U.S. Deficit Commission Recommends Changes to Social Security

Fox News ^ | November 10, 2010

[sheana]

The welfare side of social security (SSI_SSP) should be done away with completely, regardless of whether you are an American or a foreigner.

[NormsRevenge]

Riots and rebellion coming ‘round the bend? Obammy’s Legacy. He’s selling it and doesn’t know it.. or does he?

[Lou L]

Take all drunks, druggies, extended family recipients and so called learning disabled (classified) kids off social security.

I don't know all the details, but I guess I have an uncle (he finally had to marry an aunt of mine after shacking up with her for 20 years or so), who was in the Army in the 60's. He only spent about 4 months or so in the military, and was given a general discharge. Somehow or another, he filed for some type of disability, and was granted his claim. It's not much, probably less than $500 per month, but he's been collecting these checks for the past 40 years. He has no visible disability, other than he sits around most of the time, smoking his weed (he's in his 60's), and does some sort of "art" work. My aunt will retire soon, from her government job, and he'll get to reap in whatever pension she gets.

How many of these situations exist? How many people are "working the system," to get their handouts? I don't begrudge seniors who are beyond their working years, who are looking for a safety net, but the current system can't exist without some drastic changes.

[ansel12]

Loads of old people and baby boomers as well as huge numbers of youngsters voted for an Islamic Malcom X.

Why do you constantly harp on the two biggest pro-McCain/anti-Obama voting groups in the 2008 election?

Wouldn't the actual Obama voting age groups be the culprits?

[jnsun]

I do agree:

Raise the full SS retirement age judiciously, 67 or 69, and limit the early option.

The denial of COLA for the last few years does already amount to lowering the existing payout.

Like a poster above, eliminate totally the Depts of Education, Housing and UD, Homeland Security. The latter should have been under Transportation or Defense from the start. Education will take care of itself in local jurisdictions, just like it has in decades past.

Cut the federal workforce by 40% and enact a 12-15% pay cut. Competitive enterprise could easily replace the services far more efficiently.

Cut corporate taxes.

Just plain terminate ObamaCare, and get lawyers out of the competitive Healthcare system. MediCare to remain, it is enough of a commitment to our society, primarily for the elderly. Maybe likewise raise eligibility to 67.

No government bailouts for any corporations, in turn for the lower taxes.

Recant any stimulus funding, and distribute about 30% of that saved in block grants, States, Municipalities, for unrestricted use as they see fit, thereby passing responsibility on to local accountable agents.

Finger and deport all illegal immigrants. They are illegal parasites from failed nations who contribute NO long term net worth to the US economy. And furthermore they destroy the worth, employment (and spirit) of being a legitimate law-abiding citizen or legal immigrant.

Exploit all energy resources within the Geo-Constitutional Boundary of the United States, fossil, nuclear, renewable; thereby dramatically and unilaterally increasing the value of the US dollar. Eschew the global BS, and restore our garden.

Drastically review and curtail agricultural subsidies to corporate agriculture. There is far more than enough food and land in the US for itself, and the agricultural industry has become tragically bastardized in its products and motives.

Seems like change to me.

Johnny Suntrade

[RC2]

The largest cut to SS could come from the using of the program for everything under the sun. Take it back to its original intent.

[UCANSEE2]

also may propose

That's a BIG MAY.

[blackdog]

Each year line up all persons over 65 in a line. Then practice the ancient Roman problem solving tactic known as being decimated.

10% reduction in social security, pension plans, medicare, etc.... And that's for each year!

[blackdog]

It’s original intent was exactly what it is today, VOTE BUYING.

[SeeSac]

Raise the full SS retirement age judiciously, 67 or 69, and limit the early option.

The retirement age is already 67 for those 50 and under. The early option has a severe penalty of about 30%. It is not the problem.

[Califreak]

That figures.

Pick on the elderly and infirm who probably can’t fight back and may not be able to vote easily.

How chicken snot.

[hondact200]

Really cut social security. when people paid into it for years. politicians salaries to be cut lifetime benefits for politicians to be cut. number of federal employees to be cut salaries of federal employees to be cut taxes that are unpsid by federal employees waste by politicians. Look at the pockets of the politicians forst Do the politicians need 180K salaries, cut them down by 130K to 50K a year lobbyist moneys that politicians get tax them at 100%. See the problem is not going after the elderly and disabled the proper procedure is to go after the corruption of the politicians and federal employees 150K incomes no way cut them to 50K. No federal employee should make more than 50K. This will slow the federal deficit

[RC2]

That also.....but the following is what I was getting at.

“The original intent of Social Security was to provide a monthly benefit for workers who retired at age 65 financed by contributions these workers made over their career. The program has expanded over the years by, among other changes, extending benefits to the retiree’s family, the survivors of deceased workers, providing benefits for the disabled, allowing retirement at age 62,. and providing cost-of-living increases and payments to illegals.”

[Future Snake Eater]

Everytime I come onto FR, I feel like it is a sin that my husband is a federal employee.

Don't worry about the reactionary echo chamber. Yes, there's lots of dead weight in government jobs, but there are also many people who work very hard in government jobs. I'm certain it's no different than the private sector except who you get your paycheck from.

[Arrowhead1952]

My husband is a GS-11. He doesn’t make anything near $150,000.

I am a federal employee too, and don't make $70,000 a year. I am a hit and run poster for the most part - only during slow days and during my lunch brake or if I decide to miss my 15 minute coffee break.

I supported the wife and daughter and paid off my house about two years ago. I hope to have something to retire on, if 0/bummer doesn't mess with MY money.

[GOYAKLA]

Or a kiss!

[Mariner]

"Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme. We can do nothing, and it collapses the country. Or, we can treat is as a huge machine with many many levers. If we can show everyone that if we simultaneously reef down hard on all the levers, we can change its essence from a Ponzi Scheme to Welfare For Old People Who Will Otherwise Starve, we might have a chance of saving bits of it. Politically, it will be hard to do anything. I predict 0bama will disavow his panel’s recommendations within 24 hours.

SS and Medicare need this:

1. Anyone under the age of 50 can't retire until they are 70. Medicare benefits at 70 too.

2. Means tested for both. If you have $1mil in assets (or some number) or "x" amount of income from some other source, you're no longer eligible.

3. If you're not old and poor, you don't get SS...no more SS for anything that's not age/means related. Move all others to different programs and manage the fraud and excess out of those.

Eliminate Medicaide. The states will take up the burden, or they won't. Just get the Feds out of it.

I suggest that would save $1tril/yr.

[Logic n' Reason]

To add to these points....didn't the little tin god say that there was an estimated $500 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse in the US medical system?

If so, isn't it high time these funds were recovered?

Or did the little tin god lie? Again!

[justlurking]

We have to do something with Social Security. But, I don't agree that the "deficit reduction" committee should do it.

Social Security was running a surplus up until recently -- meaning that more payroll taxes were being collected than being paid in benefits. The problem is that the excess was used to fuel MORE deficit spending. The "trust fund" is nothing more than special government bonds.

Still, it represents money that people effectively loaned to the federal government, whether they wanted to do so or not. So, any cuts in Social Security have to acknowledge that it's not just another spending program.

However, even if you take that "trust fund" at face value (rather than an unfunded liability), there's still not enough to pay full benefits after the fund is exhausted about 2040. Current payroll taxes will only fund about 75% of projected benefits at that time.

I'm all for "re-balancing" Social Security, by at least bringing benefits down to a point where it can be sustained. I don't believe that increasing payroll taxes further is a solution.

But, it should be adjusted in a way that spreads the pain among everyone:

• Current beneficiaries get future reductions, perhaps in reduced COLA increases.

• Future beneficiaries get future reductions as well. But, it should be by reduction of the monthly benefit, rather than increasing the retirement age. Increasing the retirement age just increases the probability that some people will never get ANY benefit because they die early.

• Beneficiaries of Social Security that receive disproportionately a large benefit compared to their contributions (i.e. disability, survivors, etc.) should be transitioned to another support program, rather than depleting Social Security assets.

• Under no circumstances should Social Security be "means tested". If I sacrificed and invested in 401(k), IRA, etc. so that I will have a supplemental stream of income, I should not be penalized while my neighbor with the same annual salary blew it all on cars, boats, hookers, and blackjack.

[justlurking]

The denial of COLA for the last few years does already amount to lowering the existing payout.

Unfortunately, no. The reason the COLA has been zero for the last couple of years is because the last COLA increase was so large.

It was computed at the peak of a price spike in gasoline, natural gas, and heating oil. So, the COLA was about 6%, if I remember right.

Fuel prices settled back down. Prices of other factors in the COLA calculation have since increased, but not enough to overcome that increase for the temporary spike in fuel. Until they catch up, there will be no COLA increase.

So, Social Security recipients effectively got their full COLA increase for a 3-year period in the first year.