Oh, chill out, senior citizens. Eating is overrated anyway.

[marmar]

AP, via Boston.com:



BOCA RATON, Fla.—Seniors prepared to cut back on everything from food to charitable donations to whiskey as word spread Monday that they will have to wait until at least 2012 to see their Social Security checks increase.

This The government is expected to announce this week that more than 58 million Social Security recipients will go through a second straight year without an increase in monthly benefits. This year was the first without an increase since automatic adjustments for inflation started in 1975.

"I think it's disgusting," said Paul McNeil, 69, a retired state worker from Warwick, R.I., who said his food and utility costs have gone up, but his income has not. He lamented decisions by lawmakers that he said do not favor seniors.

"They've got this idea that they've got to save money and basically they want to take it out of the people that will give them the least resistance," he said. ..........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2010/10/11/with_no_raise_in_sight_seniors_tighten_budgets/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Latest+news

[DJ13]

1. Inflation? What inflation?!

Corn crunch means costliest beef since 1980s

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2013135360_foodprices12.html


Luckily, cat food rarely uses beef.

[Autumn]

2. Bunch of damn old whiners

you know other people have it so much worse. Not like anything they need has gone up in price. The Government says so.












:sarcasm:

[Warpy]

4. Yeah, why can't they live on big screen TV sets and computers?

There's no inflation there! Those prices are going down! If they just spend their money more wisely, they'll come out ahead!

Who needs to eat?

[Autumn]

10. Know what else is over rated? Medication,

two years ago I had one medication I had to take everyday. Now I have three. My Husband had four medications he had to take daily now it's six. Don't even think anyone takes that into account.

[Statistical]

34. Taking MORE medication isn't inflation.

It does take into account the cost of medication.

I think you wish it to be a money goes up by a nice % each year which isn't how SS was designed or implemented.

The amount of your first check NEVER goes up in real terms (adjusted for inflation).

So if your first SS check was say $890 you will NEVER get more than $890 in buying power. The nominal amount may change but that simply means cost of items have gone up. Your buying power is exactly the same.

[Recursion]

8. Well, what's gone up in price for you?

My grocery store's prices on stuff I buy are slightly lower than last year. Gas is a little lower than last year. My power bill rate has gone down (very) slightly. What's gone up in price for you?

[Autumn]

13. My grocery store sure hasn't gone down in price,

my health insurance is up, my electric is up, my car insurance is up. My prescription costs are up (see post 10) Yeah gas is lower than last year but that's the only thing I see. Oh yeah my property taxes went up slightly. Maybe it all depends on where you live.

[Recursion]

15. And how old/well off you are

I don't own a house (doubt I ever will make enough to). I'm also very fortunate to be healthy. But aren't people on SS also usually on Medicare?

[dflprincess]

27. People who are on Medicare need "medigap"

insurance to cover some of the medical costs Medicare doesn't cover. They also have to buy "Part D" prescription coverage. Those costs are not going down.

In Minnesota, thanks to Timmy Pawlenty's cut in state aid to local governments, local property taxes have been taking big jumps which hits people on fixed incomes especially hard - and remember, property taxes not only affect homeowners but also what is paid for rent.

[DJ13]

44. Gas is a little lower than last year.

Not true.

At this time last year gas was averaging $2.49 per gallon, it was reported this morning that gas is averaging $2.80 per gallon.

These numbers were reported on CNBC this AM.

[Statistical]

46. Gas is lower than 2008 thought (which is last SSA benefit increase).

In essence SS checks are indexed to 2008 prices. Until prices rise above 2008 levels there won't (as required by law) be any SS increase.

[DJ13]

52. But the increase in 2008 failed to keep up with the increased costs of 2008

Yes it went up 5.8% in 2008, but real inflation was far higher, especially when energy prices were tripled much of that year.

In effect those on SS are still not caught up from that period of hyperinflation.

