Skip to main content

View Diary: President Obama got exactly what he has wanted for 4 years tonight. Updated (253 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They might lose $100 bucks a year? (7+ / 0-)

    I'm about to be eligible and I'm not freaked out. Chained CPI is the most bullshit issue ever imagined. All it takes is Democratic control of the House to reverse. Are you such a pessimist as to believe that's not possible in the next two cycles?

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

    by OIL GUY on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:40:44 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  wow (8+ / 0-)

      when someone already has to choose between food and medicine, 100 bucks is a big deal. google our national poverty statistics.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:43:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Weren't you willing to let UI benefits expire (15+ / 0-)

        in exchange for automatic tax increases?  Do you want to tell us what it's like not to have unemployment benefits?

        Also, its not as if there's no potential benefit to chained CPI.  In theory, reducing the increase in benefits could allow for an increase in the number of recipients, no?

        •  do you understand the difference (6+ / 0-)

          between a temporary delay and a permanent cut? do you remember when clinton let gingrich shut down the government? it caused some real problems for people for a short period of time, but it saved social security.

          i ask you again- not knowing ahead of time what he will do on it, is chained cpi acceptable to you? is raising the retirement age? is there anything at all obama could do that wouldn't be acceptable to you?

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:03:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Retirement age has already been raised. I'm not (0+ / 0-)

            eligible until 66 and some months.

            LL, Chained cpi is not in place yet. Stop whining on here and fight against it.

            Join Melanie in IA's new Hunger Group on DK if you are truly interested in fighting hunger.

            And there are NO "permanent" anythings in legislation passed by the U.S. Congress. It just takes another vote to change any delays or cuts.

            Losing unemployment is a much bigger deal than closing the government for a few days. Social Security checks still went out.

            **Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behavior does** h/t Clytemnestra/Victoria Jackson

            by glorificus on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 06:41:04 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Don't get all holier than thou on this (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TLS66, Vicky, zizi

            President when you're willing to sacrifice the unemployed.  You're crying about Obama trading chained CPI for the unilateral ability to raise the debt ceiling (in other words, disarming the hostage takers) at the same time you're willing to put 2,000,000 people in the street to punish the rich.

            And no, UI benefit cuts were no more temporary than chained CPI would be. There's no guarantee that they would be reversed in any post cliff deal. Even your patron saint Krugman concedes that.

            •  actually (0+ / 0-)

              as was the case with the gingrich shutdown, the republicans would fold. that's the whole point. they will keep playing brinksmanship until someone fights back. even if you don't believe that, it would be worth trying it, because continually giving in to them hasn't worked. ever.

              and i ask you a third time-

              not knowing ahead of time what he will do on it, is chained cpi acceptable to you? is raising the retirement age? is there anything at all obama could do that wouldn't be acceptable to you?

              The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

              by Laurence Lewis on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 08:28:57 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well Laurence you can sit here and (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                zizi

                claim to know what would have happened, but that's meaningless. You can't guarantee anything. Besides, the fact remains that you were willing to cut off the unemployed because of your fantasy that cutting them off is somehow fighting for them. Because you care more about punishing the rich than looking out for the poor, and because protecting a program for middle and working class retirees is more valuable to you than insurance for people who literally have no work.

                Someone willing to throw people out in the street is in no position to ask me where I stand on anything.

                •  i know this is hard (0+ / 0-)

                  but when someone keeps bullying you, you have to stand up to them or they will keep doing it. but let's just keep giving in and pretend there were no other options. and let's refuse to take a stand on an issue without knowing what obama will do on it, because personality is all that matters.

                  The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                  by Laurence Lewis on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 09:38:19 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Oil Guy--I hope that you'll consider reading (4+ / 0-)

        the diary that I posted earlier this evening:

        'Dismal Prospects':  1 In 2 Americans Are Now Poor Or Low Income

        Granted, there are folks whose Social Security checks amount to no more than "pin money" as my Mother's generation would say.

