Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama's Biggest Crime Is "Putting 'It' On The Table"? Really? (458 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here here! the needs of the many outweigh... (7+ / 0-)

    ...the needs of the few.

    Chained CPI would result in a reduction in Social Security benefits of $985 a year, 20 years from now.

    A loss of Unemployment Benefits will result in a reduction in income of $985 a week next week.

    •  Are you actually correct? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Beetwasher, NoFortunateSon

      First of all, before last week, I never heard the phrase "chained CPI." I suspect that's true of most of the folks here.

      Now, you're saying that some folks here are up in arms about about a thousand-bucks-a-year reduction twenty years from now?!

      If you're right, then that's all the proof I need that the detractors of President Obama on this site will glom on to anything to put him in a bad light.

      How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

      by BenderRodriguez on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 09:37:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The chained CPI reduce the 'cost of living' (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BenderRodriguez, artmartin

        adjustment given to Social Security recipients by approximately .03 percent.  So if the COLA adjustment under today's formula called for a 5 percent increase in benefit, that would be reduced  to 4.7 percent increase.

        The President's proposal would also protect poorer recipients, so that they don't feel any pinch.

        Here's my take on it - the revolution will not be blogged, it has to be slogged. - Deoliver47

        by OIL GUY on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:00:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Notice How "Poorer" Isn't Defined (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          You honestly think some well-to-do senior citizen buying champagne and caviar on that lavish $1,000 or so bucks a month is included?



          Strange that a harp of thousand strings should keep in tune so long

          by jabney on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 04:50:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Compounding doesn't enter in of course (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            neither does the overall long term effect versus something Congress could correct in a few weeks via unemployment insurance. Once changes to SS are implemented they are not taken back like raising the SS age to 67. I expect people who do nothing but make excuses for everything the president does to not know that though.

            It really shows the disdain they have for the most vulnerable of our society, but they got theirs.

            I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

            by priceman on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 05:28:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  If you are unaware of the term, why would (9+ / 0-)

        you rely on someone here on either side to give you a fair reading of it? Why not google CHained CPI, is it a cut? And when you do, go back before this debate because these sorts of debates tends to find a lot of articles from people who have changed positions.

        You also don't understand what the data he is providing you means.

        For example: How long does unemployment benefit cuts affect the unemployed? How long the benefit cuts would affect all social security benefits receivers. What is the political implication of cutting SS to future cuts of SS?

        More questions: What impact will it have on people in terms of income available to the poor? What are the number of seniors without sufficient income versus those on unemployment? If a short term benefit the same as a long term one?  

        For the record, I wrote this the other day to illustrate my priorities, which is African Americans, and its impact on them:

        As my colleagues have shown, the “chained” cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security being discussed between President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner is a cut to benefits. The AARP Public Policy Institute’s report, Social Security: A Key Retirement Income Source for Older Minorities, helps us to think about how this cut might affect different racial groups.

        Nearly one-in-five (18.7 percent) of the Hispanic elderly lives in poverty. For African Americans, the rate is one-in-six (17.1 percent) (Figure A). A cut to Social Security benefits runs the risk of significantly increasing these rates."

        and this
        But, more disturbingly, the reality is that all Social Security beneficiaries are not aged. This is clear among African American Social Security recipients where nearly 40% are under 62. This is because one in four Social Security checks for African Americans goes to a worker with a disability. This key element of insurance that Social Security provides far outweighs issues of shorter life expectancy for African Americans. Further, by including the spouse, widows with disabilities and the children of workers with disabilities, nearly 30% percent of African Americans receiving a Social Security benefit are being helped because a worker or his widow has a disability."
        and this
        "The chained CPI, a Social Security COLA cut on the table in deficit talks between the President and Republicans, could dramatically worsen poverty among unmarried senior African American women. As such, it violates the request of major progressive organizations in a letter to the White House and Congressional leaders to “make sure that deficit reduction is achieved in a way that does not increase poverty.”

        According to the National Women’s Law Center’s analysis of Current Population Survey data, in their report on how the chained CPI would affect women, the median annual Social Security benefit for a 65-year-old single African American woman is $10,680. (By contrast, the median benefit for all single senior women is $13,200.)

        That puts the median benefit for African American woman seniors just above the 2010 poverty line for individual seniors, which is an obscenely low $10,458."

        You aren't asking really where he got the data before running with. Where did he get the data? Ask him for a link.  What are the citations used by the link that he provides? Etc

        There are a long list of questions you should ask if you claim not to know or understand the issue.

      •  Yep, that's right ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BenderRodriguez, artmartin

        For the first year, using chained CPI would mean that the increase in average annual SS benefits would be about $40-45 less than it would have been using CPI-W.  No actual cut, just a $3.50/month smaller increase.

      •  Chained CPI has been around (4+ / 0-)

        since Simpson Bowles.  It might have been buried in there, but it was also in the "Grand Bargain" fiasco of 2011, which many of us do remember quite well.  Many of us blew off Simpson-Bowles, but when it showed up in the Grand Bargain at Obama's behest (and not that of the Republicans), in a bargain that had nothing to do with SS, it worried us.

        And here it is again, just as non sequitir as before.

        It seems to me that if Obama wants to get a bill passed, pissing off everybody on the left and right by suggesting chained CPI which only appeals to centrists like Gloria Borger is a bad way to go about it.  

    •  I think you've got 'many and few' backwards. (7+ / 0-)

      Far fewer people are on UI than are or will be on social security.

      If you really want to make this a 'many vs few' argument, you'll have to switch your support to the other 'side'.

    •  Your comment would be laughable if this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Phoebe Loosinhouse, PhilJD, priceman

      wasn't a serious issue.  What you wrote is just not true.  And even if it were true, do you really think they'd be writing legislation now for cutting $985 in twenty years with the shape of our economy now?

      Chained CPI would result in a reduction in Social Security benefits of $985 a year, 20 years from now.
      Here is the truth:
      According to the Social Security Actuary, moving to a chained CPI would mean an immediate benefit cut. According to Social Security Works, an average earner retiring in 2011 at age 65 would lose over $6,000 over 15 years if the chained CPI were adopted
      And we're not just talking about the elderly here.
      •  $6000 / 15years = $400/year (0+ / 0-)

        So the numbers you just gave are even more petty.

        •  What you orginally wrote was not true. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Not true = lie.

          Chained CPI would result in a reduction in Social Security benefits of $985 a year, 20 years from now.
          $6000 / 15years = $400/year
          1 dollar, 2 dollars, 3 dollars, 20 dollars, or 400 dollars a year is too much to take away from the poor elderly, disabled, veterans and children especially WHEN IT NOT NECESSARY TO THE SURVIVAL OF OUR COUNTRY and the fat cats get even fatter, including politicians.  ENOUGH !

          psst.... SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS IS A BIG DEAL. and it starts as soon as the legislation is passed -- not 20 years from now.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site