Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The quiet liberal plans for entitlement reform
Politico ^ | 1/27/13 | DAVID NATHER

Posted on 01/27/2013 5:24:56 PM PST by Libloather

**SNIP**

Social Security: 'Chained CPI'

Savings: $112 billion

The idea is to change the way the government figures out how much more seniors should get in Social Security benefits each year to account for changes in their cost of living.

This new formula — a tweak to the consumer price index — would assume that people switch their buying habits when prices rise, rather than just buying the same things over and over. So, for example, if the price of ground beef goes up, someone might buy chicken or fish instead.

The result: Social Security benefits will rise more slowly.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: entitlements; liberal; plans; reform; socialsecurity
They have no problem taking your loot but have a bit of trouble giving it back.
1 posted on 01/27/2013 5:25:05 PM PST by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Why don't they just cut to the chase and say "white people need not apply?"
2 posted on 01/27/2013 5:33:08 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (TYRANNY: When the people fear the politicians. LIBERTY: When the politicians fear the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
So, for example, if the price of ground beef goes up, someone might buy chicken or fish instead.

And when those go up, someone will buy pet food, and when pet food goes up . . . and the downward spin of quality of life continues.

3 posted on 01/27/2013 5:35:33 PM PST by Oatka (This is America. Assimilate or evaporate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

If you don’t participate,
You cannot legislate!

IOW, since the Congress has opted itself out of SS for its own private pension plan, they should have NO SAY over SS.

And, once losing their cpntrol over SS, oversight of the program should be handed over to a citizens committee of actual taxpayers who do participate in SS.


4 posted on 01/27/2013 5:42:08 PM PST by DustyMoment (Congress - another name for anti-American criminals!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Gotta save that money for welfare and food stamps and new government housing.


5 posted on 01/27/2013 5:43:52 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (There is no requirement to show need in order to exercise your rights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
And another of their silly plans is to raise the FICA cap from the current amount of $106,800 to NO CAP so that the rich can pay their fair share!
6 posted on 01/27/2013 5:45:15 PM PST by TRY ONE (Obummer: The economy sucks......might as well go play golf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Why don't they just cut to the chase and say "white people need not apply?"

Yep. Matter of fact, I believe the New York Times has had that hiring policy for at least a decade. (Or maybe that was "straight people"..?)

7 posted on 01/27/2013 5:46:39 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

It winds up that the president’s wealthy, Northeastern liberal base will go BALLISTIC if he lifts the cap on Social Security earnings (i.e., increases their marginal tax rate by 6.2, right off the top, no deductions or offsets). These are the people that make combined incomes of $200k to $300k and go running around screaming and yelling when the see a cap gun on television. They are CONVINCED that they’re just making ends meet on their income, and given the way they live, they’re probably right. The Republican base, on the other hand, generally doesn’t exceed the earnings cap (as they tend to live in Red States), and thus would be less affected by the move.

That is why this ‘reform’ will never pass.


8 posted on 01/27/2013 5:52:53 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

And the Supreme Court has given them the authority to do that. Social Sceurity is not an entitlement, insurance program, earmark nor earned right. It is a payroll tax on one side and a welfare program on the other.

Many people believe that Social Security is an “earned right.” That is, they think that because they have paid Social Security taxes, they are entitled to receive Social Security benefits. The government encourages that belief by referring to Social Security taxes as “contributions,” as in the Federal Insurance Contribution Act. However, in the 1960 case of Fleming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workers have no legally binding contractual rights to their Social Security benefits, and that those benefits can be cut or even eliminated at any time.

Nestor sued, claiming that because he had paid Social Security taxes, he had a right to Social Security benefits.

The Supreme Court disagreed, saying “To engraft upon the Social Security system a concept of ‘accrued property rights’ would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustment to ever changing conditions which it demands.” The Court went on to say, “It is apparent that the non-contractual interest of an employee covered by the [Social Security] Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of the holder of an annuity, whose right to benefits is bottomed on his contractual premium payments.”

The Court’s decision was not surprising. In an earlier case, Helvering v. Davis (1937), the Court had ruled that Social Security was not a contributory insurance program, saying, “The proceeds of both the employee and employer taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like any other internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”

In other words, Social Security is not an insurance program at all. It is simply a payroll tax on one side and a welfare program on the other.

