Skip to main content

View Diary: White House: No Medicare age increase, cut Social Security instead (360 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Dear Liberals, Chained CPI is NOT a "Cut" to SS (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, VirginiaBlue, Gideon, hmi

    Dear Liberals, Chained CPI is NOT a "Cut" to Social Security. Get Over It.

    Please read the link above Posted by Deaniac83 at People's View to understand CPI and what POTUS is doing.

    "...The nature of our democracy and the nature of our politics is to marry principle to a political process that means you don't get 100 percent of what you want." President Obama, March 2011.

    by Aliosman on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:39:12 PM PST

    •  Yes it is! (26+ / 0-)

      Destructive, unwanted and unneeded -- that blah blah is weasel-propaganda.

      STAND AGAINST SAFETY NET CUTS!

      Millions of us – the majority – must come together to insist that President Obama and the Democrats stand up and fight for the things we sent them there to do ... Michael Moore

      by MT Spaces on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:43:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dear Conservative (26+ / 0-)

      Yes it is a cut and a Very Fucking Bad Idea.  Nobody could  honestly say it is a good and necessary thing.

      Raise the cap.  Problem solved.

      You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

      by Johnny Q on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:45:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dear Conservative: get lost. (25+ / 0-)

      When an article starts out thusly, the red flag goes up:

      There is a big freakout over a possible fiscal cliff deal including the use of something called "chained CPI" to calculate increases in Social Security benefits. Go to Huffington Post, Daily Kos or another "liberal" blog and you will see people who never supported the president in the first place but nonetheless claim to be his "base" lamenting over what a backstabber he is.

      Republicans...What a nice club...of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses. Der Spiegel -6.62, -6.92

      by CanyonWren on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:46:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  yes, it's a cut to SS (20+ / 0-)

      I'll exaggerate to make it obvious:

      Suppose SS was not indexed to inflation at all. That would be a cut, yes? If you lived 20 years after retirement, you'd be starving because inflation would have eaten half your benefit.

      That proposal would be a cut compared to today's benefits.

      Picking a lower inflation rate does the same thing; it's only a partial cut from my scenario.

      And, no, chained CPI is not more accurate for seniors. CPI-E is more accurate. Guess what: it's a higher inflation rate.

    •  Chained CPI is a cut (17+ / 0-)

      Your spin, no matter how many ways or how many times that you try it, is ineffective.

      Everybody knows that when you make a change and end up getting a smaller amount of money in the end, it's a freaking cut.

      Get over it.  You need to find some new spin. Good luck with that.


      "Justice is a commodity"

      by joanneleon on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:53:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's a cut in the rate of increase. Which is a (0+ / 0-)

        cut, I agree, in what we (I) will get to live on, if we (I) live long enough for it (what we'll lose) to accumulate over time.

        It's a cut.  But there are other questions to which we as yet don't know the answers. This one (cut or no cut) is a distraction, imo.

        1)  Will there be some compensatory adjustment that would keep the needy -- most of us, but not all -- from losing?  And if so is it enough, or too risky?

        2)  Is this offer for real, or could it be intended for some other purpose?  Remember, O's been offering it for awhile and it hasn't happened.

        3)  Is there some big prize he's aiming for, which we're not factoring in?  I don't know what that might be, but I'm constantly being reminded by all these negotiations that I'm way out of the loop, as apparently are we all.

        Am I so trusting that I think we should just see what happens?  No, we've got to push and push hard.  

        But is the way to do that to scream that Obama's a stealth corporatist shithead who's scheming to starve us and reward the bankers and dominate the world?

        No.  And that's the basic problem I have with some of our progressive reactions.  Imo we should focus on the strategy -- the bad ideas we want to defeat and the good ones we want to win.  Screaming "shithead" is extremely unlikely to get us anywhere, except dismissed and ignored.

        We've made some real progress this way.  Austerity, for example, is no longer safe from criticism.  

        That's because Krugman & many others have laid out a strong rationale for temporary stimulus, and because over time more examples of its (austerity's) stupidity have had a chance to develop (Europe).  Not -- dare I say -- because DK folk have threatened the Pres. with our all-powerful wrath.  That, imo, just makes us irritating.

        So let's push to stop the cuts!  'Nuff said.

        •  Respectfully, the very definition of austerity is (0+ / 0-)

          what is getting ready to happen (or begin).

          "Raising taxes, at the same time that benefits are cut,"--is austerity.

          Just ask the Greeks, the Brits, etc.

          IOW, a stimulus package for infrastructure or R&D won't change the fact that if a Grand Bargain is struck, and we get the tax reform that corporatist Dems and Republicans want, at the same time that they are cutting Social Security and Medicare--we'll be entering a period of big-time austerity!

          You can take that to the bank, LOL!

          Mollie

          "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible." --Frank L. Gaines

          "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 Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 08:46:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  If this happens then you'll be correct. So far, (0+ / 0-)

            though, we don't really know what's going to happen.

            Have you seen something I've missed about taxes being raised, or cutting Medicare?  

            Did any of us foresee the resolution to the debt limit "crisis"?  All I remember was a lot of talk about trillion-dollar coins and constitutional challenges as being the last resorts.

            Otoh, we're going to get some real austerity when the climate change gets rolling and we realize we can't just consume more green products to deal with it.  

            •  hooper, you might want to read the President's (0+ / 0-)

              own Fiscal Commission's proposal The Moment Of Truth.  Here's the link.

              The Fiscal Commission recommend that the revenue be raised by "broadening the base and lowering the (marginal) tax rates."

              Translation:  Tax the poor and middle class, so that the marginal tax rates on the wealthy and corporations can be lowered "for competitiveness."
              There is an entire section on this in the Chairman's Mark proposal that I linked to above.  It's called "Tax Reform."

              Here the Table of Contents from the proposal:

              Table of Contents

              Preamble ..................Page 6                              
              The Mission..............................Page 8
              The Looming Fiscal Crisis........Page 10
              Our Guiding Principles and Values...Page 12
              Overview.................................Page 14
              The Plan..................................Page 18
              I. Discretionary Spending Cuts .......Page 20
              II. Tax Reform ...........................Page 28
              III. Health Policies ....................Page 36
              IV. Other Mandatory Policies......Page 44
              V. Social Security........................Page 48
              VI. Process Reform ...................Page 56
              Appendix

              Apologize that this does not "copy and paste" in a decent format.  But the information is there.  Please take time to read this.  These recommendations have been, and will continue to be passed and implemented piecemeal over the next years of this Administration.

              There are MANY CUTS to Medicare that the President has proposed.  I will link to his written proposal, which is in PDF Form, and again, like the Table above, does not easily copy and paste.

              Here's the President's proposal entitled "Living Within Our Means and Investing in the Future."  He details many cuts to our Social Insurance Programs, especially to Medicare.

              Here's the link.

              This is not a "conspiracy theory," unless you consider the President's own proposals from the White House website, to be in that category.

              Here's a brief excerpt from a Kaiser Health News article about the President's proposal to raise the Medicare premiums for the top 25% earners, which on today's dollars, means folks making as little as $40,000 annual income.

              Apparently, "rich" has been defined down, when it comes to taking away our social insurance benefits.  We need to let our voices be heard, that this is unacceptable.

              Here's the excerpt from Kaiser:

              Affluent Seniors Could Take A Hit On Medicare

              By Mary Agnes Carey and Marilyn Werber Serafini

              KHN Staff Writers

              Nov 13, 2011

              In the scramble to come up with a deficit-reduction deal by Thanksgiving, members of Capitol Hill's super committee (as recommended by the President) appear to have one group squarely in their cross hairs: high-income Medicare beneficiaries. . . .

              House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has left the door open to asking wealthy seniors to pay more, and public opinion polls show support for the idea.

              Current law already requires seniors with annual incomes of $85,000 and above ($170,000 for couples) to pay more than others for Medicare Part B, which covers doctor bills and other outpatient costs.  In 2012, the standard premium will be $99.90 per month.  Premiums for wealthier seniors will range from $139.90 to $319.70 per month.  

              About 5 percent of seniors fall into the higher-premium group now. President Barack Obama wants the share of beneficiaries paying more for their coverage to grow over time to one quarter of all beneficiaries. If that were the case today, people with incomes as low as $40,000 a year would be paying higher Medicare premiums,

              And the pages that you need to read in the President's proposal that pertain to many cuts to Health Care are Pages 35-43.
              Current law already requires seniors with annual incomes of $85,000 and above ($170,000 for couples) to pay more than others for Medicare Part B, which covers doctor bills and other outpatient costs.  In 2012, the standard premium will be $99.90 per month.  Premiums for wealthier seniors will range from $139.90 to $319.70 per month.  

              About 5 percent of seniors fall into the higher-premium group now.  President Barack Obama wants the share of beneficiaries paying more for their coverage to grow over time to one quarter of all beneficiaries.

              If that were the case today, people with incomes as low as $40,000 a year would be paying higher Medicare premiums, higher levels of income�  

              Beginning in 2017, the Administration proposes to increase income-related premiums under Medicare Parts B and D by 15 percent and maintain the income thresholds associated with income-related premiums until 25 percent of beneficiaries under Parts B and D are subject to these premiums�

              This will help improve the financial stability of the Medicare program by reducing the Federal subsidy of Medicare costs for those beneficiaries who can most afford them�

              This proposal will save approximately $20 billion over 10 years�

              Other topics for savings to Medicare are:

              (1)  Modify (Raise) Part B deductible for new
              beneficiaries.

              (2)  Introduce home health co-payments for
              new beneficiaries.

              Medicare beneficiaries currently do not make co-payments for Medicare home health services� This proposal would create a home health copayment of
              $100 per home health episode, applicable
              for episodes with five or more visits not preceded by a hospital or other inpatient post-acute care stay�

              (3)  Introduce a Part B premium surcharge
              for new beneficiaries that purchase near first-dollar Medigap coverage.

              Again, see Pages 34-43 in the President's recommendations to the Supercommittee for all of the cuts.

              Hope this is helpful.  The information is "hidden in plain sight," LOL!  It's just a matter of knowing where to go to find it, I suppose.

              [This is a mess, sorry.  Pushed for time.]

              Mollie

              "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible." --Frank L. Gaines

              "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 Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 08:41:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks Mollie! That took some work. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                musiccitymollie

                I read the stuff...what a hodgepodge of proposals!  Quite a few good ones, and quite a few bad ones, as you point out.

                Remembering back to the summer of 2011 I can only hope that much of this proposal was never supposed to become law, but rather was the initial push to show the public how reasonable and solution-seeking Obama was in the runup to the election.   There was no way the Repubs would go for this plan, so proposing it forced the Republicans to go on record obstructing plans that Americans liked.  I recall he even padded his proposals with Republican-initiated ideas, so he could say they wouldn't even vote for their own plans.

                I suspect the situation is more fluid than we are aware...a lot of ideas floating around, some real, many planned for political effect, some included to avoid provoking opposition at particular times.

                All we can do is learn & push.  Thanks for helping me learn.  Now we've got to find better ways to push.

                •  You're welcome, hooper. The truth is that I'm an (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  hooper

                  "oddball," who actually likes reading briefs and regulations.

                  Guess it's a holdover from my twenty plus years with DOD, in federal civilian service, LOL!

                  Mollie

                  "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible." --Frank L. Gaines

                  "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 Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 10:36:55 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Semantic nonsense. Seniors still receive less. (10+ / 0-)

      If you want to debate which is the best way to describe it, then fine. But that changes nothing. Seniors in the future will receive less than they otherwise would, and there is no definition "cut" that would make this not one.

    •  I'm looking forward to downshifting in my dotage (5+ / 0-)

      to dry dog food from that wet cat food stuff to keep up with inflation.  And walking more instead of buying expensive bus tickets.  The future is fungible and bright.

      The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

      by accumbens on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 02:04:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Please, no Third Way hucksterism (18+ / 0-)

      If it weren't a cut, it wouldn't be saving the government $200 billion over the next 10 years.

      Democratic Leaders must be very clear they stand with the working class of our country. Democrats must hold the line in demanding that deficit reduction is done fairly -- not on the backs of the elderly, the sick, children and the poor.

      by Betty Pinson on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 02:14:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  it is called INFLATION (11+ / 0-)

      and you can return to your propagandist site

      Believe me, as a 100% total and permanent disabled veteran, I know goddamn well what chained CPI is

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

      by Jeffersonian Democrat on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 02:20:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hey..People's View is still around? (5+ / 0-)

      Still got people and views? Good to hear. Centrist and Conservative Democrats need a voice in our party.  Somebody has to stick up for the establishment. Don't agree with you all on economic and budget policy, but you all are okay in my book.

    •  lol (0+ / 0-)

      Deaniac83?  At People's View?  

      I guess they're right on board with taking money from seniors while more than 50% of the discretionary budget is spent on Defense?  Or, more accurately the MIC.

      And taking money from seniors in the future rather than fighting to raise the cap.

    •  Please stop, it's a cut (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      musiccitymollie

      At least be honest that its a cut in benefits.

      "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

      by noofsh on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 07:56:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The People's View has a purpose (0+ / 0-)

      If you choose to believe it...from someone who apparently thinks liberal is a deragatory term...so be it...

      "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

      by justmy2 on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 08:26:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  yes...we should pay attention to someone (0+ / 0-)

      who hyperbolically says DailyKos didn't support the President...to get page views...is supposed to be taken seriously?

      HAHA

      "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

      by justmy2 on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 08:31:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  that article is one the Wall St Journal (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CanyonWren

      would be proud of in terms of how much it manipulated facts and created strawman.

      That dude actually said liberals would call cuts to future defense spending a cut..because...well because he/she dislikes liberals...

      hilarious...

      "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

      by justmy2 on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 08:51:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site