[Statistical]

55. Hyperinflation. Please consult a dictionary. The US experienced no hyperinflation.

The increase in gasoline prices was accounted for. It wasn't a tripling in one year (not sure where you get that).

http://www.GasBuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx?city1=USA Average&city2=&city3=&crude=n&tme=36&units=us

From June 2007 to June 2008 2008 gasoline rose from roughly $3.11 a gallon to $4.12 a gallon. a significant 30% increase however it is just one component. This change was reflected in CPI however CPI is an aggregate of all prices and we didn't see everything rise 30% in a year.

[Bluenorthwest]

80. Incorrect. Each year is compared to the previous year

They do not go back to 2008, or to the last year of an increase. It is relative to the previous year, Oct to Oct, using the quarter ending in September.

[Statistical]

85. Except that CPI-W declined in 2009. As a result the last increased in used.

If the system always worked year to year then SS could decline. CPI-W declined 1.6% in 2009 compared to 2008. However COLA has a protection mechanism built in that SS checks will never decline. When that happens the year of the last change becomes the baseline.

CPI 2008 3rd qtr - 215.5
CPI 2009 3rd qtr - 211.0
CPI 2010 3rd qtr - 214.2 * (so far)

So 2008 is now the metric. PI-W declined in 2009 but SS checks didn't decline they remained indexed against a CPI of 215.5. When CPI exceeds 215.5 (it was 214.2 in August) for 3rd qtr exceeds 215.5 there will be a COLA increase.

The system would be simpler to compare year to year and we would have 1.4% COLA increase this year (214.2/211.0) however that would leave open the potential for SS checks to decline. For example last year instead of a COLA increase of 0.0% it would have been a COLA decrease of 1.8%.

[demodonkey]

100. Yeah, and heating oil is up over 40 cents a gallon from last year too.

Anyone notice how when Bush was in power, oil prices and products went DOWN in costs before elections but now they are going up???

NOT a coincidence, I am sure.

[WinkyDink]

94. Are you joking? NAME one grocery item down in cost. My electricity rose by exactly 30%. TV cable, UP

And gasoline isn't part of the CPI.

[Recursion]

101. Grocery items down in cost

It may just be that the things I buy (which aren't many) are flat or down: eggs, lentils, packaged chorizo & salami, milk, greens, and diet soda.

Note also that I'm quite literally exactly who the CPI-W (not the CPI-U) was created to reflect: a young, single worker on a government contract in an urban setting. So it shouldn't be that surprising that my experience matches pretty well with the index.

[Mimosa]

127. Whole grain breads can cost up to $4 a loaf, for one thing.

Peanut butter and cheese are more expensive. So is chicken.

[laughingliberal]

131. Groceries are certainly up where I live.

Gas is about the same-slightly higher than a year ago.

[EC]

3. Well, wasn't this COLA set back in 1970

or thereabouts? Why are they not asking for the law to be changed instead of attacking this administration...like they think it's something new that Obama and Dems did?

[Recursion]

7. Yeah, for all the complaints I have yet to see someone actually point out...

...how politics came in to this.

There's a formula that's been around for decades that determines how much the COLA each year is for SS. No politician has to decide. No politician even gets to decide. It's based on the price increases in certain items over the past year.

Now, if food and utility prices have gone up over the past year (mine haven't) and the index doesn't reflect that, then it's missing something important. How much have food and utility prices gone up in the past year? Mine are slightly lower now than a year ago.

[grasswire]

21. look at the data below

food and energy prices have increased.

[Recursion]

23. The one that says the CPI was 1 tenth of 1 percent?

And that in that food had gone up 1 percent?

OK, yes, apparently nationally food is 1% more expensive this year than last year.

[Statistical]

32. That is for 1 month. CPI-W shows 1.4% inflation compared to a year ago.

[defendandprotect]

92. That's believable .... how much have we increased the MIC alone ... !!!????

What is it now -- over $750 BILLION????

I'm sure that works out to 1.4% inflation!!!


Has anyone noticed that the Bush/Obama wars are bankrupting the Treasury?



:evilgrin:

[pnwmom]

31. I understand that the CPI in 2008 was higher than now

and that is the level for which current S.S. payments were set. Then prices, and the CPI, dropped. Prices have been rising in the last 2+ years, but they still haven't reached 2008 levels, according to the CPI.

