PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Millions face shrinking Social Security payments


petegz28
08-23-2009, 09:20 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise. The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.
By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly

"I will promise you, they count on that COLA," said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. "To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal."

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.

Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

"For many elderly, they don't feel that inflation is low because their expenses are still going up," said David Certner, legislative policy director for AARP. "Anyone who has savings and investments has seen some serious losses."

About 50 million retired and disabled Americans receive Social Security benefits. The average monthly benefit for retirees is $1,153 this year. All beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent increase in January, the largest since 1982.

More than 32 million people are in the Medicare prescription drug program. Average monthly premiums are set to go from $28 this year to $30 next year, though they vary by plan. About 6 million people in the program have premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security payments, according to the Social Security Administration.

Millions of people with Medicare Part B coverage for doctors' visits also have their premiums deducted from Social Security payments. Part B premiums are expected to rise as well. But under the law, the increase cannot be larger than the increase in Social Security benefits for most recipients.

There is no such hold-harmless provision for drug premiums.

Kennelly's group wants Congress to increase Social Security benefits next year, even though the formula doesn't call for it. She would like to see either a 1 percent increase in monthly payments or a one-time payment of $150.

The cost of a one-time payment, a little less than $8 billion, could be covered by increasing the amount of income subjected to Social Security taxes, Kennelly said. Workers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,800 of income, a limit that rises each year with the average national wage.

But the limit only increases if monthly benefits increase.

Critics argue that Social Security recipients shouldn't get an increase when inflation is negative. They note that recipients got a big increase in January—after energy prices had started to fall. They also note that Social Security recipients received one-time $250 payments in the spring as part of the government's economic stimulus package.

Consumer prices are down from 2008 levels, giving Social Security recipients more purchasing power, even if their benefits stay the same, said Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank.

"Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt," Biggs said. "Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want."

Social Security is also facing long-term financial problems. The retirement program is projected to start paying out more money than it receives in 2016. Without changes, the retirement fund will be depleted in 2037, according to the Social Security trustees' annual report this year.
President Barack Obama has said he would like tackle Social Security next year, after Congress finishes work on health care, climate change and new financial regulations.

Lawmakers are preoccupied by health care, making it difficult to address other tough issues. Advocates for older people hope their efforts will get a boost in October, when the Social Security Administration officially announces that there will not be an increase in benefits next year.

"I think a lot of seniors do not know what's coming down the pike, and I believe that when they hear that, they're going to be upset," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is working on a proposal for one-time payments for Social Security recipients.

"It is my view that seniors are going to need help this year, and it would not be acceptable for Congress to simply turn its back," he said.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A8V4080&show_article=1

petegz28
08-23-2009, 09:23 PM
Another story to make you all warm and fuzzy about the Fed Gov taking over our health care....LMAO

Saul Good
08-23-2009, 09:23 PM
With all the practice they had with our retirement, now they know what not to do with our health care.

petegz28
08-23-2009, 09:24 PM
"Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt," Biggs said. "Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want."


This guy is spot on. We reserve that Right for the bankers and friends of the Fed!!!

petegz28
08-23-2009, 09:30 PM
How about instead of waiting until next year, we fix the broken programs we currently have before we take on new ones to break like health care?

banyon
08-23-2009, 09:54 PM
The thread title doesn't follow from the article at all.

this is about Bush's prescription drug benefit and rising premiums in that.

Saul Good
08-23-2009, 10:01 PM
The thread title doesn't follow from the article at all.

this is about Bush's prescription drug benefit and rising premiums in that.

...combined with the fact that there is no cost of living increase which results in a net decrease in SS payments.

banyon
08-23-2009, 10:02 PM
...combined with the fact that there is no cost of living increase which results in a net decrease in SS payments.

Yeah, I agree, Bush's program is s****y. It has nothing to do with not reforming SSA to conform to the s****y program though.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 07:37 AM
The thread title doesn't follow from the article at all.

this is about Bush's prescription drug benefit and rising premiums in that.

The "thread title" is the title of article. I even gave you a link.

patteeu
08-24-2009, 09:15 AM
The thread title doesn't follow from the article at all.

this is about Bush's prescription drug benefit and rising premiums in that.

