AARP statement on Social Security Cut... NO!!!!!!

[kpete]

AARP to Congress and the President: Don't Cut Social Security

"Adopting the chained consumer price index for Social Security benefits will take $112 billion out of the pockets of current Social Security beneficiaries in the next 10 years alone, and is neither fair nor warranted.

"Social Security is currently the principal source of income for nearly two-thirds of older American households, and roughly one third of those households depend on Social Security for nearly all of their income. Half of those 65 and older have annual incomes below $18,500. Every dollar of the average Social Security retirement benefit of about $14,800 is absolutely critical to the typical beneficiary.

"The Chained CPI is a stealth benefit reduction that will compound over time and cut thousands of dollars in retirement income for current beneficiaries. A typical 80-year-old woman will lose the equivalent of 3 months worth of food annually. The greatest impact of Chained CPI would fall on the oldest, eventually resulting in a cut of one full month's benefit annually. This dramatic benefit cut would push thousands more into poverty and result in increased economic hardship for those trying desperately to keep up with rising prices."

Read more here: http://www.heraldonline.com/2012/12/18/4494295/aarp-to-congress-and-the-president.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/19/1171815/-AARP-statement-on-Social-Security-Cut-NO

[iemitsu]

1. I hope everyone who reads this sends congress the message that this is unacceptable.

I know that seniors can not absorb this hit as my M-I-L is living with us because her SS check and her retirement check are not enough to live on. She has more resources than many older Americans and can't afford both a place to live and food.
If Obama manages to do this nasty and immoral trade-off with republicans, it will be his defining moment. He will go down in history as the democratic president who starved old people to allow the richest Americans to avoid paying their fair share.

[liberalmike27]

62. Obama

Continues to disappoint.

I was hoping for better in his second term, when he no longer has to be reelected, or get corporate funding.

Hell, might as well have voted for Hillary, another "neoliberal."

[byeya]

73. I feel the same

[iemitsu]

104. Yeah, its totally depressing.

There are so many ways to strengthen Social Security and make it stronger and all our "public servants" can think to do is steal from old people to provide tax breaks for the rich.
Its shameful.
If I were president I would propose reducing retirement and health benefits for congress and the executive before reducing the already meager Social Security benefits that the elderly need to survive. How can a man propose taking from the weak to give to the strong and look himself in the face?

[djean111]

2. Oh gosh, AARP is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good!

Whoever floated that balloon, in my opinion, wanted to know what people think.
So they are finding out.
I don't see what the big deal is about being critical.
Don't we laugh at freepers and fauxpers believing and agreeing with any old thing that is fed to them - even downright lies and things that change daily?

[grahamhgreen]

3. 3 months worth of food annually...

[dkf]

4. Social security isn't meant to be the sole source of income in retirement.

It was never intended to do so and wasn't funded to do so.

The lack of planning or forethought that people put into their futures is breathtaking. It's really no wonder we can't properly fund infrastructure or cope with global warming. Our short term thinking is all pervasive.

[Glitterati]

7. So, what? The folks who depend on social security alone, should just DIE?

Is that your answer?

Social Security wasn't meant to be MY sole income either. But, then, I presumed my husband would live long enough to collect his social security.

[Glitterati]

19. Here's what I am saying

YOU stop corporate theft of pensions and then we will talk.

Simple.

[alcibiades_mystery]

8. Uh Muh Guh

[Demit]

10. You're right. It was supposed to supplement your company pension.

That used to be how people planned their futures. Until companies took them away, or found ways not to honor them. You are blaming the wrong people. You sound very young.

[Glitterati]

11. NOT young

This poster ALWAYS spouts the right wing version of rebuttals.

Always.

[Jazzgirl]

13. Glitterati, you are correct.

n/t

[Rustycup]

18. It was suppose to supplement pension

and your stock investments. However, the stock market takes big hits and unless you have lots of money you can not possible earn that much in the market. Also, what are politicians even thinking? Most people are losing their jobs before they are sixty, companies are canceling retiree benefits. Those in the 50-65 year old range don't have time to make up for it. Those that are younger maybe but still.....

[Sherman A1]

41. it was supposed to keep old people from starving

if we are talking about it's origins in the 1930's.

[dkf]

20. I am young enough to never have believed I would get a pension nor social security.

So I funded my 401k which has actually done damn well over all these years.