[treestar]

77. Then advocate to change the way the COLA is calculated

If you think it is inaccurate.

[Greyhound]

38. "Flexible basket of goods".

That is all.

[Statistical]

41. Not quite.

CPI-W includes rent, mortgages, electricity, heating oil, gasoline, utilities, food (meats, dairy, grains, vegtables), processed/prepared foods, transportation, medical services, clothing, and a dozen other categories.

When CPI-W resulted in 5.8% increase in 2008 were you equally upset? Did you think it was equally suspect?

Strange CPI-W is only broken when it results in low/no benefit increase. If fed can't get inflation under control and we see 10% CPI-W for 2011, 2012, 2013 will you say no SS checks shouldn't go up 30% compounded. CPI-W is a scam.

I doubt it.


Summary:
CPI-W = large increase -> good
CPI-W = no increase -> scam

Selection bias?

[Greyhound]

72. And each category can and is modified to reflect any cheaper alternatives.

If you are a statistician, you are either very bad or employed by the government.

Gillespie Research blew this and so many other "government stats" years ago, it has only gotten worse since then. When the formulas used to reliably predict economic activity for decades stop working, there has to be reason. When they went back to the sources they found that reason, successive administrations of both parties fudging, and then fudging the fudged numbers and so on.

A tweak here, and unemployment drops a tenth. Another tweak there and GDP rises a bit. Change how you count production and the conditions required to be counted as an American export, and the trade deficit look a little better...
:eyes:

[jaxx]

9. You are correct.

It is the law and that would need to be changed to allow COLA increases. Blaming the President isn't rational.

[Autumn]

20. Can you point out to me, where in that article the President

is blamed? Maybe I need new glasses because I can't find it.

[jaxx]

24. No, just a couple references to the government in this thread.

And a catfood commission reference. I really hate that name, it's ugly to link it with the seniors.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. It should be ugly - where do you think the reference came from?

FYI, regardless of the comparitive prices between tuna and catfood today, that was one of THE scandals of the Reagan administration - seniors eating tuna catfood instead of tuna because it was 10 cents a can cheaper.

Cut SS payments, raise the retirement age, and we'll be back to the good old Reagan days in no time at all.

[Lance_Boyle]

99. "seniors eating tuna catfood instead of tuna"

Congratulations! You've identified the left wing's hyperbolic equivalent to "Cadillac-driving welfare queens."

The melodrama - it makes you stupid.

[RaleighNCDUer]

105. Wrong.

I remember the Reagan recession, and just as people were talking about cutting or dismantling SS back then, there WERE seniors buying catfood to make tuna casserole - pasta is cheap, catfood cheap, a can of store-brand peas and a chunk of government cheese, and you have tuna casserole.

That was the BEGINNING of homelessness in America. There had always been a 'Skid Row', but before Reagan we NEVER saw homelessness like we began to see then, not since the great depression.

No hyperbole there.

These days, of course, catfood is more expensive than tuna - it was an untapped market back then - but the idea holds.

The fact is, if the catfood commission cuts benefits, raises the retirement age, or does anything other than raise the cap on paying in, people will be hurt, they will be hungry, they will die. Particularly now that real pensions don't exist anymore, that seniors' retirement is dependent upon the vagaries of the market because they've had to put their 'retirement' into 401ks as there was no other option.

Why do you think they call it the 'catfood commission' if there is no precedent for people to connect with? If 'seniors eating catfood' was just a fantasy they made up, it would not resonate - people would just say 'huh?'

Disclaimer - none of the above applies if you think ketchup is a vegetable.

[Lance_Boyle]

108. it's hyperbolic bunk, just like the caddy driving welfare queen

Shame that you can see the BS in one of those examples but not the other.

[RaleighNCDUer]

112. OK kiddo, how old are you?

do you really not remember the 80s? I was no senior then but I do distinctly remember considering it myself, because I WAS hungry. It happened. It was in the news. It was reported, and verified. It was NOT just a bullshit statement dropped into a presidential speech.

