Skip to main content

View Diary: Since We're Doing the Time Warp (again), Let's Review Some Other Years-old Articles (129 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  what i said about CPI was this: (6+ / 0-)
    In light of the massive Medicare expansions under Obamacare, is a decrease in the Social Security COLA increase really such a dealbreaker so as to not even be considered if we get something meaningful out of Boehner for it?  We all know medical inflation is, like, crazy higher than normal inflation.  Which is why prevention is so critically important.  Which is why preventive screenings are now free for seniors.
    you cannot look at what it would do to seniors without also looking at what medicare and other programs are now doing FOR seniors.

    what you're ignoring in that chart is that the top line would also come down, as seniors are spending less on health care costs now, e.g. closing of the doughnut hole.

    it's also true that the chart is basing its projections on the 67-year retirement age being fully phased in, which is still a dozen years out.  find its original source. it's in the footnote, which was oddly elided from that link you gave.

    Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

    by Cedwyn on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 09:31:57 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Let's isolate (7+ / 0-)

      Chained CPI for a minute.

      Is it a cut to SS benefits or not?

      We don't know what will happen with the other programs.

      "Justice is a commodity"

      by joanneleon on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 10:01:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  it. cannot. be isolated. (5+ / 0-)

        it doesn't happen in a vacuum.

        and no.  if your company has been raising your pay by 3% every year, but for 2013 only raises it 2%, you have not received a pay cut.

        Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

        by Cedwyn on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 10:36:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, it definitely can be isolated (7+ / 0-)

          It is a separate program and any changes to other programs are not tied to the cuts to Social Security.  The other changes that you cite can be changed the following year with no mandatory change to the Social Security program that you are bundling into some bizarre package.

          So you stand by your answer that Chained CPI is not a cut?  This will have no negative effect to current and future beneficiaries?

          "Justice is a commodity"

          by joanneleon on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 10:43:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Nonsense (5+ / 0-)

          Coming up with a new way to calculate the cost of living, for the express purpose of saving money, is a cut.

          Some elderly are not able to pay for all food and rent expenses with their income being so low.  Taking money away from them, while also providing some additional health care not previously included, is nevertheless making it harder for them to pay essential costs of living, since hard cash will be in shorter supply.

          Basically, what this means is people are deciding on behalf of seniors how money should be spent for them.

          Health care is a large expense. Let's not use the excuse that shifting more expenditures to health care (which should be a right anyway) allows lawmakers to decrease cost of living adjustments.  With that kind of logic, seniors could one day have more health care than ever before, but no way to eat three meals a day.

          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

          by ZhenRen on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 10:58:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Um absolutely wrong as usual (7+ / 0-)

      The top line is assuming we are using chained CPI-E which is a new metric to measure health care costs in the equation which they already calculated. The line can't come down just because you want it to. Costs are raising above inflation and wages still even though it's below 8% which is an improvement but it's not enough to make the point you are making.

      This pretty much blows away these excuses I hear from you that these changes are taking place in the future so they don't matter as much. Do seniors still rely on SS income to get by in the future? I would bet on it and I would also bet on this harsh reality being more harsh in the future.

      You see, just because you don't take in the effects of compounding doesn't mean you can blithely dismiss it.

      Maybe you don't understand how benefits are calculated?

      This cut the president supports will also hurt those suffering the most:

      Hmmm, no big deal, Cedwyn? I'm sorry you don't think African American women's income is that important, but it is. But what's most insulting is to hear the garbage from you that NOT increasing income to reach the price threshold isn't a cut. When Nixon put the COLA in SS he understood what you don't' is that inflation eats away purchasing power so yes Going from a 3% raise to 2% meaning you can't afford that basket of goods the CPI sets because you lowered he income needed to reach the price threshold.

      So stop excusing the chained CPI and stop advocating for taking away income for seniors, women, and especially African American Women. Whenever you say the chained CPI isn't a cut just a "decrease on the increase" you how you don't understand inflation at all or the effects of it because after all, income is only relevant to what you can buy and since SS income is not expected to increase changing the weigh we measure inflation without increasing SS income will cut what is in seniors basket which means food.

      Your whole diary is ignorant and offensive.

      I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

      by priceman on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 01:05:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i am neither excusing nor advocating (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Onomastic, kirbybruno

        a damn thing.

        all i said was that going with chained CPI has to be evaluated in the context of the other programs that also affect seniors.  because nothing happens in a vacuum.  

        and yeah, a lot can happen in 12 years, so a chart that says "this is what things will look like starting 12 years from now" isn't exactly relevant.

        Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

        by Cedwyn on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 07:26:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're the Jack Welch of the Democratic party (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LaEscapee, triv33, Ginger1, gooderservice

          The only metric that takes into account health care costs in the COLA is the CPI-E(I wish that was on the table but it is not) which includes everything you say was not taken into account like the ACA(health care costs includes medicare and prescription drugs). As I have shown health care costs are continuing to rise despite your denial of data, but you're not in this for accurate data or reality. Only the CPI-E COLA raises enough income to cover this.

          The now used CPI-W doesn't raise income enough to cover health care costs even even with the ACA now and after 2014 as calculated. The chained CPI does even less to cover health care costs now and past 2014 including the ACA in the COLA including everything in the ACA. What did you think they somehow forgot a law that was passed before this calculation?

          But like Jack Welch, I'm sure you know better than the people who do this for a living like at SSA and BLS. You're in this for spin. Pure spin about the SS chief actuary, the BLS, and the economic policy Institute and how they supposedly forgot the ACA even though they have calculated in everything you said.

          Health care costs have risen and still will rise above inflation meaning the Chained CPI decreases the extent to which even current CPI measures their cost of living including health care. And you certainly do not know how to read charts for the decrease happens for those African American women fully retiring at age 65 in 2011 as well like I have shown above in the chart calculating reductions starting in 2016.

          12 years? Oooo ouch. Didn't you get the AARP warning?  The SS actuary knew that the full retirement age(the metric footnote since obviously they will not be waiting until everyone else born before 1960 to die) would rise in 2012, not 12 years down the line when he made these calculations. Yes the full retirement age is already phased in to 67 for those born after 1960. Ooo. Ouch. yeah, that's actually what that footnote meant. Not what you hope it does.

          You hope you can spin the data how you want but you certainly don't even understand the data. Better not try to again. Seniors shouldn't have to suffer because you have a hero worshiping complex. Until you stop you are the Jack Welch of the Democratic party and those that support you and will be called out as such.

          I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

          by priceman on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 09:04:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site