No cost-of-living hike for Social Security again

[Better Believe It]

No cost-of-living hike for Social Security again
Expected announcement before election couldn't be worse for Democrats Advertisement
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
The Associated Press
October 10, 2010

WASHINGTON — As if voters don't have enough to be angry about this election year, the government is expected to announce this week that more than 58 million Social Security recipients will go through another year without an increase in their monthly benefits.

This week's announcement about Social Security benefits raises more immediate concerns for older Americans whose savings and home values still haven't recovered from the financial collapse: Many haven't had a raise since January 2009, and they won't be getting one until at least January 2012.

"While people aren't getting COLAs they certainly feel like they're falling further and further behind, particularly in this economy," said David Certner, AARP's legislative policy director. "People are very reliant on Social Security as a major portion of their income and, quite frankly, they have counted on the COLA over the years."

Social Security recipients got a one-time bonus payment of $250 in the spring of 2009 as part of the government's massive economic recovery package. President Barack Obama lobbied for another one last fall when it became clear seniors wouldn't get an increase in monthly benefit payments in 2010.

Congress took up the issue, but a proposal by Sen. Bernie Sanders died when 12 Democrats and independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut joined Senate Republicans to block it. Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine was the only Republican to support the second bonus payment.

Read the full article at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39603054/ns/business-your_retirement

[Vinca]

1. And to think they dare to speak of tax cuts for the wealthy.

[aquart]

3. But it's expensive to be rich and so cheap to be poor.

The rich need help!

[stray cat]

9. The wealthy are not getting an increase in SS either

[Stargazer99]

37. For most of the wealthy SS amount will not make or break them

[sabrina 1]

43. SS is pocket change to the wealthy. For the average elderly

American it is all they have. Are you seriously comparing the two?

[Better Believe It]

52. Right. They are really going to miss it. You're just joking .... right?

[demosincebirth]

4. They have no shame!

[dkf]

2. Did anyone get a raise over the last 2 years?

[bbinacan]

6. Not me. n/t

[stray cat]

7. Not only no raises but many got cuts in pay

[DJ13]

11. No

Im on disability, so no increases for me.

My wife works for a hotel that has spent hundreds of thousands in upgrades, but no raises there since 2008 (and even that was puny).

We're starting to feel like the frog in the pot as the water temperature slowly increases.

[discocrisco01]

16. I Did

I work for the Feds. My policy is that Social Security should get an increase if federal employees get a pay increase.

[dkf]

21. You are right that only the Feds seem to have gotten raises.

I'm not sure that is a good thing to point out to everyone else who hasn't seen a raise in ages.

[sabrina 1]

46. Yes, Wall St. CEOs, bailed out by the American people

received huge bonuses right after being bailed out.

And Congress got their COLA raise for two of the last four years.

[bbinacan]

5. COLA is based on CPI.

Short of changing the law, nothing can be done.

[DJ13]

8. They could give more one time stimulus checks to recipients

[bbinacan]

10. Why? n/t

[DJ13]

12. Because the CPI is a manipulated statistic that fails to show real inflation

Thats why.

[Sherman A1]

14. Precisely

I haven't seen prices going down on such things as food, fuel, electric, gas, telephone, trash service, etc. So, the cost of living is increasing despite what their funny numbers say.

[discocrisco01]

15. CPI

The CPI does not include the costs of increased health care and cost of energy. If they included it, it would be at least 2%.

[Statistical]

17. CPI includes both cost of energy and medical services.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm

[bbinacan]

25. Thanks for setting the record straight. n/t

[sabrina 1]

50. Why not? They had no problem bailing out Wall St. and letting

them use some of that money to give themselves huge, multi-million dollar bonuses, did they?

[Better Believe It]

13. Not really. Congress can vote to give Social Security recipients a special cost-of-living payment

As Senator Sanders will propose, hopefully with the all-out backing of the Obama administration.

[Odin2005]

31. Which seems to be ignoring food price inflation!

[sabrina 1]

48. Tell that to Congress. For two of the past four years,

they got their cost of living raises.

[Obamanaut]

18. This is not the surprise people are making it out to be. This was in

the news earlier this year.

The prediction is there will be no increase until 2012, and then only a modest one of about 1.4%.

[DJ13]

19. I remember that, and I wondered how they can know the inflation that far out

Its like they either already know the false inflation numbers they plan on putting out, or the Amazing Randy now works for the government.

[TheCowsCameHome]

20. Perception is everything.

If seniors find a Dememoratic administration isn't going to offer up increases for two straight years, it certainly will hurt the Dems at election time.