I grew up thinking I had to do it on my own. It seems I am one of the few who got the message and believe me I feel mighty fortunate that I did not think I would be taken care of.

[Glitterati]

21. You are so full of shit, it's not even funny

"401K has done damn well"

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha! Your lies are becoming obvious.

[Johnny Noshoes]

29. Yeah that is funny isn't it.

Before the crash I had 90 grand in a 401k - after - 60 grand. I never figured that the 401k would be a LOT of money but a supplement. I also didn't think I'd be out on my ass at 57 years old because the genius a hole who was the next to last CEO of the company I worked for would run it into the ground and it would go bankrupt. Try getting a job in your late 50's even with over 30 years of workplace experience. I did EVERYTHING I was able to do and yet here I am 58 years old and looking for work. It is getting better and I figure I will get a job. People try to play by the rules but they keep changing the rules - its enough to make you dizzy.

[Glitterati]

39. Exactly

401Ks have been the worst performers since 2007. ALL of them. None are immune from this economy.

Good luck in the job search. I've just given up. There's simply no way I can get hired as anything but Walmart greeter at 60.

[AllyCat]

43. Apparently, he is a real wizard with investing.

Perhaps he could set himself up to help people plan for their retirements with all that knowledge.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. That is not a function of youth. Republicans said no one would collect during the

original debates leading to the passage of Social Security. So the right has 'believed' they would not collect since before the act became law. 1935. And they never stopped.
"When the Act was debated in Congress, prominent Republicans in the House and Senate made attempts to delete the provisions creating the old-age pension system. They said they preferred to rely solely on the assistance (charity/welfare) approach to help the aged."
It's all here to read.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/reports/crsleghist3.html

[Beacool]

45. Well, bully for you!!!

The reality of most people's life is different from yours. There are so many factors that can affect your income, such as illness and job loss. There are also those who are too poor to begin with to be able to save enough to live on in their old age. Besides, you and I may have a 401K, but millions of people work in jobs that don't offer it. There are so many people who work hard and can barely pay their bills and put food on their table at the same time. That's their reality.

I'm sorry, but you sound smug and insensitive.

[Dustlawyer]

48. My dad had a pension, right up until he was ready to retire. The company went bankrupt,

stole the pension money to fund golden parachutes. My Dad passed, and my mom, who, unlike most moms in the 60's and 70's, worked. She worked at doctor's offices with no benefits for little money. Now she gets a little SS. Her house is paid for, but now she must sell and move. Her savings went to support 2 of my addicted siblings and pay when she went into the Donut Hole on her RX. She should starve right. It is her fault life happened to her and ruined her retirement security. The Pentagon deserves the 200 plus golf courses they have around the world. No cuts there, right!

[AlexSatan]

50. Her savings went to support 2 of my addicted siblings

Why in the world would she do that???

Not trying to be mean or snarky, but why would she dump her future down a black hole like that? My kids know that they would receive no help from us if they did anything like that.

[SugarShack]

80. EAsier said than done. IF we had healthcare, they would have had the health issued treated.

[oldbanjo]

92. I agree

[Dustlawyer]

112. I am with you on that, she finds it hard to deny her children. I have finally got her to stand firm

She kicked my sister out, and my brother will go once he recovers from surgery to save his life due to a failing pancreas. Seeing him almost dead in the hospital finally made her see what her "help" was doing. Still, she should not be in the situation she is in, even with her aid to these two addicts. She is not the problem with the country, but I would agree that she is not w/o blame for her situation.

[duffyduff]

61. 401(k)s were never designed to replace pensions or Social Security

They were supplemental savings plans, but Congress made sure there were loopholes an 18-wheeler could drive through. Companies simply decided to junk their defined benefit pensions, which are always better than 401(k)s, but the latter are far cheaper for them.

Many companies would love nothing better than to get rid of Social Security since they pay half of the contribution.

[mindem]

82. You sure assume a whole bunch.

In the real world millions of people don't have the luxury of investing in a 401K, or stocks, or IRAs or anything else because they earn only enough to scrape by. It's real easy to"think ahead" if you have the money.

[marew]

34. You are absolutely correct!

I have a pension. I am fortunate. But it was stolen from so many!

[OldDem2012]

22. Wow. Just wow. You NEVER miss an opportunity to spout right-wing garbage.....

....on ANY issue, do you?