        On the other hand, according to Janice Gregory, President of NASI (National Academy of Social Insurance), the lowest four (4) quintiles (80%) of Americans rely "heavily" on their monthly Social Security benefit checks.  [Meaning that it is their primary, or only source of income.]

        Here's a link to a piece that explains its policy impact quite thoroughly.  

        And here's an excerpt:

        Everything you need to know about Chained CPI in one post

        By Dylan Matthews, Updated:  December 11, 2012

        Here is a sentence you won’t hear politicians or policy wonks saying in the next few weeks: “We should pay Social Security beneficiaries less in the future and push a lot of people into higher tax brackets.” Here is a sentence you almost certainly will hear: “Let’s adopt chained CPI.” . . .

        That adds up to a big cut in Social Security benefits. Imagine, for example, a person born in 1935 who retired to full benefits at age 65 in 2000. According to the Social Security Administration, people in that position had an average initial monthly benefit of $1,435, or $17,220 a year. Under the cost-of-living-adjustment formula and 2012 inflation, that benefit be up to $1,986 a month in 2013, or $23,832 a year. But under chained CPI, the sum would be around $1,880 a month, or $22,560 a year. That’s a cut of over 5 percent, and more as you go further and further into the future:

        The results by using chained CPI for taxes are also striking. The Tax Policy Center calculated the income tax increases that would be caused by a switch to chained CPI. They’re not big — a little more than $100 a year for most families — but they’re oddly regressive:

        The group getting the biggest tax hike is families making between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. Their increase is almost six times that faced by millionaires. That’s because millionaires are already in the top bracket, so they’re not being pushed into higher marginal rates because of changing bracket thresholds. While a different inflation measure might mean that the cutoff between the 15 percent and 25 percent goes from $35,000 to $30,000, the threshold for the top 35 percent bracket is already low enough that all millionaires are paying it. Some of their income is taxed at higher rates because of lower thresholds down the line, but as a percentage of income that doesn’t amount to a whole lot. . . .

        All told, chained CPI raises average taxes by about 0.19 percent of income. . . .

        You don’t hear a lot of politicians calling for the drastic slashing of Social Security benefits and an across-the-board tax increase that disproportionately hits low earners.  But that’s what they’re sneakily doing when they talk about chained CPI.

        “If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 01:14:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  You should be nervous (4+ / 0-)

      The current CPI doesn't keep up with inflation for seniors who spend much more on health care and medicine.  The lowering prices of electronics, for example, which figures highly in determining the cost of living, doesn't factor in much for seniors.

      In case of Chained CPI, the problem will be made much, much worse.  The longer someone is on Social Security, the more they lose since their check doesn't rise with even the standard cost of living increase.  It's been calculated that a senior in their 80s could lose about a tenth of their annual income, about $1300 - 1500 per year.  

      It's a big deal when seniors are already having to decide between food and medicine.

      I'm about to get Social Security in 2 months.  My concerns aren't personal, but about future generations who will keep on paying into SS (except for people making over $110,000 per year) on every dollar they earn.  Taking the cap off contributions will make SS more current.

      Additionally, I don't see how SS even factored into these current discussions other than the continued hatred of the GOP for SS, Medicare, and Medicaid.  SS doesn't use any tax dollars, doesn't add to the deficit in any way, and isn't part of the national debt.  It's entirely self-funding.

      There already is class warfare in America. Unfortunately, the rich are winning.

      by Puddytat on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:56:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  SS is not part of the deal passed. (0+ / 0-)

        Secondly, the reason that SS is part of the conversation is that come 2032 there is a 25% cut in benefits if the SS fund is not made solvent beyond that year. A chained CPI extends this out past 2032. I am not sure how far it extends it out.  

        Right man, right job and right time

        by Ianb007 on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 01:37:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (137)
  • Community (59)
  • Elections (39)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Culture (32)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Law (27)
  • Economy (26)
  • Texas (26)
  • Baltimore (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (23)
  • Labor (23)
  • Hillary Clinton (22)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Health Care (18)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • International (17)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Freddie Gray (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site