The thread title looks right to me. SS payments never went down under Bush. Obama promised "change" and he's delivering!

KC native
08-24-2009, 11:04 AM
The thread title looks right to me. SS payments never went down under Bush. Obama promised "change" and he's delivering!

LMAO Perhaps you should read the article again.

KC Dan
08-24-2009, 11:09 AM
Their one-time payment from this tax source will never happen. That is if the President has any integrity. His "No tax increases for anyone making less than $250,000" would prevent this method.



Kennelly's group wants Congress to increase Social Security benefits next year, even though the formula doesn't call for it. She would like to see either a 1 percent increase in monthly payments or a one-time payment of $150.

The cost of a one-time payment, a little less than $8 billion, could be covered by increasing the amount of income subjected to Social Security taxes, Kennelly said. Workers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,800 of income, a limit that rises each year with the average national wage.

"I think a lot of seniors do not know what's coming down the pike, and I believe that when they hear that, they're going to be upset," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is working on a proposal for one-time payments for Social Security recipients.

"It is my view that seniors are going to need help this year, and it would not be acceptable for Congress to simply turn its back," he said.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 11:49 AM
LMAO Perhaps you should read the article again.

Perhaps you should...

petegz28
08-24-2009, 11:50 AM
the funniest part about this article is the Gov uses the fact that inflation is down because "energy costs" are below 2008 levels, yet every economic report on inflation removes the costs of "food and energy" right off the bat. LMAO......these people are tards among tards

Skip Towne
08-24-2009, 11:53 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

KC native
08-24-2009, 11:55 AM
the funniest part about this article is the Gov uses the fact that inflation is down because "energy costs" are below 2008 levels, yet every economic report on inflation removes the costs of "food and energy" right off the bat. LMAO......these people are tards among tards

Jeebus, you are one stupid fucker. They report both of them. It's called headline and core CPI.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 12:14 PM
Jeebus, you are one stupid ****er. They report both of them. It's called headline and core CPI.

Yes, I know they report both of them, little girl. Once again your mouth spews nothing but bullshit, you chicken shit cock fag.

KC native
08-24-2009, 12:42 PM
Yes, I know they report both of them, little girl. Once again your mouth spews nothing but bullshit, you chicken shit cock pillowbiter.

Hey more gay insults. +1 for the closet CP camp.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 12:45 PM
Hey more gay insults. +1 for the closet CP camp.

Perhaps if we didn't have so many illegals milking our system there would be more money for legal citizens???

KC native
08-24-2009, 12:50 PM
Perhaps if we didn't have so many illegals milking our system there would be more money for legal citizens???

You are aware that illegals don't receive medicare and social security right?

petegz28
08-24-2009, 12:59 PM
You are aware that illegals don't receive medicare and social security right?

LMAO....they just milk from other parts of the system to drain the funds that could otherwise go to SS and meicare.

KC native
08-24-2009, 01:05 PM
LMAO....they just milk from other parts of the system to drain the funds that could otherwise go to SS and meicare.

Really pete? Are you aware that SS and Medicare are funded out of payroll taxes and that if an illegal is using a fake social or tax payer indentification number that they are paying into the system but not draining it right?

petegz28
08-24-2009, 01:10 PM
Really pete? Are you aware that SS and Medicare are funded out of payroll taxes and that if an illegal is using a fake social or tax payer indentification number that they are paying into the system but not draining it right?

I guess then what they pay for the use of all the other social services and flooding of our emergency rooms don't cost anything, heh?

petegz28
08-24-2009, 01:13 PM
Really pete? Are you aware that SS and Medicare are funded out of payroll taxes and that if an illegal is using a fake social or tax payer indentification number that they are paying into the system but not draining it right?

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for welfare social services by the American taxpayers.

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular,their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from terrorist countries.

12. The National Policy Institute, “estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.”

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.

14. “The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States.”

http://kevincolby.com/2008/07/27/the-cost-of-illegal-immigrants-to-the-american-taxpayer/

KC native
08-24-2009, 03:13 PM
1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for welfare social services by the American taxpayers.

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular,their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from terrorist countries.

12. The National Policy Institute, “estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.”

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.

14. “The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States.”

http://kevincolby.com/2008/07/27/the-cost-of-illegal-immigrants-to-the-american-taxpayer/

Heyoooooooo, more debunked and misleading numbers.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 03:15 PM
Heyoooooooo, more debunked and misleading numbers.

sure, sure....

MahiMike
08-24-2009, 05:21 PM
The "thread title" is the title of article. I even gave you a link.

The title is misleading. They aren't cutting SS benefits. Matter of fact, even COLA is correctly factored in since our COLA actually went DOWN. More scare tactics.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 07:16 PM
The title is misleading. They aren't cutting SS benefits. Matter of fact, even COLA is correctly factored in since our COLA actually went DOWN. More scare tactics.

Really? Is that why Congress gave themselves a COLA? :shrug:

banyon
08-24-2009, 07:25 PM
The "thread title" is the title of article. I even gave you a link.

Ok, then the editor's chosen article title is misleading.

Should you be held accountable for it though, like jAZ's Karl Rove indicted in 2 weeks?

petegz28
08-24-2009, 07:29 PM
Ok, then the editor's chosen article title is misleading.

Should you be held accountable for it though, like jAZ's Karl Rove indicted in 2 weeks?

Yes, hold me accountable for something I didn't do.....dick :D

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 07:34 PM
Yeah, I agree, Bush's program is s****y. It has nothing to do with not reforming SSA to conform to the s****y program though.

True, but the thread title doesn't say a thing about that. It says that millions face shrinking SS payments. The article is about millions of people who face shrinking SS payments. In that sense, the title is pretty close to the mark. Short of making the entire body of the article the title of the thread, I don't know how much more accurate it could get.

I suppose you clicked on the thread expecting to read an article about Matt Cassel.

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 07:36 PM
Heyoooooooo, more debunked and misleading numbers.This response is vastly superior to simply responding, "horseshit". Keep up the hypocrisy.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 07:51 PM
This response is vastly superior to simply responding, "horseshit". Keep up the hypocrisy.

:LOL:

banyon
08-24-2009, 07:54 PM
Yes, hold me accountable for something I didn't do.....dick :D

What do you mean, you posted the thread with the thread title, didn't you?

patteeu
08-24-2009, 07:59 PM
LMAO Perhaps you should read the article again.

I don't see why reading it twice would make any difference since I understood it the first time I read it.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 07:59 PM
What do you mean, you posted the thread with the thread title, didn't you?

The thread title is the title of the article......:doh!:

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 08:01 PM
Does this help? If not, try reading it again.


WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

patteeu
08-24-2009, 08:01 PM
Ok, then the editor's chosen article title is misleading.

Should you be held accountable for it though, like jAZ's Karl Rove indicted in 2 weeks?

What thread title do you suggest? I can entertain the idea that there might be an even clearer title than the one used, but I agree with Saul that it's pretty accurate based on the content of the article. I wouldn't hesitate to be "held accountable" for this title. Unlike jAZ's crazy title, this one is a fact.

petegz28
08-24-2009, 08:03 PM
What thread title do you suggest? I can entertain the idea that there might be an even clearer title than the one used, but I agree with Saul that it's pretty accurate based on the content of the article. I wouldn't hesitate to be "held accountable" for this title. Unlike jAZ's crazy title, this one is a fact.

Not to mention that if you click the link and the very top, the very first thing you read is

Millions face shrinking Social Security payments
Aug 23 09:51 PM US/Eastern
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
Associated Press Writer

banyon
08-24-2009, 08:17 PM
Does this help? If not, try reading it again.

Don't know, sounds like you might want to give it one more shot though:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

Blue doesn't equal red.

banyon
08-24-2009, 08:20 PM
The thread title is the title of the article......:doh!:

Yeah, that's what jAZ did too. :doh!:

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 08:22 PM
Don't know, sounds like you might want to give it one more shot though:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

Blue doesn't equal red.

Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightlyIt won't rise. In fact, it will shrink for millions.

banyon
08-24-2009, 08:31 PM
It won't rise. In fact, it will shrink for millions.

Let's try this again:



Thread title: Millions face shrinking Social Security payments


Originally Posted by the part about the payments shrinking
Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly

It won't rise. In fact, it will shrink for millions.

Green part doesn't match the purple part (i.e., Social Security Payments aren't shrinking.

And of course this was followed by posts bashing SSA, which has nothing to do with the point of the article.

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 08:39 PM
Let's try this again:



Green part doesn't match the purple part (i.e., Social Security Payments aren't shrinking.

And of course this was followed by posts bashing SSA, which has nothing to do with the point of the article.

Actually, they are. If Obama raises taxes, my paycheck shrinks if I don't get a corresponding raise. That doesn't mean that my employer pays me less, but it does mean that I receive a smaller payment.

This isn't that difficult.

patteeu
08-24-2009, 08:41 PM
Let's try this again:



Green part doesn't match the purple part (i.e., Social Security Payments aren't shrinking.

And of course this was followed by posts bashing SSA, which has nothing to do with the point of the article.

SSP = SSBA - MRP

where
SSP = Social Security Payment
SSBA = Social Security Benefit Amount
MRP = Medicare related premium

As MRP goes up, SSP goes down. I really don't understand why you can't see that the thread title is accurate unless you're confusing SSP with SSBA.

If the government raised your income taxes and someone from your employer told you that your paycheck would be shrinking it would be the same thing. I think it would be far more misleading if they told you not to worry about the tax increase because your salary wouldn't be affected.

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 08:43 PM
SSP = SSBA - MRP

where
SSP = Social Security Payment
SSBA = Social Security Benefit Amount
MRP = Medicare related premium

As MRP goes up, SSP goes down. I really don't understand why you can't see that the thread title is accurate unless you're confusing SSP with SSBA.

If the government raised your income taxes and someone from your employer told you that your paycheck would be shrinking it would be the same thing. I think that would be far more misleading than if they told you not to worry about the tax increase because your salary wouldn't be affected.

It scares me how often we post the same thought back-to-back. Are you incredibly good-looking, too?

patteeu
08-24-2009, 08:47 PM
It scares me how often we post the same thought back-to-back. Are you incredibly good-looking, too?

LOL, I just said virtually the same thing to you in a rep comment.

Saul Good
08-24-2009, 08:51 PM
LOL, I just said virtually the same thing to you in a rep comment.

Just read it. I guess I'm just a faster typist than you. Otherwise, I'd be the one following your posts all the time.

banyon
08-24-2009, 10:26 PM
SSP = SSBA - MRP

where
SSP = Social Security Payment
SSBA = Social Security Benefit Amount
MRP = Medicare related premium

As MRP goes up, SSP goes down. I really don't understand why you can't see that the thread title is accurate unless you're confusing SSP with SSBA.

If the government raised your income taxes and someone from your employer told you that your paycheck would be shrinking it would be the same thing. I think it would be far more misleading if they told you not to worry about the tax increase because your salary wouldn't be affected.

If I don't pay a bill and someone garnishes my wages, that gives me a smaller paycheck too, but it has nothing to do with a policy of my employer.

You can garnish SSA for federal payments too (back taxes, loans), but that doesn't mean that SSA has reduced your monthly allotment.

patteeu
08-25-2009, 08:06 AM
If I don't pay a bill and someone garnishes my wages, that gives me a smaller paycheck too, but it has nothing to do with a policy of my employer.

You can garnish SSA for federal payments too (back taxes, loans), but that doesn't mean that SSA has reduced your monthly allotment.

No one said anyone's SS benefit was being reduced. The title just says that SS payments are going down and they are. It would be more misleading to say that SS payments will remain the same over the next two years. People would get their smaller checks and, in the words of General Jim Jones, have a "whiskey tango foxtrot moment". I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. I don't think it's misleading at all and while there might have been an even better title available, no one has made any suggestions.

jAZ
08-25-2009, 08:33 AM
Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

...

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

What a tortured effort to write an article around a false premise, both on the facts and the spirit.

1) "By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down".

2) If the "shrinking SS payments" are a result of the "Medicare prescription drug program... premiums"... unless this is the first year ever that such premiums were deducted from your SS payments, it's certain that the first year those premiums were deducted, those SS checks certainly went down at that time and stayed down every year since.

What a crock.

The less frightening but accurate headline would be "Social Security benefits won't rise for the first time in a generation".

KC Dan
08-25-2009, 09:55 AM
JFC, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement...."