What part of 'poverty' do you not comprehend?

(edit to add link)

You might take a couple minutes and browse through the links included here.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=130561

[Lance_Boyle]

123. It's still bullshit - a myth.

Beans are cheaper than cat food. Hell, a dollar-menu burger at McDonald's is cheaper than cat food. Your hyperbolic nonsense is moot.

[RaleighNCDUer]

133. IN THE FUCKING 80s

A can of tuna was .25 cents. A can of tuna catfood was .15 cents, sometimes on sale for 8 for a dollar.

Compare a $1 4oz burger to 40oz of catfood for a dollar, and THEN tell me which is cheaper.

[Greyhound]

140. How many of these "mythical" people would you like to meet?

Would any number convince you that you are just wrong?

[Lance_Boyle]

141. All none of 'em.

Maybe we can find them chilling in the back seats of all the welfare queens' Cadillacs. :eyes:

[RaleighNCDUer]

142. By the way, I went shopping last night, and out of curiosity checked the

pet food aisle - cans of cat food are STILL half the price of store-brand tuna.

[Greyhound]

145. I hope you're proud.

You give republicans something to shoot for.

[treestar]

76. Thank you!

This issue illustrates better than any how people think the POTUS is a king who can just order things to be done whether the law says they can be done or not!

[sabrina 1]

5. But I bet 'inflation' the lack of it or not, will not prevent the

Wall St. Welfare Queens from getting their big bonuses again this year.

If only the government had prosecuted those who brought down this economy and recovered some of the money they stole. A few of those bonuses would most likely pay for a COLA for millions of elderly Americans. But, punish the little people, we cannot expect billionaires to make any sacrifices, such as maybe not buying a new yacht. How devastating that would be for them poor babies.

The SS Fund is separate from the Federal Government's budget and should not even be a part of this discussion. How is keeping more money in a fund that belongs to the people, that it is illegal actually, to use for any other purpose, going to help 'save money' for the Federal Government? Unless they are stealing from that fund, of course.

[Contrary1]

11. There you go again, making up crap to suit your Liberal agenda...

Oh, wait.

Wall Street set to pay out record $144 billion

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39631043/ns/business-us_business/











Never mind.

[sabrina 1]

14. Lol ~ and I'm not even good at math.

Which means, that if a math challenged moron like me can figure this out, why can Congress not do so?

[HelenWheels]

6. No raise okay

I'm on SS and I can understand why we aren't getting a raise. We seniors should have to sacrifice too.

[SammyWinstonJack]

16. You sacrifice so Wall St banksters don't have too. Happy?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39631043/ns/business-us_business

[Cronus Protagonist]

12. I haven't had a pay increase in a decade

I'm glad seniors are getting some here and there, but my rent is going up every year while my income goes down. It seems few care about the working poor who rent.

[leftyladyfrommo]

17. Pretty soon the working poor will be just about everyone.

More and more people just keep sliding down that slope.

[Greyhound]

42. Not that we/they don't care, just a different, though tangentially relevant, topic. n/t

[Starry Messenger]

18. Sorry to be blunt

But elderly people don't have that kind of time to wait around. This is fucking criminal. TWO years. It's insane.

[grasswire]

19. the data from the government itself

Consumer Price Index Summary


Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until
8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, September 17, 2010 USDL-10-1281


Technical information: [phone] [e-mail] www.bls.gov/cpi
Media Contact: [phone] [e-mail]


Consumer Price Index - August 2010

The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased
0.3 percent in August on a seasonally adjusted basis, the U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics reported today. (Before seasonal adjustment, the
all items index increased 0.1 percent for the month.) Over the last
12 months, the all items index increased 1.1 percent before seasonal
adjustment.

The energy index rose in August and, as in July, was the primary
factor in the seasonally adjusted all items increase. All major
energy components posted increases, with the gasoline index being the
main factor. The food index, which declined in July, rose in August.
The food at home index was unchanged while the index for food away
from home increased.

