Skip to main content

View Diary: Senator Tom Harkin stands up for Social Security recipients by denouncing "chained CPI" (54 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Income cap is at $110,100 (10+ / 0-)

    about the 84th percentile.

    After the 1983 deal the cap was at the 90th percentile. Which today would be about 186k. Raising the cap to 186k would be about a 4k COLA to the max benefit of 30k.

    Beyond that there is nothing wrong with SS that a good economy wont fix.

    Create 25 million jobs and raise the min wage. both mean more FICA.

    If we remove the cap, we remove the reason we got the Earned Income Tax Credit......

    I love Harkin, but cant support his read on the so called problems of SS.

    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 Dec 07, 2012 at 03:18:15 PM PST

    •  I'm not sure I follow you Roger, Harking wants to (6+ / 0-)

      remove the income cap does he not?  What part of his analysis is wrong? Am I making an error in supporting his bill?  

      The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

      by HoundDog on Fri Dec 07, 2012 at 03:20:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Trustees low cost scenario (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoundDog, Just Bob, Calamity Jean

        The Trust Fund will not be depleted thru 2090.

        Each year the SS Trustees issue a report that includes 4 scenarios, low, intermediate, high costs, and a stohastic model.

        Their job is to create a conservative financial estimate.

        TO believe that SS will go broke by 2029 or 2035, you have to take for granted the very unrealistic assumptions/predictions.

        Basically you have to have 20 more years of recession to make SS go broke by 2029 or 2035.

        Going by memory, heres a few examples:

        Workforce growth:

        Currently at about .95%. The Trustees use .2%. Council of Economic Advisers, the BLS, everyone else uses numbers like .4%- to .7%. The low cost scenario uses .5%,

        GDP Growth:
        The SS Trustees use 1.9% & 2.3%, but in the low cost scenario they use 2.8%. Economists suggest the days of 4-8% growth are gone, but 3% to 3.5% is realistic.

        Job Creation:
        High and intermediate estimates assume that for 20 years job creation will be stagnant, maintaining the pool of 20 to 25 million that dont have full time year round jobs. The low cost scenario assumes widespread job creation.

        Wage growth:
        High and intermediate estimates assume no wage growth above inflation. Min wage is due for an increase, heres some numbers. Significant real wage growth above inflation is not very realistic. Some wage growth might be expected, especially by raising the min wage.

        Both in the 80's and 90's we saw real wage growth above inflation, coupled with lots of job creation.

        The Trustees tells us the Boomers will be dead by 2062, then assets will climb. If the vast majority of Boomers live to be 80, then most will be dead by 2042.

        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 Dec 07, 2012 at 06:05:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No cap makes a 10k to 15k monthly check (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoundDog

        Are you in error supporting this bill? Not really, but forget about this bill and support a bill that creates 20 to 25 million jobs instead....

        If Harkens bill comes to the floor, GOP will try to amend it. I see no benefit by putting SS on the table, even for adjusting the cap as I described.

        I prefer to tell the GOP no toucha my Social Security you scuma baggers. You touch my SS I pull out my dueling saber and give you a close shave.

        Theres nothing wrong with SS that a good economy wont fix. SO why cant Harken propose a jobs bill?

        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 Dec 07, 2012 at 06:46:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  BTW I appreciate you rec'ing my post. Thanks (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      divineorder, murasaki, elwior, Roger Fox

      The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

      by HoundDog on Fri Dec 07, 2012 at 03:24:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Income cap rises to $113,700 in 2013. (3+ / 0-)

       But why have a cap at all?
         Remove the cap, and the system would be sustained forever.

         Remove the BS from the debate, and the issue becomes fairly simple to resolve.

      "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

      by elwior on Fri Dec 07, 2012 at 05:45:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  BTW, the COLA for the coming year is 1.7%. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoundDog, Just Bob

        How much lower would they like to take it?

        "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

        by elwior on Fri Dec 07, 2012 at 05:47:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  might match GDP growth/annum (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elwior, HoundDog

          Ouch.

          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 Dec 07, 2012 at 06:22:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  One thing to keep in mind as to COLAs is (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Roger Fox, elwior, Just Bob, HoundDog

            something that also should be taken care of. COLAs can take SS payments above $25G.  When that happens for singles, which is a whale of a lot of seniors, they get the privilege of paying income tax on half of their SS, which rises to taxes on 85% with another eight grand. I advocate that one reform which would help avoid this problem is simply making SS payments large or small not taxable, because it is seniors simply paying income tax on the proceeds of sums they were taxed for before, and effectively limiting them to lesser and lesser shares of the sums which under the formula they are entitled to, and cuts the benefits of any COLA they may receive.

            Other income not SS is different, but taxing somebody whose sole support is SS is idiotic and should be ended. Maybe Reagan thought seniors were getting rich on SS, but with the inflation between that time and this, it is no longer so.

      •  If we take nothing from capital (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Burned, HoundDog

        we owe nothing to capital.

        FDR.

        Plus if we remove the cap then we loss the original reason we made a deal with the GOP for the Earned Income Tax Credit. And we make a 12-13k monthly SS check for some maxed out uber rich dude.

        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 Dec 07, 2012 at 06:52:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Or raise it a lot, and peg it to something (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JeffW, HoundDog, elwior

        external.  For example, set the cap to the salary of a Senator or the President.  When their pay rises, the cap goes up automatically.  

        Renewable energy brings national global security.     

        by Calamity Jean on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 05:16:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site