Posted on 12/30/2012 12:59:24 PM PST by Sub-Driver
‘Major setback’ in fiscal cliff talks By: Manu Raju and John Bresnahan December 30, 2012 12:15 PM EST
Negotiations between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell suffered a “major setback” after Republicans demanded the inclusion of a new method for calculating entitlement benefits as part of the fiscal cliff package, according to Democrats.
The provision, known as “chained CPI,” is opposed by many liberals because it would result in lower payments for Social Security beneficiaries.
While President Barack Obama has backed the provision as part of a major deficit package, Democrats are objecting to including this as part of the negotiations on a scaled-down fiscal cliff deal. They say they’ve already given ground on other issues, including raising the threshold for new taxes to around $400,000 annually as well as showing flexibility on estate taxes, sources said.
But Republicans are insisting on the chained CPI provision in exchange for raising taxes.
On the Senate floor, Reid ruled out any cuts to Social Security as part of any agreement to avert the fiscal cliff.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Raising taxes on the rich will only make matters worse and will result in increased unemployment.
We need economic growth which will only come from creating more taxpayers. We need tax cuts; and we need budget cuts--NOW!!
Let me get this straight: Dems have given ground and have shown flexibility, and the GOP wants to cut Social Security.
Oh, I see, it’s from Politico.
Republicans should just submit a bill to the Senate that makes the Bush tax cuts permenant for everyone.
Bill two addresses sequestration.
Bill three addresses Chained CPI.
Bill four addresses the dairy farmers.
Bill five addresses the debt limit.
Bill six addresses deficit reduction.
Give every bill to the Senate tonight with the premise that the house will take up tax increases on those making over $250,000 in 2013.
I would never go along with increasing taxes on those with incomes of over $250,000 without making a HUGE deal of it through the press. Somehow the braindead voters of this country has to be made to understand our problem is NOT under taxing of the rich—it is over spending.
Not that I disagree with you, but the problem with that is that those brain dead voters voted to receive some of that spending. They'll be happy as long as they get theirs.
Not children....they are what you find in a diaper.
So President Bain was willing to “compromise”. Too bad we don’t have a Dark Knight to truly oppose him.
When you check out wome of the crap they spend our tax dolars on ya have to wonder if anyone has a clue?
You folks in Iowa cold??
Can you believe the stupidity of proposing a cut in social security?? Talk about stupid, Cut welfare!! cut foreign aid. Cut foreign military bases!! Not the social security which we paid for!!
and which President/Congress did not have a Cost of Living Adjustment for SS for the first couple of years?
Who said anything about cutting SS? CPI might lower the increases though.
WHich Prez/Congress didn’t even give a COLA to SS recipients for the couple of years?
Of course.
We need to just let it expire. Let it be the dems problem.
Considering the nature of SS from the beginning, the age at which a recipient can begin to receive it should be adjusted each year according to actuarial tables.
I agree. It would be one of those promises that are never kept. Time for the Republicans to play like the Democrats.
>> Not the social security which we paid for!!
But it’s an ‘entitlement’ now.
He'll be heading to FL in a couple of months with our daughters, who take him there once a year, but not until after the chance of snow is over. I'm not kidding.
I disagree. We worked under a contract agreement.That agreement had the age at 66 for full benefits. You shall not breach that agreement. Talk about tables? How about the table of earnings on our money? It is a trust fund!! Lock box right? They didn’t steal our money did they. That is theft!! a felony!!
“McConnell said he had called Vice President Joe Biden — his former Senate colleague whom he has previously worked with to cut bipartisan deals — ‘to see if he could help jump-start the negotiations on his side.’”
What? Send in “The Clown” Biden?
A sure sign this “deal” isn’t likely to happen!
CPI is already one of the most heavily cooked numbers on the planet, and the Republicans say they want to tweak it to cook the numbers even more, resulting in less SS for people who spent their lives paying into it.
But you may be in the camp that considers SS “welfare.”
The way it is going to work out unless the Republicans totally surrender and gives them more than they asked for is the Democrats have no intention of giving an inch. What Reid and Obama want is exactly what Obama authorized Reid to place on the floor and they will allow no deviation. The MSM will fall all over Obama singing his praises. That’s been the plan from the start.
Yeah...and when Obamacare kicks in life expectancy is going back to the original 65.
Resulting in a big increase in SS payments.
Let it go over the cliff. All these jerks who voted for Obama because he promised to raise the taxes on the top 2% can start paying their fair share now. Raise everyone’s taxes, cut the spending and go on down the road. Time for the 47% to step up to the plate.
Zactly. It is a diversion.
As of 2011, the earliest age for Social Security retirement benefits is 62, but those opting to receive benefits at this age will see benefits reduced by a fraction of a percent for every month before the full retirement age. For those born before 1943, the full retirement age is 65. For those born between 1943 and 1959, the full retirement age is 66, and those born after 1960 receive full retirement benefits at 67.
