There really is no point in going too in-depth on this. It's rather straight-forward. My only reason for sharing this is because this specific proposal for cuts in Social Security came as news to me this morning. My guess is that it may come as a surprise to others as well.
Lawmakers are considering changes to how Social Security is adjusted for inflation.
Then again...
...maybe yet another sneak attack on the benefits of retirees comes as no surprise to anyone (emphasis mine):
When inflation rises, retirees' social security checks keep pace with small increases. But if some lawmakers get their way, those raises may be a whole lot smaller in the future.
As part of the current deficit-reduction talks, White House officials and Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle are advocating changes to the way inflation is calculated. The little-noticed proposal advocates measuring inflation with the "chained consumer price index," a metric that would likely make inflation look slower than the current measurement does.
[...]
Well, that's comforting. It's good to see White House officials advocating for these
cuts in Social Security. Tricky little sneaks. If they can't find a way to make
cuts in Social Security directly, they'll find a back door into the
cuts in Social Security.
Which is, of course, exactly what was promised by the guy in charge when he pledged that the option he would be advocating going forward was?
Let's take a trip down Social Security Memory Lane:
"I think that the best way to approach this is to adjust the cap on the payroll tax so that people like myself are paying a little bit more and the people who are in need are protected. That is the option that I will be pushing forward."
And why would he be pushing that option going forward?
OBAMA: That’s why I would look at potentially exempting those who are in between. This is an option that I would strongly consider, because the alternatives, like raising the retirement age, or cutting benefits, or raising the payroll tax on everybody, including people making less than $97,000 a year--those are not good policy options.
Somehow, those
cuts in Social Security are now good policy options. Either that, or he's busy pushing bad policy options on America.
And just what do those cuts in Social Security mean? Not just to seniors, but others as well?
That would result in smaller Social Security increases for seniors, experts say. "Seniors cannot afford this," says Mary Johnson, a senior policy analyst at The Senior Citizens League, a non-profit seniors rights advocate. "This would negatively impact not just seniors, but also many families that end up helping out these seniors financially."
By the numbers:
For the roughly 60% of seniors who rely on Social Security for at least half of their retirement income, this is a big deal. Under the new calculation, the rate of inflation would grow at an average annual rate of about 0.3% less, on average, than under the current calculations, according to the Congressional Budget Office. If Social Security uses the new measurement to determine cost-of-living adjustments, the average retiree would receive about $18,000 less in benefits over 25 years, according to The Senior Citizens League.
That's $18,000 less over 25 years. That averages out to be about $750 less per year. That's $750 less per year grandmom can use to buy food to eat. Or pay increasing health care costs to keep her alive.
You know, there was a bit of an uproar when AZ governor Brewer managed to cut Medicaid funding for those in need of medical assistance.
"She's signing death warrants -- that's what she's doing. This is death for me," says Gravagna, 44, a heavy-set man who takes 14 medications to stay alive.
In fact,
Keith Olbermann was very focused on the lives of those being affected by the cuts. Or the lives lost. And I recall many being up in arms over it. It was "Jan Brewer's 'Death Panel'", IIRC.
Apparently something has happened along the way that hardened some to the idea of killing gradmom by a thousand cuts in Social Security. And something tells me that if cuts in Social Security like this are to go through, and they can tangentially or directly be linked to deaths as a result, somehow the outrage will fall silent.
After all, IOKIYAD.
I think that's what others were trying to get at when they took issue with the messenger relaying the reality that:
President Obama Says YES! To Keeping Social Security Cuts On The Table