Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Video & Multimedia

madfloridian

(88,117 posts) Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:44 PM Dec 2012

Senator Harkin explains Chained CPI

He is very clear about the fact that as seniors make difficult choices about what to buy, the chained CPI will reflect it. If you buy something cheaper because you can't afford what you really want, the plan will use that as a factor in lowering the Cost of Living raise. Trade-offs.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Senator Harkin explains Chained CPI (Original Post) madfloridian Dec 2012 OP

A race to the bottom with yourself. Fuck this. This is seriously bad policy for Ed Suspicious Dec 2012 #1

As the WH... dennis4868 Dec 2012 #2

That is really no way to defend screwing the rest of us. madfloridian Dec 2012 #3

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)

1. A race to the bottom with yourself. Fuck this. This is seriously bad policy for

Reply to madfloridian (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:35 PM

Dec 2012

people who live month to month relying solely on Social Security for income.

dennis4868

(9,774 posts)

2. As the WH...

Reply to madfloridian (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:35 PM

Dec 2012

said, people who are not well off (i.e., live month to month) there will be a special exemption that the changes will not apply to them. Nobody here cares to want to "remember" this point.

madfloridian

(88,117 posts)

3. That is really no way to defend screwing the rest of us.

Reply to dennis4868 (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:07 PM

Dec 2012

That is excusing harming those of us who are more in the middle economically. It's good not to hurt the poor...but who will get to define it?

That argument scares me. What have we become to defend Social Security cuts that way?

Reply to this discussion