, “I guess you’re right on the economics. They are politics all the way through. We put those pay roll contributions there so as to give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their pensions and their unemployment benefits. With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my social security program. Those taxes aren’t a matter of economics, they’re straight politics.”







          Link - feel free to post on your Facebook pages.

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:08:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What is that? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Roger Fox, 3goldens

            I don't do Tweeter, btw.

            And yes, I know it's Twitter, but I like to call it Tweeter, where you can twit.

            "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

            by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:19:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Some code I made for the SS DK BLogathon (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kovie

              using tables.

              ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:36:37 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  What would you need me to do? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Roger Fox, 3goldens

                "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

                by kovie on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:20:29 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Write an article on SS (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  3goldens

                  Join Social Security Defenders, queue up the article for auto publish. Done.

                  Time slots: March 25-29. 11am, 1pm, 3pm, 5pm EST.

                  I have 3-4 time slots each day, some are taken or reserved, Howard Dean on Monday 11am for example. SO pick a time slot.

                  email me at rdanafox at the yahoo

                  ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:33:02 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  As a fiat currency (5+ / 0-)

    with a monopoly on issuing our own money, we can pay out full social security benefits for the lifetime of all retirees, people over 50, people over 40, people over 30, people over 20, people over 10, people not even born yet, and their children's children.  The whole argument is just bullshit, they don't want to 'fix' it, they want to screw it up again.  The only constraint on paying out social security benefits is providing the resources that retirees will need to buy.  So, when people are unemployed, they are not making the stuff that people who receive social security benefits will need, therefore, they will not be available.  It has nothing to do with money.  For those who say resources are limited because commodities are limited, I say, they are only limited by our imagination, not money.

    Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world--and never will. Mark Twain

    by whoknu on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 06:58:44 PM PST

  •  Obama himself needs to stop offering up SS! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox, Boppy, aliasalias, 3goldens

    Funny, during my entire time volunteering for his campaign, hitting the pavement, knocking on doors, canvassing neighborhoods, nothing was ever mentioned in any campaign materials or by anyone that said boo about SS. Yet, I keep hearing/reading of him offering it up as part of this dumb @ss grand bargain idea. OBAMA is the one pushing changes (like chained CPI) to SS, not the GOP as far as I can tell. Please correct me if I'm wrong!!

    Obama may consider himself a moderate Republican of 20 years go (and yes, I think he is) BUT, he was elected as a Democrat, therefore he should be a Democrat. And the other people elected as Democrats need to act like Democrats as well.

    "Watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, fanatical, criminal..."-7.75, -5.54

    by solesse413 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 08:49:20 PM PST

  •  Two of us have been sounding the alarm to (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox, Boppy, aliasalias, 3goldens

    our DFA club about the danger that Obama will insist on harming Social Security and Medicare and eventually, the rethugs will take him up on it. Our fellow members don't seem to care. It's as if they secretly think it's a good thing. We did go to visit our Congresswoman's (Jackie Speier)office  to meet with her spokesperson, but that's only because national DFA wanted people to go to their Congressperson's offices and ask them to sign on to Rep Takano's letter. They refused pleasantly.
    The propaganda is unending and even well-informed people have drunk the koolaid.

    48forEastAfrica - Donate to Oxfam> "It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness." Edna St.V. Millay

    by slouching on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 09:15:33 PM PST

  •  Right On! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy, Roger Fox, Clem Yeobright

    To which, I can only add, this page and this diary.

    It's time to focus on wages and jobs. If you want to "fix" Social Security and Medicare the real way to do that is to fix wages and jobs.

    Go after them, Roger. This is exactly what they need to hear.

  •  Amen (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy, 3goldens

    TY!

    "In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer."- Albert Camus

    by valadon on Mon Mar 04, 2013 at 11:02:37 PM PST

  •  why is obama...? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo, scorpiorising, 3goldens