Later Retirement
Those delaying taking Social Security benefits until after the full retirement age for their particular date of birth may increase benefits by a monthly percentage for each month until reaching age 70.
This regime did not put through any COLA increases for SS recipients the first two years. The last two increases have been eaten up by Medicare increases.
This is something nobama brought up. Now the pubs are for it and the Dems are again it? Welcome to bizarro world.
Besides, how much lower than 1.7% do they want to go? Much lower and they might as well forget about it.
Social security didn’t start out as a welfare program but it has been moving in that direction over the years. The system cannot sustain the millions of people claiming disability who paid little or nothing into the system but will collect a lifetime of benefits. It is also not sustainable when the average person collects 4X as much as they pay into the plan. These problems will only grow bigger as our workforce continues to shrink from obama-nomics and the pool of retirees grows from baby boomers retiring. I don’t want anybody to get less then what they are entitled to but something has to change.
If I'd been allowed to invest what they took from me in FICA, I'd *have* 4X as much as I paid in. It's the miracle of compounded interest.
Good FReepers have written to me (with I assume straight faces) that SS needs to be means tested, because it's "not fair Bill Gates can collect SS." Bullcarp. If he paid in as I did, he deserves payout. Even alleged conservatives have fallen for the "Well, SS turned into welfare, so we need to screw good people over because they're just filthy, grubbing welfare recipients" leftist propaganda.
Bottom line: If by some miracle your 401K survives to your retirement, your Social Security will be reduced as punishment for scrimping and saving your whole life.
Hello newbie...
...I disagree. We worked under a contract agreement.That agreement had the age at 66 for full benefits. You shall not breach that agreement....
check your social security statement, there is no contract Congress can and does change the law anytime it wants look at WEP. SS is a ponzi scheme that should have Congress in jail, but they write the rules until such time as the people take back the country or we have honest politicians (LOL) We also gave the government the right to govern us with certain exceptions spelled out in the Constitution, how is that working out? They breached it so what are we going to do?
it is no different than any other government payments to individuals. ‘Paid into...’ the general fund like everything else. How long have you paid into food stamps? or Planned Parenthood?
it is no different than any other government payments to individuals. ‘Paid into...’ the general fund like everything else. How long have you paid into food stamps? or Planned Parenthood?
Nonsense. It was a Ponzi scheme from day one.
Something has happened. The DOW Industrial futures went from -226 an hour ago to +31 as of this posting.
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/stocks/futures/
Let me guess, GOP caved.
Something has happened...
Republicans caved.
Okie Dokie. I thought I remembered you correctly. You’re one of the a-holes who thinks people who payed into the SS system and are expecting to get paid back are welfare recipients.
lol. very simplistic. you pay taxes expecting to get it back?
Of course, had you invested no return—or even retention of principal—would have been guaranteed either.
The fact is that the guv didn’t invest for you and we don’t have the money to pay what people are expecting back—particularly now that we’re living so much longer.
So cuts have to come somewhere. The obvious, unless we just scrap it altogether, include lower increases, later eligibility, and means testing.
What do you propose?
“Can you believe the stupidity of proposing a cut in social security?? Talk about stupid, Cut welfare!! cut foreign aid. Cut foreign military bases!! Not the social security which we paid for!!”
This is why nothing will get cut. Everyone wants to cut everyone elses spending, but not “their” spending.
“That is theft!! a felony!!”
So you’re actually a comedian. That’s good to have an extra skill. You’ll need that extra income after they cut your social security that you think you paid for.
My plan would be to increase the retirement age by one year every other year until the age is more in line with the actuarial expectation. I'm fine with putting in more years. And for the love of Pete *don't means test it!!*
Of course, had you invested no return—or even retention of principal—would have been guaranteed either.
True, there are no guarantees, but it's a fact that you can pick any ten-year period in history and you will see the stock market beat inflation. And that includes any decade you want to choose that includes the Great Depression.
So, SS = “Welfare.” Check.
Mitch McConnell is being politically suicidal.
Social Security is the Third Rail of American politics. If he wants the GOP to keep being in the minority, cut beneficiaries’ monthly checks.
Its a political loser. The Democrats have the whip hand here.
“So, SS = “Welfare.” Check.”
It’s not Earned Income. It’s somebody elses earned income.
You can call it what you want, but make sure you tell the guy that made the money that he didn’t really earn that.
Folks don’t get it. It’s all going to get cut. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Welfare or not. The check WILL get smaller, and it might get zeroed out.
Nobody knows. We’ve got incompetents at the helm We may hit an iceberg, we may run aground, we may crack up on the rocks. We know it won’t be smooth sailing.
“It was a Ponzi scheme from day one.”
Nothing wrong with a ponzi scheem as long as you get in early!!!
At 75 the money won’t run out until we are dead!!!!
Sorry, but you are full of it. I’ve seen you somebitches enough on FR to know you. I am finished trying to explain it to you.
I hope to God you have to work every effing day until you die, as you are wishing upon me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.