The Dems had better not ignore the seniors again, especially after no raise last year, either.

[bbinacan]

23. So, are you saying

that it's time to buy votes? :eyes:

[TheCowsCameHome]

28. Call it what you want,

if most of those legislators that represent us in DC can be assured of annual raises for not doing what they were elected to do, we want a piece of the action, too.

Tell seniors no increase too many times and they will vote for the other side because they my feel they have nothing to lose.

Do not risk it, Dems.

[Odin2005]

32. And disabled people like myself who get SSI.

[TheCowsCameHome]

33. If seniors and folks like yourself

feel Dems are sticking it to them, they will vote anti-Dem in droves.

Rightly or wrongly, that's what will happen.

DC Dems - you'd better listen up.

[DJ13]

34. +1

Every time I go shopping I can see the lie in their claims theres no inflation.

[Stargazer99]

35. Don't you think it is about time to think about those

who have no home, are hungry, have no medical/dental care? So SS has not had an increase in two years,many others have no increase and some are even in worse shape. Or is it a case of I have mine to hell with you conservative value? Incase you wonder, yes I receive SS-lower end...

[TheCowsCameHome]

40. Re-read my post.

Take it at face value.

Do not imply I don't care about others.

[juajen]

41. This SS recipient is taking care of an adult unemployed son

who eats a lot. Also an adult daughter who pays little of her expenses, though some. More people than granny are depending on ss these days.

[corpseratemedia]

49. +millions of votes

pay attention, dems!!!

this is fucking ridiculous, food inflation is hurting seniors and the disabled

[madfloridian]

22. That is considered okay here. No problem.

Seniors are noticing.

[Individualist]

39. The "I get along okay; screw those that can't" posts are reprehensible.

[sabrina 1]

51. Absolutely reprehensible. What has happened to this

Party? The SS benefits are small compared to other countries, yet there are actually Americans who would allow the elderly, disabled, dependent children to starve just to defend a political party. It is truly despicable, as you said.

[BzaDem]

55. If the CPI went up (and therefore SS checks went up), that just means each dollar of the check would

be worth less.

Please spare us your bullshit about how the Democratic party now hates seniors etc etc etc.

[sabrina 1]

56. I didn't say they hate them, I said many of them

don't care about them. I don't care about the CPI. It did not stop Wall St. crooks from getting their bonuses, nor Congress from getting their COLAs for two of the past four years. Congress needs to vote to give Seniors their cost of living wage, and that is all there really is to say about it as far as I am concerned. They do it for their buddies on Wall St. they can do it for the people who bailed them out.

[BzaDem]

57. The COLA increase would be 0, because the COL as defined by the CPI did not increase.

Congress did not get a COLA -- they got a raise on TOP of the COLA. Wall Street did not get a COLA -- they got bonuses on TOP of the COLA.

You could argue that Seniors should ALWAYS get a raise above and beyond the COLA, every year. But that is a different argument. There is nothing special about this year.

[DJ13]

58. the COL as defined by the CPI did not increase

Then the methodology in determining inflation is wrong.

[Statistical]

59. Why?

Prices aren't higher than they were in 2007/2008.

[DJ13]

62. You dont shop, do you?

If you account for packaging size prices ARE higher.

Yes a box of cereal costs the same, but that box has lost 30% in size over the last 2 years.

Portions shrink to maintain a price point instead of increasing the price for the same amount.

[Statistical]

64. Hardly

Prices have risen in last 12 months but they aren't higher than they were at the pre-crash peak.

Take gasoline for example. It is higher today then it was 9 months ago however nobody can claim they are paying more than they were in the summer of 2008.

CPI doesn't just measure food it measures 16 different price categories. Prices have risen but they haven't exceeded the 2008 highs.

[DJ13]

66. Take gasoline for example.

Energy isnt included in the CPI for the same bullshit reason food isnt, its considered too volatile.

Its too bad we cant exclude that volatility from our expenses every month.

[Statistical]

67. Easily debunked falsehood. energy, food, and medical services are ALL in CPI

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm

[DJ13]

70. Your quoting the CPI-U, SS is based on the CPI-W

[Statistical]

72. Here (link to CPI-W)

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.t04.htm

Still the commonly expressed claim that "x" is not part of CPI is false.

note X changes from month to but tends to revolve around
food
gasoline
electricity
medical costs
etc

[DJ13]

73. We use the CPI-W to annually adjust benefits paid to Social Security beneficiaries

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/cpiw.html

[Statistical]

74. Yeah and notice CPI-W peak in 2008.

This indicates the aggregate of prices (which despite your dubious claim does include gasoline, good, and medical services) peaked in Jul 2008 @ 216.304.