Your Social Security benefits are always subject to the whim of 535 politicians in Washington. Congress has cut Social Security benefits in the past and is likely to do so in the future.


9 posted on 01/27/2013 5:58:15 PM PST by CharlesMartelsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesMartelsGhost

Very well stated. And, as I like to put it, the fact that the older people have spent all of their tax money (including SS) and then some (actually a lot, as in $16T) DOES NOT give them the right to make my children into debt slaves for their now-unfunded retirement.

If they want money when they retire, they should have saved their own money. If they didn’t do that, then they should ask THEIR children first (not have the government put a gun to the head of my children). If neither is available, then they should be able to go to the state and take my kids’ money, but only to the point of what is needed to survive.

And don’t give me any crap about an “implied contract”. I started working 30 years ago myself, and EVERYONE back then knew that Social Security money was being spent faster than it came in, on all kinds of stuff beyond Social Security. As you said, it is a payroll TAX, just like an income TAX, it all went the same place and it was ALL spent at that time, and that WAS NOT a state secret.


10 posted on 01/27/2013 6:22:55 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CharlesMartelsGhost

One significant item draining SS funds is supplemental social security benefits given to seniors who immigrate to US. They have never worked in US and therefore never “contributed” FICA tax. Yet they are given lifelong monthly benefit checks.


11 posted on 01/27/2013 6:26:08 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

“One significant item draining SS funds is supplemental social security benefits given to seniors who immigrate to US. They have never worked in US and therefore never “contributed” FICA tax. Yet they are given lifelong monthly benefit checks.”

No one has contributed to Social Security...they only paid a tax called Social Security. It is a welfare program, or a transfer program (to use a less provocative term, if you will), and the fact that tens of millions of people who never paid that tax (or have paid next to nothing) are cashing in on it only proves it further.


12 posted on 01/27/2013 6:39:44 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Sorry, one other comment...there is no fund to drain. It is EMPTY, ZERO, ZILCH, WIPE-OUT. All that there is are promises from the Treasury to tax MY KIDS to pay for tomorrow’s (really today’s) ‘benefits’.


13 posted on 01/27/2013 6:42:09 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Unfortunately one of the largest organizations in the country (40 million members) has spent decades brainwashing people just the opposite.

AARP


14 posted on 01/27/2013 6:46:30 PM PST by nascarnation (Baraq's economic policy: trickle up poverty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

“Unfortunately one of the largest organizations in the country (40 million members) has spent decades brainwashing people just the opposite.”

Yes they have. And the feds have done the same, especially with their annual “Social Security Benefit Statements”.

You can see just how effective it is, when you read some of the usual responses to my comments, ON THIS SITE. These are people that honestly know better, they vote conservative EVERY TIME - but have been so conditioned that any substantial reform is a lost cause, and the country WILL go down...big time.


15 posted on 01/27/2013 6:55:16 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

But President Obama, the people have no bread.

“Then let them eat cake” or crap or whatever.


16 posted on 01/27/2013 7:03:12 PM PST by Wisconsinlady (The 2nd amendment is NOT about hunting-but protection from a tyrannical govt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesMartelsGhost; BobL
You guys are good. Glad to see someone else on this forum who is willing to call SS what it is. Welfare! Tax me to give to thee. Transfer scheme.

My favorite theoretical question, a litmus test for conservatives is this: Would you roll our government back to its limited constitutionally activities even if you have to give up Social Security? I rarely get a yes and usually hear a litany of excuses as to why that person, who claims to be in favor of limited, small, constitutional, low tax, stay out of my life government, is owed, or earned, or promised, or sacrificed, or served in the military, is owed their check and how most everyone else did not.

Many of them are on this forum.

17 posted on 01/27/2013 7:12:04 PM PST by FreedomNotSafety
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNotSafety

“Many of them are on this forum.”

Yes they are, and I hear the same, angry, lines from them. As I often point out, they are in STRONGLY in favor of welfare to the OTHER GUYS, but not to themselves (such as means-testing Social Security).

It is really sad. These are the people that we need to support freedom in this country, but FDR was able to buy them off...even 70 years after his death.


18 posted on 01/27/2013 7:25:00 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

The huge numbers getting classified as disabled when unemployment runs out is a greater drain. More people are classifying as disabled and getting Social Security Disability than getting jobs many months.