Thanks to the latest massive financial collapse, Social Security is the ONLY retirement program currently available to millions of Americans. But you want to slam them for a "lack of planning or forethought" for believing their pension, 401K and other retirement programs would be there when they retired??

Perhaps you were on vacation when companies began reneging on their pension pay-out plans, or just flat-out siphoned them off into the pockets of their top executives.

Perhaps you missed the latest stock market crash the reduced the value of 401K plans nationwide.

Perhaps you missed the collapse of the housing market, destroying the hopes of many to sell their homes to help fund their retirements.

I could go on, but I'm afraid someone with your obvious sociopolitical views will never understand what you're being told by those of us on the left.

You're obviously unhappy on this board....why don't you go out and find a board that better suits your obvious right-wing leanings?

[strongermessage]

23. Insulting.

Unfortunately, too many people who are on social security either did not have the resources to adequately invest in "their futures," or did not have access to a pension plan at their workplaces. Furthermore, social security has no impact on "properly funding the infrastructure or coping with global warming." Needless wars have depleted the resources for the infrastructure and the same people who want to tamper with social security benefits also believe that global warming doesn't exist.

[Sadiedog]

24. Maybe not...

I`m in my late 50`s and would love to be able to save for retirement but guess what? I need every dime I earn just to keep my head above water. And no, I don`t live a lavish lifestyle.

[n2doc]

26. Meant or not meant, it is.

Poor People will suffer with this. Far more than the rich will. Saying something wasn't supposed to happen doesn't change reality.

I still ask, where were the benefit increases when these tax cuts went into place in the first place? Shouldn't the first task be to cut the things like tax cuts and military spending that got us into this problem in the first place? Bring back Carter era tax rates and military spending, and if that doesn't do the trick, then we can talk.

[gollygee]

27. A huge number of people live completely hand to mouth

There are tons of people who can't save a dime because to do so would make them hungry or homeless.

Should they just die off?

[joeglow3]

60. Agreed, but there are tons of people where that is NOT the case

The impossible task is identifying the two.

I have a great job and, at 35 years old, am now making low six figures (barely six figures) in a low cost of living state. My wife and I have saved over 25% of our income from day one. Barring an unlikely emergency, we will be able to retire early and have no need for social secuirty. What frustrates me is when I look at my coworkers. They could be in the exact same boat, but choose to put 3% into retirement and piss the rest away on their house, cars, vacations, toys, etc. As cold hearted as it is, I would have little problem with them getting little in social security. They are effectively blowing everything for fun and then, when they get older, demand a portion of my money that saved by denying myself the same luxuries they enjoyed.

Sadly, we can never know the difference with all recipients and need to error on the side of caution.

[Glitterati]

64. Jumping to conclusions, condemning others

You have no idea what situation your co-workers are in, yet you come here and talk about them like they are the scum of the earth.

Good for you. But others have things like college debt, child support payments, etc. which preclude them from following your example. Why do you feel it is appropriate to jump to conclusions when you have no facts to back them up?

[joeglow3]

66. I have worked with them for 10 years, 50 hours a week.

I know enough to know who is frugile and who is not. I know who is divorced and who is not. I know I lived in a $120,000 3 bedroom house with 3 kids until last year (when we upgraded to a $180,000 house) and there are people below me who have built new houses for over $300,000 and yet can't afford to drop a penny into furnishings. This is not rocket science. If they were having the problems you identified, there is no excuse for a married couple with no kids to drop $300,000+ into a 4,000 square foot, 4 bedroom two story.

Sorry, but these are based on concrete facts. However, good for you feeling it is appropriate to jump to conclusions when you have no facts to back them up.

[Glitterati]

67. Outward appearances can be deceiving

I have a sister who played the exact same game. It all fell apart when the economy crashed.

That house she let folks think she bought? A rental.

The nice cars? All went back when the credit cards changed her credit limit to what she had ON the card already. Credit ranking? She's using a prepaid credit card now trying to rebuild it.

She can't pay her bills. But, whooo hooo, everyone THOUGHT she had it all.

[joeglow3]

68. Interesting about the rental home

I an nosy (I admit it) and make great use of the assessor's website. We had two couples who recently "bought" houses in the neighborhood, yet they are still owned by real estate companies. I would never (and have never) say anything to anyone, as it would probably humiliate them. However, looks like they may be playing the same game.