Until CPI exceeds 216.304 there will be no COLA increase to SS because a CPI of 216.304 is already "baked in" to existing SS checks.

SS doesn't lower SS payments despite CPI falling however that simply means more time until the next increase.

[Better Believe It]

61. Are are you opposed to Congress voting for a special COLA increase for Social Security?

I don't think you've endorsed the idea during this discussion but if I'm wrong please bring it to our attention.

Thanks again.

[sabrina 1]

63. There is something special about it. As you yourself point out

it is possible, and should have been done already, to make sure that Seniors and the disabled get their raises. The money is there in the fund they paid into. All this is is an attempt to keep that money from having to be repaid by the thieves who borrowed it for their wars and their bailouts.

So, pass a law that makes sure the most vulnerable Americans get at least as much care and attention as the wealthy, corrupt criminals who collapsed this economy, creating the situation we are now in. Seniors should not have to pay their debts for them.

[DJ13]

68. There is nothing special about this year.

Actually thats not true.

If were going to need to stimulate our stagnant economy theres no better stimulus than stimulating the lower classes, which happens to be the demographic most SS recipients are in.

Better them than Goldman Sachs (again).

[BzaDem]

45. You are angry because Obama can't produce inflation???

[sabrina 1]

24. Third year in a row, they have cut SS benefits, for no reason

whatsoever. There is plenty of money in the SS fund to cover a cost of living increase. The corrupt Wall St. thieves are stealing from that fund and forcing the elderly to pay their debts with the help of our elected officials. It's just disgusting.

And why wont' Dems commit to not voting for more cuts to SS before this election?

Because that's what they intend to do. And for me, and so many others if they do that, it will be the end. I hope I'm wrong.

[bbinacan]

27. What SS cuts? n/t

[sabrina 1]

47. Refusing to give seniors a cost of living wage which they are

entitled to for three years. That is a cut.

By comparison, Congress has received THEIR cost of living raises for two of the past four years.

So while they deny the poorest Americans their raises, they themselves forgot to vote to deny themselves their Cost of living wage when they thought no one was watching.

If it's a raise when you get it, it's a cut when you don't.

Wall St. CEOs have awarded them huge bonuses while poor elderly Americans have their benefits cut.

What a great country. And people are actually defending this? No wonder they do it, they know they can get away with it. Unlike France, Greece, Iceland and other places where the people still believe that it is their country too, that it doesn't just belong to the wealthy, corrupt, Wall St. crowd and their employees in Congress.

[bbinacan]

54. SS

no cpi=no cola. good grief

[Statistical]

60. Nobody on SS is "entitled" to a raise. Nobody.

Sorry.

SS was inteded to provide a fixed retirement.

Thus sat someone gets $1,000 SS check. Now price of goods goes up 3%. The SS check also goes up 3%. But it still has the same buying power.

Once you retire in REAL TERMS (adjusted for inflation) your SS check never rises. Never. The nominal amount may go up but that only means that price of goods have gone up. If SS goes up 15% it doesn't mean SS recipients are suddently rich. It means price of goods & services went up 15%.

CPI hasn't reached the peak of 2008. Now prices may fluctuate but they haven't exceeded the previous high in May 2008.

[sabrina 1]

65. SS benefits CAN be raised, and should be considering

the surplus there is in the SS fund. That would HELP the economy. There is nothing preventing them from raising benefits, nothing at all, and it has been done before.

This is a perfect time to do it. The SS fund is the only solvent fund there is in this government. Bailing out Wall St, borrowing from the SS fund to do so? Too bad for them. That money belongs to the people and they owe it. Now is the time to start raising benefits. It's long past due. No one can live on $1,000 a month. Other countries manage to take care of their seniors, what is wrong with this country? 'American Dream', what a nightmare it has turned out to be for those who worked hard, played by the rules, and are now begrudged even the retirement, small as it is, they EARNED and PAID for.

[Statistical]

71. Couple points:

a) However increases beyond COLA will deplete SS trust fund faster. Just because there is "money there" is foolish reason to spend it. That money has to last decades until Boomers die. To spend it just because you "can" is horribly irresponsible.

b) Congress could do that but it wouldn't be a COLA increase it would be supplemental SS increase. CPI is below 2008 peak thus there will be no COLA increases until CPI reaches previous peak

SS is a fixed income plan. On the day you retire you get $x. It might be $1,000 it might be $1,200 but THAT AMOUNT WILL NEVER INCREASE. While the nominal might increase the buying power NEVER will. Any increase in COLA simply means that prices have increased thus your buying power is exact the same.

[sabrina 1]

75. I know it wouldn't be a cola increase.

By 2023 there will be over 4 trillion dollars in the trust fund. There is more than enough money to take care of the baby boomers' retirement.

The reason for not raising benefits was to keep the fund growing. If we had not had this economic collapse, it is very likely that benefits would have been raised. But even in this bad economic times, with high unemployment depleting the amount going into the fund (SS has other sources of income btw) SS was still, and will be, able to meet its obligations until at least 2037 and beyond. In fact the Congressional Budget office puts that time at 2044, without doing a thing. 100% benefits, and if they still did nothing, and this is based on THIS year, a bad economic period which won't be the case foreever, they could still out 75% of their obligations after 2037-44 or whatever.

To raise SS benefits now would help the economy. To legalize undocumented workers would increase SS funds. To end the wars and reduce the Pentagon budget is another way to help the economy.

There are many ways of making it possible to provide for the most vulnerable Americans. But the will to do so is not there. That is the only reason why we cannot do it. Priorities are all wrong, war, bailouts etc. are eating up this country and no one is being held accountable, except the elderly and the poor.

[Statistical]

42. What SS cuts. There has been no SS increase but there also has been no SS decrease.

Prices are below the peak in 2008 thus SS isn't going to increase until prices are above that peak.

[madfloridian]

44. Actually Medicare payments are taken out of SS, they have gone up.

And Medicare costs have gone up in many ways...more money out of the pocket for medicine, more co-pays.

Drug prices are way up.

[sabrina 1]

53. There has been a decrease. Inflation has made those benefits

worth less than they were a few years ago.

Why are you defending not taking care of the weakest and most vulnerable Americans? Congress received ITS COLA for two of the past four years. And Wall St. CEOs used the bailout money, much of it taken from the SS fund, to give themselves huge bonuses. Yet, here you are excusing cutting the benefits of the most vulnerable Americans. Obviously the money is there, but it went to the wealthiest Americans and now they are trying to make the poorest and least able to defend themselves, pay for their debts.

[Statistical]

77. Relative to two years ago there has been deflation.

CPI-W in June 2008 was 216.3. As of Aug 2010 it is 214.205.

In 2008 COLA was 5.8% to compensate for the CPI rise from 205.8 (peak in 2007) to 216.3 (peak in 2008).

In effect SS checks have a CPI of 216.3 "baked in".

While prices in last 3 months have risen they are still below peak in 2008 so a SS check has more buying power today than it did in June 2008.

[dark forest]

26. No offense to Obama

or the members of his administration. But I can't feel that this is the kind of news that should come out just before an election.

Old people vote, and boy can they get grumpy.

[TheCowsCameHome]

29. Bad timing. Very bad timing.

I'm a Dem and it pisses me off.

[Odin2005]

30. No COLA? Have they saw my fucking grocery bill?

:grr:

[jwirr]

36. For seniors like me it really does not matter. Every year I got the

COLA they just ended up taking it away with raises in Medicaid premiums and housing cost raises. I never received more that $12 a month anyhow. The people that get hurt by stopping the COLA are the government employees who make a good wage and do not get the raise. If I am not mistaken that includes state,federal and military employees. I as a senior am going to be the last to complain. Yes, it is getting harder to live on what I get but the $12 would not have changed that.

[Stargazer99]

38. Thanks for enlightening the average person

[Blue_In_AK]

69. Are you surprised?

I don't know where the cost-of-living figures are coming from. All I know is that my utility bills keep rising year after year, and food's not getting any cheaper either. Living must be cheap for somebody somewhere.

[BlueCheese]

76. I generally agree...

... that no inflation, as the government measures it, should mean no COLA. It's the way the system is meant to work. In fact, as I understand it, SS benefits can do better than inflation, in that they always go up to match an increase in CPI, but don't decrease when the CPI decreases. (Please tell me if I'm wrong.)

But I can understand why people might be upset. It would be all right if everybody was saving and making do. But it feels like big monied interests--big business, banks, the health insurance companies, the very wealthy, etc. are all getting bountiful favors from the government. They don't seem to be sacrificing at all. So why choose seniors as the group to be left out?