    1) the social security trust fund has been stolen.
    2) as krugman says, the proposal to save cuts in the future consists of making those same cuts now.
    3) if something does need to be done, most people, even republicans, support raising the cap.
    4) gingrich once said that if he couldn't get the whole loaf he'd settle for half and come back for the other half later. they won't stop with just this.
    SO WHY HAS OBAMA, WHO APPOINTED BOWLES-SIMPSON, BEEN PUSHING THIS FOR YEARS? WHY HAS HE IGNORED RAISING THE CAP? HE'S THE MAN WHO APPOINTED GEITHNER, THE MAN WHOSE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAS NEVER SERIOUSLY TRIED TO GO AFTER THE CRIMINAL GANGSTERS, THE MAN WHO FROZE PAY FOR FEDERAL WORKERS TWICE, THE MAN WHO HAS LET THE HOUSING CRISIS FESTER AND THE PEOPLE TAKE THE HIT, THE MAN WHO JUST ALLOWED CERTAIN STATES TO LOWER THEIR PAY RATES TO DOCTORS FOR MEDICAID. HE HAS USED REPUBLICAN INTRANSIGENCE TO PUSH HIS OWN VERSION OF CUTS. LESS, YES, BUT SEE THE GINGRICH PARAPHRASE ABOVE. DOES HE NOT KNOW THIS?
    HE      IS       THE       PROBLEM.  HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PROBLEM, FROM THE TIME HE PUSHED HOWARD DEAN ASIDE AND FROM THE TIME HE HIRED TIM GEITHNER. HE'S BEEN HARD TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE ON SOCIAL ISSUES HE'S A DEMOCRAT.. A LITTLE BEHIND THE CURVE ON GAY RIGHTS, ON GUN CONTROL, ETC. BUT ULTIMATELY THERE. BUT NOT ECONOMICALLY. ECONOMICALLY HE IS WHAT HE TOLD A CUBAN/AMERICAN RADIO STATION IN FLORIDA DURING THE CAMPAIGN. 'IN 1980 I WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED A MODERATE REPUBLICAN.
    THAT'S THE PROBLEM. HE RAN AS A DEMOCRAT BUT IS, ECONOMICALLY, A REPUBLICAN. THE CONFUSION OVER THIS IS WHAT HAS KEPT MANY OF US FROM SEEING HIM CLEARLY ALL THESE YEARS.

    WE'VE GOT THREE YEARS TO FIND A BETTER CANDIDATE FOR NEXT TIME.

  •  I think SS needs to be reformed... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aliasalias, 3goldens

    we need to increase benefits...raise the cap so it can be better funded...and real COLA's..!!

    great diary Roger Fox...let's keep on the pressure.


    We are not broke, we are being robbed.

    by Glen The Plumber on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:40:44 AM PST

    •  Ummmmm create jobs and raise the min wage (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright, Glen The Plumber

      and watch the FICA roll in.

      Want to increase benefits, ok, raise the cap a bit, from 84th income percentile to 86%.

      If we remove the cap, we create a 14k monthly check for the uber rich. And we make FICA a flat tax, so we got the EITC cause FICA was regressive, now we lost the main reason we got the EITC.

      I'm very leary of removing the cap. lifting a bit to increase benefits to seniors, thats great.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:25:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Don't assume all people trying to (0+ / 0-)

    cut SS are Democrats because the are here, and don't assume all people protecting it are Democrats.

    The question is are you a progressive, liberal, centrist, or conservative.

    "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

    by justmy2 on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:48:32 AM PST

  •  Oh to be a Diogenes inside the Beltway, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens

    ready to put down the lamp if I ever found a Democrat.

    I'd probably die of old age first.

  •  So if I promise to die early, can I keep my SS? (0+ / 0-)

    All the harping on the unsustainability of SS doesn't frighten me, but I know it frightens many of my fellow moochers.

    Golly, folks, I'm sorry I had that major stroke before I turned 66.  I'm sorry, so sorry, that I had the temerity to expect a promise made to me years ago, while I was well-off and paying for 35 years into SS, would be kept.

    I thought I was ... entitled (?!@#) to that earned benefit.

    I'm so sorry.  Truly I am.

    The message is just so loud and so clear:  "How dare you be old?  Just die already so the rest of the country doesn't have to support your meaningless, old, disabled ass.  You retxxd, you!"

    A good many of the loudest among our citizenry are happy to let someone die for lack of insurance.  Or be executed because someone can't afford decent representation.  Or get shot by stray gunfire in his or her bed because, well, just because.  Life isn't fair, ya know.

    Do you imagine that's not what many of us hear?  Do you think it makes waking up every day and smiling a lot easier?

    That judgment has hit home.  Don't think I'm happy to be destroying the future of this country that my ancestors helped build.  

    It would be one thing if it were family telling me I am an undue burden and a highly resented parasite.  It's quite another when much of society, millions and millions of people and their elected representatives, scream that at me daily.

    Message received.  But I have to let the cats live out their lives first. Reina's 19, but Milo is only 10.  When I took them on, I committed to them for their natural lives.  They may not have known that, but it was a commitment nonetheless.  

    They deserve better.  So do the rest of us, don't ya know.

    (-7.62,-7.33) Carbon footprint 12.6 metric tons. l'Enfer, c'est les autres.

    by argomd on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:56:05 AM PST

  •  Of course SS was fatally hamstrung (0+ / 0-)

    from the start.

    I'm not even allowed to pay into it at my job.  Instead I'm forced into one of the TIAA-CREF or (gaaah) VALIC casinos.

  •  noted economist blames Obama for sequester (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aliasalias, 3goldens, chuckvw
    But it was President Obama who decided to play deficit reduction games rather than being truthful about the state of the economy. There was no reason to expect better from the Republicans in Congress, we had reason to hope that President Obama would act responsibly.
    http://www.commondreams.org/...
  •  I don't want a Grand Bargain! (5+ / 0-)

    I want Hiz Honor to do what he said when we elected him! Stop it with this debt and austerity crap! Stop with the cut the safety net crap! Start with some JOBS!

    You have your right to your opinion, I will grant you that, but do not denigrate my right to mine!

    by MrQA on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 07:43:16 AM PST

  •  Want to save Social Security? (0+ / 0-)

    Drop the Cap.
    Place a .03% surcharge on incomes over $10 Million.
    If you run the number it'll take us out to 2065.  By that time all us Baby Boomers will be dead.

    Conservatives say if you don't give the rich more money, they will lose their incentive to invest. As for the poor, they tell us they've lost all incentive because we've given them too much money. -GC

    by cobaltbay on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:20:27 AM PST

    •  Stop listening to the GOP, SS doesnt need saving (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright, 3goldens

      and your math is very wrong, the CBO scoring says lifting the cap equals .6% of GDP thru 2090, the Intermediate scenario by the SS trustees says the shortfall is .6% of GDP.

      Create jobs and raise the min wage, and watch the FICA roll in.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:20:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  We have been invaded (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy, 3goldens

    by Republicans.

    I didn't abandon the fight, I abandoned the Party that abandoned the fight...

    by Jazzenterprises on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:21:47 AM PST

  •  SS may need some changes, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy

    The changes really needed won't decrease payouts.

    1) Remove the cap on SS tases.
    2) Cover government employees -- especially state and local.

    I had the same problem when I spent most of my time advocating for income-tax reform.
    I was talking about -- still am talking about, though less often -- cutting out loopholes.

    The WNM stole the phrase "tax reform" to mean cutting the rates on the highest brackets.

    •  Remove the cap =14k monthly check for uber rich (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright, 3goldens

      150k a year. IS that what you want to do?

      Heres a choice, remove the cap, or create 20 million jobs (lots of FICA revenue).

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:16:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  My prescription for Social Security reform: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy, 3goldens

    Reinstate the payroll tax for all income levels;
    Force Congress to redeem their "IOU"s to SSTF;
    Lower the retirement age to 55;
    Raise benefits to ~$2k/mo.

    Done, and DONE!

    I am a leaf on the wind - i hover, twirl, float,
    Weightless, frictionless, I fly

    by chmood on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:55:13 AM PST

  •  There is one . . . (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aliasalias, Boppy

    There is one reform in the Social Security system that makes sense:

    Raise the income limit on the payroll tax to a million dollars.

    That would probably not just keep SS solvent -- as we have seen from this posting, that's not even an issue -- it would probably fund most of the government.

    All right, I'm exaggerating.  I shouldn't do that unless I'm on TV, or a politician.

    In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

    by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:09:42 AM PST

  •  Thank you for speaking so forcefully! (5+ / 0-)

    You are certainly right.  Dems need to stop the talk of drastic cuts to the safety net now.   NO chained CPI; no raising the elgilbility age of Medicare!  NO, NO, NO!!!  I have been calling, writing letters, and commenting on these topics for months now.  Everytime I think these sorry ideas have been abandoned they rear their ugly heads once again.  And the pathetic part of it is, everytime I hear them, its from the media elite and from Democrats who apparently have forgotten what our party has always stood for. These proposed cuts are unnecessary, extemely hurtful to vulnerable Americans, and politically idiotic.  The Democratic party needs to take heed.  There will be major political repercussions if they abandon their core principles and begin dismantling the New Deal and Great Society.

  •  Not to inject some counterpoint in the SS debate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Justus

    but the Social Security Administration states in the second sentence of their 2012 annual report"The long-run actuarial deficits of the Social Security and Medicare programs worsened in 2012... ."  There IS a problem with both Social Security and Medicare.  Conservatives can deny climate change to their detriment, but let's not make the same mistake here.

    No amount of magical "everybody should be able to retire at 55" thinking is going to change those facts.  Stay focused on fixing the problem that exists, not denying it.  

    Does everyone realize that in 1965, a 65-year-old man's life expectancy was 13.46 years (18 for women).  In 2010 that 65 year-old's life expectancy was 16.79 years (+25%) . Oh, and retirement aged persons were 9% of the 1965 world.  In 2010 those 65+ were 13% (+44%). 4.5 workers per retireee in 1965, 3.1 (-31%) in 2005.  

    Let's review: back then more workers supported each retiree, and each retiree was on the rolls for 40 fewer months, on average. The actuarial projections are contrary to Mr Fox's assertions.  The annual report declares the major program (OASI) will be insolvent under 2 of 3 scenarios within 32 years (under current law and actuarial assumptions). Mr Fox cites the one scenario where we don't go off a cliff and then he says "no worries." FALSE.  

    •  Underlying assumptions are not realistic (0+ / 0-)

      IF you think the 2029 and 2033 dates are realistic, then youre saying 20 more years of recession is going to happen.

      Youre also saying workforce growth will drop in half in 10 years, 1.1% dropping to .5%) when no one thinks it will drop past .7% by 2050.

      Youre also saying job creation will stay static, 14.7% unemployment (U6) or thereabouts for 20 more years.

      The job of an actuary is to create a conservative financial estimate, thats what the Trustees have done.

      ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Fri Mar 08, 2013 at 05:41:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •   Mr Fox, You've done your homework, but (0+ / 0-)

        SSA projections are based on historical factors, not today's specific unemployment/job growth/interest rates.

        Don't deny where climate change, I mean, Social Security is clearly headed!

        The SSA actuaries use a weighted set of parameters where historical norms still exert some influence over where things are likely headed. For example, workforce growth is a huge determinant in the model (hint: let so-called illegals come into the mainstream and start contributing like other wage earners!).  

        Life expectancy is another major parameter, just as important as interest rates (maybe more so!).  Social Security was DESIGNED as a benefit to help people in the finale 10-20% of life(implying Life Expectancies of 70-75).  Not the final 33-50% (85+)!  No wonder it's showing some strain.

        Stop asserting that the forecast assumptions are about "20 more years of recession"; it's the weight of life expectancy, and reduction in the "contributor class," coupled with the unprecedented growth of the "beneficiary class" that's driving things. We must reform the system!

        For starters, we should all support a bill to raise the ceiling on Soc Sec contributions!  Why does it make sense to impose a regressive tax to fund Social Security?  Above $113.7k of wages, no one pays in to the system.  That's NOT RIGHT!

        Denial of the problem does not help solve the problem.  Raise the retirement age? Maybe.  Adjust the employer/employee contribution maximums? Definitely!

jbou, Bruce Webb, colleen, felix19, bink, Renee, JekyllnHyde, Alumbrados, paradox, Superskepticalman, Ed in Montana, Angie in WA State, cslewis, chrississippi, pundit, coral, Paleo, Chi, copymark, slinkerwink, deben, XOVER, Liberal Thinking, left of center, irmaly, Geenius at Wrok, dfarrah, emal, MouseThatRoared, Pescadero Bill, Aspe4, GayHillbilly, Pompatus, xynz, StevenJoseph, HootieMcBoob, Woody, gjohnsit, expatjourno, hubcap, Creosote, Dumbo, onig, cfm, TheMomCat, Boston Boomer, bronte17, TracieLynn, sponson, howd, magnetics, whenwego, srkp23, Ian S, Agathena, CoolOnion, stevej, Bensdad, roses, slouching, chechecule, pedrito, greenomanic, Bill Roberts, Nate Roberts, FriendlyNeighbor, splashy, Chrisfs, k9disc, Quege, scorpiorising, Getreal1246, psnyder, annan, pat bunny, 2laneIA, Boppy, agincour, i dont get it, JimWilson, 2liberal, wdrath, QuoVadis, whyvee, RebeccaG, riverlover, Lilith, Dave925, dkmich, Oaktown Girl, JayBat, AllisonInSeattle, VerbalMedia, zerelda, randallt, Black Max, justmy2, valadon, vacantlook, solesse413, rolet, Dave in RI, Armand451, greeseyparrot, Gowrie Gal, rapala, Skennet Boch, davidincleveland, joanneleon, la motocycliste, humphrey, maybeeso in michigan, Bluesee, Simian, radarlady, 3goldens, Farlfoto, TheGeneral, jrooth, Jeffersonian Democrat, denise b, caul, Russron, ek hornbeck, Alice Marshall, irate, corvo, Big River Bandido, Coss, Clem Yeobright, MT Spaces, kaye, jparnell, YucatanMan, Laurence Lewis, reflectionsv37, ratzo, Sun Tzu, Dem Beans, where4art, kaliope, LucyandByron, Rogneid, laurel g 15942, Ekaterin, bently, Jim R, Jim P, kovie, Showman, esquimaux, Hirodog, Orinoco, Debbie in ME, Keone Michaels, cybersaur, BlueInARedState, profundo, Gorette, AoT, sleipner, KenBee, MargaretPOA, Son of a Cat, blueoasis, NBBooks, DarkestHour, triv33, praenomen, gooderservice, Libby Shaw, OMwordTHRUdaFOG, Dinclusin, onionjim, midwesterner, CA Nana, James Hepburn, fiddlingnero, blueoregon, kurt, shaharazade, PhilW, equern, kurious, bstotts, nhox42, Little, BeerNotWar, cpresley, tegrat, ammasdarling, pale cold, BeninSC, hooper, Haningchadus14, SpecialKinFlag, Debs2, devis1, cobaltbay, FishOutofWater, Trial Lawyer Richard, Mary Mike, wildweasels, david mizner, dclawyer06, aliasalias, rantsposition, artisan, Kentucky Kid, rivamer, jedennis, Aunt Martha, dankester, cyncynical, bobswern, carpunder, GeorgeXVIII, leonard145b, cloudbustingkid, Azubia, Don midwest, vet, Foraker, TomP, cville townie, rogerdaddy, also mom of 5, poligirl, OleHippieChick, Sixty Something, Arlys, Alexandre, Involuntary Exile, NewDealer, elwior, filby, KJG52, Pam Bennett, jamess, tofumagoo, CenFlaDem, MrJayTee, alnep, mofembot, temptxan, Karl Rover, priceman, JamieG from Md, David Futurama, legendmn, LaFeminista, maggiejean, robbinsdale radical, bluemoonfever, nwrain, cybrestrike, MufsMom, J M F, arendt, Rick Aucoin, greengemini, RenMin, j0em0mma, Michael James, gharlane, maryabein, ebrann, JesseCW, dRefractor, petral, zaka1, TheOpinionGuy, kevinpdx, Shelley99, Losty, sfarkash, Tommymac, deviant24x, Leftcandid, Words In Action, cassandraX, Clyde the Cat, commonmass, coppercelt, FogCityJohn, p gorden lippy, indie17, eXtina, piers, Anima, sunny skies, Man from Wasichustan, ATFILLINOIS, NM Ray, gulfgal98, DiegoUK, Johnny Q, Betty Pinson, DrTerwilliker, ericlewis0, cocinero, nosleep4u, renbear, Colorado is the Shiznit, TAH from SLC, kerflooey, Bluefin, allenjo, coquiero, Oldowan, StateofEuphoria, tosimmonds, jm214, freesia, La Gitane, Bluerall, mujr, deeproots, Gamblndan, thomask, akmk, muddy boots, tardis10, worldlotus, whoknu, peregrine kate, whaddaya, PhilJD, VTCC73, la58, cailloux, kareylou, imlpdx, Willa Rogers, jvmwordsmith, dradams, DRo, SouthernLiberalinMD, Lucy2009, longtalldrink, BlueDragon, auroreden, quill, jeopardydd, chmood, ridemybike, hamm, Cordyc, KiB, hardhatmama, StonyB, SparkyGump, cwsmoke, Williston Barrett, Siri, IndieGuy, AnnieR, Ginger1, FreeSpeaker, Horace Boothroyd III, This old man, Mike RinRI, Slightly Wobbly, radical simplicity, Brown Thrasher, splintersawry, Denver11, Victim of Circumstance, Glen The Plumber, catchy, Purplehead, peptabysmal, ShoshannaD, WheninRome, Hammerhand, Quasimodal, madcitysailor, Stills, Blue Dream, Chaddiwicker, simple serf, Illinois IRV, argomd, jbob, remembrance, Thornrose, poopdogcomedy, SanFernandoValleyMom, Panama Pete, gypsytoo, silentlurker, Urban Owl, Joyce in Reno, northerntier, rigcath, Jim Domenico, Mickquinas, aughtomatic, fuzz2347, TheDuckManCometh, Chas 981, sensetolisten, OldSoldier99, Capt Crunch, SeekingJustice, Penny GC

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site