[Glitterati]

69. Yeah, happens a lot

Rental with an option to buy (which will never be exercised).

Pretty home. Recently built, custom everything. 5 bedrooms.

And she struggles to pay the rent most months.

[gollygee]

71. Your co-workers are not the ones who will suffer from this

Their 3% (plus matching funds?) will give them something to work with, plus their $300k house can be sold and they can move into a smaller home.

The people who will be hurt are people earning $20k to $40k (or less) with no ability to save anything at all.

And there are a lot more people in that salary range than yours.

[oldbanjo]

95. I know a lot of people who have gotten devorced

after retirement, this was not in their plans, It's hard to plan for the future many things can and will happen to screw things up. Everyone on SS needs a raise and they earned every penny that they draw.

[Stonepounder]

28. You are a smug bastard.

Let's see... lack of planning and foresight. Yeah, I lacked foresight when the tech bubble collapsed and I lost about 25% of my savings. I lacked foresight when my Enron stick became worthless. I planned for my company to sell itself and devalue the stock that I held. I planned to get transferred from Kentucky to Missouri just as housing prices collapsed and it took a year to sell my house in Kentucky (so a full year of double mortgage payments and insurance payments) and then when I finally did sell it, I was the one that had to bring money to closing rather than the buyer. (and no you pompous idiot, I did not have an ARM, I had a fixed rate mortgage from a local bank and no i didn't buy more house than I could afford.)

And the biggest lack of planning and forethought that I strolled blithely into was getting laid off from the company I had worked 20 years for when I was 60.5 years old. I lacked the forethought to not have chosen a career path that led me into a highly technical and highly specialized career path that resulted in my being too specialized in my knowledge to easily transfer into another job. Several hundred resumes later (who wants to hire a 60-year-old techno-geek?) and after my unemployment insurance ran out, I finally gave up and took my Social Security, and that's what I live on now.

So, take your "lack of planning or forethought" and just shove it where the sun don't shine. Oh, yeah, and you can take your "short term thinking" and put it right there beside it!

[Johnny Noshoes]

35. THANK YOU

nt.

[marew]

36. Very well put!

I also lost a bundle in the dot com debacle. My paid for house value here in FL has plummeted. Yet I am so much better off than so many others.
Greed of the very rich is the new normal! Playing by the rules guarantees nothing!

[leftstreet]

56. +1

Welcome to DU!

[Quantess]

110. Agreed, and well said.

The lack of empathy makes me ill.

[olegramps]

31. Many people are barely surviving. Do you want them to just die?

[OKNancy]

44. She doesn't care, she has hers

It's been my contention in various run-ins with this one is that I don't care if Medicare or SS can't pay for themselves... pay it anyway. It's for the greater good of society ( "the village" ) > Take the money from something else or tax something/someone else.

[AllyCat]

32. So lets cut their benefits to punish them?

Of course, it wasn't meant to be the sole source, but for MANY people, it is all there is. Job losses, pension raids, 401Ks in the tank, not to mention never having a job that paid enough to plan for a 401K are all reasonable problems behind the best hopes for retirement future.

But you know this. Don't you...

[RomneyLies]

33. And a 401K is supposed to be your primary source of income in retirement???

Man, what world do you live in?

[duffyduff]

63. You'd have to have literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in one

if not in the millions, to have a halfway decent monthly benefit. People have NO idea how much they'd need to save in those junk plans.

It's not possible to save that much money over the course of a working career unless one is very high income and never faces layoffs, health crises, or the tanking of the U.S. economy and stock market.

[HughBeaumont]

65. Yep. ZERO landmines, amazing stock market timing and constant high incomes.

I've been working at halfway decent-paying jobs for 15 years and I'm not even at 100k combined with both 401ks I have. I'm supposed to somehow get to a million in 18-20 more years? Yeah, THAT's going to happen. Is there a fortune-telling class I can take??

[duffyduff]

74. I get a small public pension of $300 a month

I would have to have well over 100k in a 401k to be able to have that same amount spread over a thirty-year period. That doesn't even include the monthly increases after year three.

I have been getting this pension for the past two years; I had to take it after being let go and the UI ran out.

[plethoro]

38. What! Nor did those who would eventually need Social Security expect theirs and their offspring's

jobs to be shipped overseas, or corporate banksters to derivatize away their homes and savings, or their real wages to keep diving, or crooked stockbrokers to arbitrage away their investments, nor to have multiples of what others are paying in healthcare. You post lacks
thought and understanding.