19 posted on 01/27/2013 7:28:31 PM PST by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BobL

I think the liberal base is primed to ‘sacrifice for the common good’.
Voltaire said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”


20 posted on 01/27/2013 7:28:41 PM PST by griswold3 (Big Government does not tolerate rivals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BobL

I think the liberal base is primed to ‘sacrifice for the common good’.
Voltaire said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”


21 posted on 01/27/2013 7:28:41 PM PST by griswold3 (Big Government does not tolerate rivals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

“I think the liberal base is primed to ‘sacrifice for the common good’. Voltaire said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.””

Like heck. To them getting a 47” plasma rather than a 54” plasma with their welfare check is a MAJOR sacrifice....just as settling for a 36 foot Winnebago rather than a 42 foot Winnebago is a MAJOR sacrifice for our side, should our welfare (i.e., Social Security) get means-tested.

That’s why it’s no-win. No one will give up their goodies.


22 posted on 01/27/2013 7:37:00 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Leave it to the left to come up with a (woefully inadequate partial) solution to the problem of entitlement costs that manages to break faith with people who paid Social Security taxes all their working lives. The only fix is to let the eligibility age for Medicare and Social Security (and all non-military defined benefit pension plans) drift upward until the original relationship with life-expectancy is restored, but not for folks who have or are about to retire and made plans on the basis of the current system.

Personally, I advocate raising it by two months for each year of age under 60 a person is when the reforms passed until it reaches 72 or 73, then pegging it to life expectancy at age 60 so it goes up if people live longer (and down if some plague or socialized medicine decreases life expectancy). Ideally, the reform should also allow people in jobs requiring manual labor to more easily qualify for disability benefits when they hit an age near the current retirement age, while tightening disability requirements overall.


23 posted on 01/27/2013 7:56:57 PM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

That is not the point I was making. My point is people who never paid a dime in FICA tax are given benefit checks. There are millions of old foreign born people in this category living in US and collecting benefits.


24 posted on 01/27/2013 9:23:27 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
So, for example, if the price of ground beef goes up, someone might buy chicken or fish instead.

Wow. This simple Econ 101 I learned as a freshman in college. It's the concept of superior/inferior goods.

Only a government idiot, in 2013, would think they've invented the concept.

25 posted on 01/27/2013 9:27:47 PM PST by Fledermaus (I'm done with the GOP. Let them wither and die. Let's start over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TRY ONE

Or “means test” it when you retire. What a crock. You enter the workforce at a young age, they put a gun to your head and force you to pay 6.2% of your income up to the cap (matched by your employer) and if you are STUPID enough to become successful or save for the future, they say “oops, you don’t need SS...so sorry.”


26 posted on 01/27/2013 9:31:35 PM PST by Fledermaus (I'm done with the GOP. Let them wither and die. Let's start over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Yep, but it was sold as insurance so the idiot masses would fall for it.


27 posted on 01/27/2013 9:33:19 PM PST by Fledermaus (I'm done with the GOP. Let them wither and die. Let's start over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Nonsense. The GOP has proposed this policy numerous times. Meanwhile: question time for those complaining - how do you propose to pay for all of the entitlement benefits?? Hint - cutting the Federal government completely will only result in a drop in the bucket.


28 posted on 01/28/2013 4:47:22 AM PST by KantianBurke (Where was the Tea Party when Dubya was spending like a drunken sailor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

“That is not the point I was making. My point is people who never paid a dime in FICA tax are given benefit checks. There are millions of old foreign born people in this category living in US and collecting benefits.”

Same with other forms of welfare...so I don’t get what is special about FICA. Both are taxes and both payout benefits to people that qualify. Sure, we’d like to think we stored our FICA money in Al Gore’s Lockbox, but it doesn’t exist.

In other words, if we paid out the same benefits to foreign-born people, but didn’t say it was FICA, there would be absolutely no difference to this country or anyone’s retirement - we’re bankrupt either way.


29 posted on 01/28/2013 5:47:47 AM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
SSI recipients, better be warned - you will be the first to be 'reformed'... before welfare, food stamps, and medicare recipients. You will find your program 'reformed' even before public employee pension programs.

The last to be 'reformed' will those belonging to reliable democrat voting blocks, meaning those the ethnic lobbies, illegal immigrant lobbies and public unions speak for.

30 posted on 01/28/2013 1:15:59 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson