2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHi all. Have you seen O'Malley's plan for Social Security?
If you haven't (or even if you have), I think this is a great chance to tell you about it.
I know we all support different candidates with different visions, but I think O'Malley's white paper on Social Security is really some of the best ideas there are, and I hope that even if you support a different candidate you would ask him or her to take these ideas into their own plans.
http://martinomalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/OMalley-Retirement-Security.pdf
First off, O'Malley has an explicit goal of increasing the number of Americans with adequate retirement savings by 50%, through a combination of wage increases and savings incentives.
O'Malley rightly calls Social Security one of the USA's greatest achievements. It is our responsibility to see it handed off to the next generation rather than whittled down.
O'Malley supports immediate increases in benefits for both current and future retirees, to be paid for by an increase in the minimum wage (higher wages mean more SS revenues).
O'Malley supports a minimum Social Security benefit at 125% of the Federal poverty line, so that no Senior Citizen need live in poverty.
O'Malley supports a change in the inflation calculation to use the "CPI-E" rather than "CPI-U" formula. The "CPI-E" more accurately reflects the spending patterns of elderly Americans. (There's literally no excuse not to do this.)
(This one was what won me over for O'Malley) O'Malley supports giving giving up to five years of "caregiver credits" to persons doing elder or child care, which means those five years without wages will not count against them in the calculation of their SS benefits. This is literally the most pro-family idea to be suggested in decades, and I cannot stress enough how strongly I support it.
I do not pretend that I will convince many people with this, but I really hope that all of you will at least look at O'Malley's plans. Even if you are not yet convinced to support him for President, I hope you will urge your candidate to adopt these measures in his or her platform.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)FSogol
(45,481 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)I couldn't find it.
Response to Armstead (Reply #4)
Recursion This message was self-deleted by its author.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)But I don't think it's a big priority for him because the program isn't actually in any financial trouble.
eridani
(51,907 posts)What about scrapping the cap?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)AFAIK he doesn't make it a big priority because he doesn't cap benefits (which makes it essentially a wash in terms of money), plus talking about lifting the cap plays into the false idea that the program is in financial trouble.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)Of course, it's easier to make points like that when you aren't beholden to the same moneyed interests as your opponent.
eridani
(51,907 posts)It would still go up without limit, but that could be on a very shallow slope.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)I read something else on DU yesterday that indicated Webb and Chafee are still running. Who knew. I guess that's what happens when you allow the Republicans to frame the discussion and dominate the airwaves. It's not so much the number of debates but the timing. While the clown car crazies have had 2 debates, the *first* Dem debate is still weeks away. Gee, I can't imagine why Will Rogers didn't think the Democratic Party was organized.
eridani
(51,907 posts)That will hurt all Dems, including Clinton.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)Clinton doesn't come across as genuine to many people and she does risk being called out for having close ties to seedy corporations/firms. And for her rhetoric not matching her actions. Still, she should be confident enough in her lead to not be negotiating for so few debates. She should recognize that timing matters, that allowing the Republicans to frame the discussion will only make it that much harder on her should she become the nominee. And having a debate before Biden's decision would have been smart on her part. But the DNC is somewhat of a disaster.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)'supports a minimum Social Security benefit at 125% of the Federal poverty line, so that no Senior Citizen need live in poverty.'
In many areas of the country 125% of poverty level is still poverty level. And why do we need anyone living at poverty level?
artislife
(9,497 posts)In August, I went down to Portland to care for a friend who ended up having a bone graft out of her pelvis to put into her ankle because the bone had died. (LONG story and terrible chain of events) I spent 6 days giving her morphine every 3 hours....24 hours a day. They had realized that they fractured the pelvis when they did the bone graft so she was in excruciating pain. Day 3 or 4 I had to take her to the emergency room, because the nurse line kept saying to give it another day.
Why I am going on about this is that I was exhausted and by day 6 my brain was fuzzy by not getting sleep at more than 2 hours at a time. It is very hard work to be the care giver, imagine if you were older and frailer and trying to help a spouse to and fro to the toilet. For longer than a week.
So well done, Martin. This is one of the best ideas out there.