[John2]

49. I continue to

hear this argument for making excuses to dismantle Social Security and Medicare. Americans like those programs period!

We did not intend for the United States military to be in almost every country in the World either before or after World War II. When we go to War, the American people is suppose to decide that. The U.S. still has over 50 thousand troops in Germany also and 30,000 in South Korea. We are also sending vast amounts of money to other countries by buying them off.

Americans see Social Security as a retirement pension overwhelmingly, so whatever it was intended for is irrelevant! They want it and nobody gave the President or Congress permission to cut it. If they want to cut those programs, then come out in the Election and say so, instead of being cowards after they get Americans' votes! I believe most of the electorate in the Election, told the country what to cut and it sure wasn't that. So they need to keep their hands off of it and replace the funds they stole!

[Heather MC]

51. You are correct

social security was designed to be part of a three part plan,
Pension
Social Security
and
Personal Savings

Unfortunately Pensions were done away with for the most part. The economy crashed most people at retirement age at the time of the crash don't have time to wait for a full recovery

And thanks to this countries insane push to keep people spending no one is talking to people about how to save money.

Saving money has to be intentional, it doesn't just happen by accident. Most people have no Idea how to make money work for them, and there isn't a push to educate people on how to save money.

So in the end for a lot of people Social Security is all they have left to hope for.
And It's very necessary when you get to a point in your life when you can't work anymore and you never know what might happen to blow a whole in your savings it's nice to know at the very least you will have something that is a garantee.

[morningfog]

55. Wow.

[HughBeaumont]

89. Sure wish a few others would . . .

Unbelievable.

[arikara]

72. So somebody who worked for less

and lived pay cheque to pay cheque in order to feed their kids and keep a roof over their heads, or somebody who was too sick to work, or somebody who stayed home with the kids, or somebody who had a financial catastrophe and had to use their savings... or what's happening so commonly nowadays, somebody who was screwed out of their pension by corporate greed does not deserve to live with dignity when they can no longer work.

Piss off. What a nasty shitty inconsiderate attitude. Go ahead and hide my post I don't care, I'm so SICK of this shit.

Everybody deserves to live their old age in dignity and comfort. Corporations are NOT people and the rich already have more than they need.

[SugarShack]

78. They knew it would be the only source while they allowed stagnent wages for 30 yrs!!

[Cleita]

83. No but after the last two decades of interest cuts by the Fed and a couple of market

crashes, most of us who had a nest egg when we retired don't anymore. Neither my husband, nor I were fortunate enough to work for companies that offered pensions. That almost takes a union job to accomplish. So there you are. Even when you try to do the right thing, the right wingers who have been managing our economy screwed it up.

On edit: Seems that wasn't enough, so now they are after the last secure income we had our, Social Security. They want that too.

[spooky3]

84. I'm so proud of myself for planning to be healthy.

So I could remain employed at a good job. And, I planned on having good genes--aren't I smart? Oh yeah--and that reckless driver who did so much damage to my car that the body shop could not believe I was in the car when he hit it and I didn't get injured--I planned that accident really well too.



Of course you are right that some people who are lucky and capable of planning do not do a great job of it. But there are plenty of others who have done everything right, planned and scrimped and saved, but were still devastated by job loss, illness, etc.

And, your argument does not address whether social security benefits should be indexed for the REAL rate of inflation, in order to help people remain whole in the portion of their retirement that comes from SS.

[jtuck004]

85. Would this be the short-term profit seeking of greedy bankers and the politicians that work for them

The ones who destroyed so many people's lives?

Damn bad oversight on the part of those Walmart employees. Silly people get the Walmart subsidy, aka Earned Income Credit because their pay is so near the poverty line. The post suggest they are dumb bastards for spending it on food instead of investing it like Warren Buffet. On the other hand our elected officials vote for a program called TARP, with an assurance that (it's recorded) it will be used to stem foreclosures. Instead the banks use it to enrich themselves and say no to stopping over a hundred thousand FAMILIES from being yanked from their homes into the street. Then the government sends them hundreds of billions of dollars more.

There's some planning and forethought that's breathtaking.

Above, it seems in that point of view those 13 million people over 65 for whom this is their only source of regular income are thoughtless fools who just tempt fate by living until they are to be paid the Social Security they were promised.Don Quixote had nothin' on these people, eh?.

Money that would otherwise pay for these things, and for training and infrastructure, the things that create opportunity for people who work every day, is instead being used to fund useless wars, kill civilians (we've funded the deaths of more than 20 innocent children in our little drone wars in the past few years, at least 7 times more, btw), and and protect rich people from losing part of their billions of dollars.

That post above seems like grave dancing on a yet to be filled grave, just to make sure they hear you before they die. Or maybe I'm reading it wrong.

[femrap]

87. As over half the population,

women live longer (up to now that is), and over the past 65 years we have been paid CONSIDERABLY LESS than men. As a result, we don't get as much Social Security.

And what if a large number of women had low-paying jobs on minimum wage? Just how does one set aside money if working a minimum wage job?

Or what if an older woman gets cancer or some other EXPENSIVE DISEASE and she is wiped out. It's easy to do. Have you ever been hospitalized in the past three years?

There are many ways that a woman can reach old age without a rich husband and a reliable income that doesn't entail PLANNING. It's just life...the cards she was dealt.

You know, 'by the Grace of Goddess go I...'

If anything is short-sighted, it's the Corporations who only see three months ahead....but they don't have to pay taxes, now do they? Hell, lots of them get money back....those minimum-wage women give the Corporations their tax dollars.

Empathy. Try to imagine yourself in another's shoes. Now I know lots of people are not capable of this....and they have a very bad name.

[Doremus]

90. It was created because good people decided they could no longer stand by and watch

our nation's seniors unable to feed, clothe and house themselves.

Period.

You'd like to insert your disclaimers and rationalizations to make yourself feel better, but the fact remains that for many SS is all that separates them from living on the streets, just as they did in the 30s. Seems there are some folks today willing and able to turn a blind eye to that possibility.

[DJ13]

101. I was going to criticize you

But I think you must have gotten the message by now.

[Fearless]

107. Actually that's a right wing lie.

The exact phraseology is this: "To provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of Federal old-age benefits, and by enabling the several States to make more adequate provision for aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of their unemployment compensation laws; to establish a Social Security Board; to raise revenue; and for other purposes."

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title00/0000.htm

[Demit]

5. Good on AARP. I hope this Democratic president who is willing to cut Social Security is listening.

By the way, to register contempt for this idea, sign this White House petition :

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-no-cuts-social-security/xqsFsqLP

[tazkcmo]

75. Very Dissapointing

Signed the petition yesterday. Still fewer than 4k people have signed this. I would think this petition would be the most signed as most everybody knows somebody on SS or SSI. Makes me sad.

[DJ13]

102. Signed

Now at 4,030

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Good to see that someone understands arithmetic.

[AzDar]

9. K & R

[badgolfer]

12. Possible cuts

If Obama wants the Democrats to lose big in 2014, he should just continue down this path.

What is with this guy who always wants to appease the Republicans?

When will he learn that they hate him and will do anything to destroy his Presidency?

Just listen to McCain and Graham spitting venom every day.

[HiPointDem]

14. kr

[Maineman]

15. Chained CPI creates a downward spiral

After a few substitutions, the cost of living index would apparently be based on the price of potatoes and a can of beans. The talking point says that people substitute chicken for steak. Ha. Pure B.S. People with car elevators using their imagination again.

[Liberalynn]

16. I watched Bill Press this morning

was happy Barbara Lee said she won't vote for it, period.

Unfortunately the gentleman on, one House Rep, and one Senator said they are against Chained CPI but will wait to see what the rest of the package entails.

Look I am sorry but any proposal that has this in it should be DOA period.

I don't care how much revenue it raises. It is not enough to justify this HORRIBLE UNFORGIVEABLE, UNACCEPTABLE BETRAYL OF SENIORS AND THE DISABLED.

When you call, if you agree, make sure you tell your reps wait and see is not good enough.

They need to let both the President and Boner know now, that if this is in the deal, the deal should not even be brought to the floors of the House or the Senate to begin with. It needs to be off period, a non starter.

[marew]

37. Exactly! n/t

[leftyOhio]

30. Chained CPI

If this happens, it will automatically become a model that corporations will use when negotiating pay raises for it's workers. I can easily visualize some arrogant corporate stooge saying that it was good enough for retirees and that this method of determining the cost of living is acceptable to the government.

[Beacool]

42. Are the Democrats caving in?

If so, this is disgusting. The economic woes were the fault of younger and greedy generations, why should the elderly pay for these people's shortcomings? The avaricious companies and banks caused the collapse and the generation who did everything right has to pay for it????? I see the elderly in my church and my neighbor (she's 94 and sharp as a tack). They are the children of the Great Depression. They know what it is to have very little and they were careful with their money all their lives. Why should they pay for the careless spending of the generations that came after them? It is morally wrong.

[John2]

54. The President

and the democrats, don't have to cave. They are stupid to do so, when they have the Republicans' clearly exposed now for what they are! Seniors had a tough time figuring out the lies, Republicans were telling them in the Elections. Now, the Republicans are clearly out in the open wanting to hurt seniors. It will be political dynamite for the Republican party in 2014. They already have a problem with other groups, but seniors were one of the main constituency. The democrats should hold the line and let the Republicans self destruct. If we do go into a recession, it will not last.

[Rocky888]

46. I just sent my daily email to the President!

Keep sending and calling everyday. We cannot take this laying down. The very people that have been the most responsible for this mess are once again trying to make us pay for their fraud and theft. And our earned benefits did not cause this, and yet, they have the media pretending it did, with their silence of the truth. Every last one of these network hacks have completely turned their backs on us. Even mr. I'm a Jersey Shore middle class guy, Brian Willams. He my next e-mail, asking him to please explain the damage in detail of this CPI chain social security will have on ALL if this is passed. The one program not adding to our debt is the one the republicans want to ruin. Not only do they need to end this payroll tax holiday, may be consider an extra $5 more each paycheck to keep it solvent. Sorry or going on and on.........

[Mr Peabody]

47. Like the NRA, I do not expect the AARP to show much flexibility - that is what they get paid to do..

[forestpath]

53. How can you be "flexible" on peoples' lives? Either they have enough to eat or they don't.

To take away even one cent from people who have so little when the well off don't get touched is simply unconscionable.

And to compare the NRA to the AARP is unconscionable, too.

[Mr Peabody]

77. Not all older americans are starving, have you ever been to a Casino? 1 in 4 patrons are retired...

[MindPilot]

88. Yeah everybody in a casinio is fucking rich.

The retired people are in casinos because a slot machine has considerably better odds than a 401k.

[glowing]

52. The more sensible thing to do would be to increase

The social security tax. Why can't it be on everyone's annual salary for the entire amt of income earned. It's not like those making over $108,000.00 would be so hard up for paying more, when most Americans pay all year because they make less (and so what if we have to cap the amt that those who are wealthier take back out at retirement? Those people aren't relying mainly on social security to live once they retire anyway.

And LOCK it down. The govt cannot borrow people's social security to fund their wars or whatever else they think they should do (the greedy asses in charge of making laws are about as bad as CEO's using Pension Funds to pay themselves and then running away under bankruptcy and leaving tax payers to fund the workers pensions.

[Doctor_J]

57. WH to AARP...The hell with you!

you and the bleeding heart liberals can find another party if you don't like cuts!

[jwirr]

59. I will continue to fight any cuts to Social Security but I often wonder what this means to me

personally. I get only $264 of my income from Social Security. What do I lose in this deal?

[tazkcmo]

76. Anybody you care about?

I get no SS money as I'm fairly healthy and not retired but I know hundreds of people this will effect including my father, sister, cousin, best friend and a whole population at a retirement home.

To you it will mean lower COLA's in the future.

[jwirr]

109. I said I would continue to fight. I do not know how this works and wonder about someone like me

who gets so little.

[WillyT]

79. HUGE K & R !!!

[libdem4life]

81. AARP has been at the forefront for seniors...Medicare and Social Security

$19 a year.

I've looked, but haven't found any other PAC with 35 million members and one major issue...seniors 50 and older. I've been a bit criticized on here as it has been considered Republican, which is probably true. I don't buy anything they have yet, maybe I will...we need some powerful punch to our rights and benefits with all of those "negotiators" and their whittling knives and carving tools.

Consider the option ... wait and vote in 2014 or at worst 2016. These alerts come out almost daily. The bottom line...keep your grubby hands off our benefits. No changes. Heck, one came out with a text with a number to call the white house. That's power I can get behind.

And about the foreclosure shame that effected seniors...here...

http://www.aarp.org/about-aarp/press-center/info-07-2012/AARP-Study-Foreclosure-Report.html

Millions of Homeowners Age 50 and Older Remain at Risk

WASHINGTON— Today, AARP’s Public Policy Institute (PPI) released a new study measuring the progression of the mortgage crisis and its effect on people age 50 and older. Looking at nationwide loan-level data for 2007 through 2011, the analysis finds that more than 1.5 million older Americans lost their homes since 2007. The study also finds that the percentage of seriously delinquent loans – those in foreclosure and loans 90 or more days delinquent – increased from 1.1 percent in 2007 to 6.0 percent as of December 2011 for people age 50 and older, a more than fivefold increase.

“The collapse of the housing market has been especially painful for older homeowners,” said Debra Whitman, AARP Executive Vice President for Policy.

According to the report, millions of older homeowners also remain at risk. As of December 2011, more than half a million (600,000) loans were in foreclosure and a similar number (625,000) were 90 or more days delinquent. Further, as of December 2011, 16 percent of loans belonging to people age 50 and older – 3.5 million loans – were underwater, meaning the amount owed on the loan is greater than the value of the property.

“Older homeowners often rely on their home equity to finance their needs in retirement – things like health care, home maintenance and other unexpected needs. The fact that so many older Americans have no equity at all is troubling,” Whitman continued."

[JDPriestly]

86. The chained CPI is brutal. We shouldn't go there.

[nineteen50]

91. chained consumer price index

just another tool in the war against the poor

[taught_me_patience]

93. So everybody else gets cuts, but not old people?

112B over 10 years amounts to $10B/yr... a pittance in the overall scheme of the economy.

[retread]

94. Are you really this obtuse? Or just trolling?

[taught_me_patience]

105. You do realize what happens if we go over the fiscal cliff, right?

ALL of us get shitted on by the impending recession. We've got to make some compromises to get a deal done... everybody will have to share some level of cuts at some point... we're running a deficit that amounts to nearly 10% of total GDP.

[blkmusclmachine]

96. 2014 will be a bloodbath.

[gollygee]

97. Rick Snyder already cut my parents' pensions

They're retired school teachers. They're already having trouble because they budgeted their retirement with numbers in place, and those numbers have already been cut. Now they'll face more cuts.

It's always people who don't have much money in the first place who have to sacrifice when Republicans talk about "shared sacrifice." Their idea of "sharing" is like my 3-year-old's idea of sharing. Sharing means you share what you have with me, but not that I also share.

[Bozita]

99. Show this toon to your folks.

[Poll_Blind]

98. DU REC +1 nt

PB

[mnhtnbb]

100. I applied today (on-line) for social security. Guess what will be the date of my first check?

April Fool's Day 2013.

No joke.

[B Calm]

103. I plan to apply

on January 7th, birthday is April 7. Was it easy to do?

[Buns_of_Fire]

108. Very easy (I did it about six weeks ago). The SSA site leads you through it.

Just click on "Apply for Benefits", fill in a several boxes, and they give you an application number that you can use to log in in once a week or so to check on the status. After about two weeks, if all goes smoothly, it'll tell you that you've been approved, and to watch for a letter from them (all really official stuff will come by mail). In my case, about a week after that, a letter arrived that told the approximate date of the first payment, and how much it'll be for.

[mnhtnbb]

111. It was easy. I got a phone call the next day from an SS rep, though,

wanting to verify circumstances of reported income during a period
of time when I got divorced, changed my name, and changed jobs
three times. Apparently the computer had flagged all the changes.
Then the same rep called me back to verify that I had checked
having an adult child with a disability (prior to becoming an adult).
Yes again. My youngest has a juvenile, genetic form of macular
degeneration which makes him legally blind (he sees with his peripheral
vision) and apparently he may be eligible to collect benefits. We'll
have to make an appointment with our local ss office to look into it.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

106. Married couples

do better on Social Security benefits as my family found out. When my mother died in 2011, we moved my dad in with us since his S.S. was cut in half. He has a pension of a grand $187 a month that has never been raised in all his 91 years. It was a win/win. He's happy and secure with us, he has no money worries now, and our pets love him. He's an asset. I get the feeling we're a pretty typical household...old ones, young ones and we in the middle living together.

HANDS OFF Social Security!