The index for all items less food and energy was unchanged in August
after increasing in each of the previous three months. This pattern
mirrors the shelter index, which also was unchanged in August after
rising in recent months. Posting increases in August were the indexes
for medical care, used cars, and new vehicles, while the indexes for
recreation and apparel declined.

Over the last 12 months, the index for all items less food and energy
rose 0.9 percent, though the shelter component posted a 0.7 percent
decline. The food index increased at a similar rate, rising 1.0
percent, with grocery store food prices up 0.8 percent. The energy
index posted a somewhat larger increase, rising 3.8 percent with
gasoline up 4.4 percent.


skip the table here


Consumer Price Index Data for August 2010

Food

The food index rose 0.2 percent in August after falling 0.1 percent
in July. The index for food away from home, which was unchanged in
July, increased 0.3 percent in August. The index for food at home was
unchanged in August after declining each of the two previous months.
The six major grocery store food groups were evenly split between
increases and decreases. The fruits and vegetables index rose 0.4
percent in August after a series of recent declines, and the indexes
for cereals and bakery products and for other food at home also
posted slight increases. In contrast, the index for meats, poultry,
fish, and eggs fell 0.3 percent, ending a string of seven consecutive
increases, and the indexes for dairy and related products and for
nonalcoholic beverages both fell slightly.


Energy

The energy index rose 2.3 percent in August following a 2.6 percent
increase in July. The gasoline index rose for the second month in a
row after five straight declines, increasing 3.9 percent in August
after a 4.6 percent increase in July. (Before seasonal adjustment,
gasoline prices rose 0.4 percent in August and have risen 3.5 percent
over the last six months.) The household energy index, which rose 0.6
percent in July, rose 0.5 percent in August as all of its components
posted increases. The fuel oil index rose 0.9 percent in August after
declining in July. The index for electricity edged up 0.2 percent in
August after a 0.5 percent increase in July. The index for natural
gas rose for the third month in a row, increasing 1.1 percent.


All items less food and energy

The index for all items less food and energy was unchanged in August
after rising 0.1 percent in July. The shelter index, which rose 0.1
percent in each of the previous three months, was unchanged in
August, as was the index for household furnishings and operations.
Within the shelter component, the index for rent declined 0.1
percent, its first decline since November of last year. The index for
owners' equivalent rent was unchanged and the lodging away from home
index fell 1.3 percent. The index for medical care rose 0.2 percent
following a 0.1 percent decline in July, with both the medical care
commodities index and the medical care services index rising 0.2
percent. The index for hospital services rose 0.5 percent in August
after a 0.5 percent decline in July. The index for used cars and
trucks continued to increase, rising 0.7 percent in August, and the
index for new vehicles rose 0.3 percent. In contrast to these
increases, the recreation index continued to decline, falling 0.2
percent after a 0.1 percent decrease in July. The apparel index
turned down in August, falling 0.1 percent after rising in each of
the three previous months.

The 12-month change in the index for all items less food and energy
has held steady at 0.9 percent for five months in a row. Indexes that
contributed to the increase include used cars and trucks (up 15.5
percent), medical care (up 3.2 percent), new vehicles (up 2.3
percent), airline fares (up 8.7 percent), and tobacco (up 7.7
percent). Partially offsetting these increases were declines in the
indexes for shelter (down 0.7 percent), household furnishings and
operations (down 2.6 percent), recreation (down 1.1 percent), and
apparel (down 0.4 percent).


Not seasonally adjusted CPI measures

The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased
1.1 percent over the last 12 months to an index level of 218.312
(1982-84=100). For the month, the index rose 0.1 percent prior to
seasonal adjustment.

The Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
(CPI-W) increased 1.4 percent over the last 12 months to an index
level of 214.205 (1982-84=100). For the month, the index rose 0.1
percent prior to seasonal adjustment.

The Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U)
increased 0.9 percent over the last 12 months. For the month, the
index rose 0.1 percent on a not seasonally adjusted basis. Please
note that the indexes for the post-2008 period are subject to
revision.


The Consumer Price Index for September 2010 is scheduled to be
released on Friday, October 15, 2010, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm

[SammyWinstonJack]

22. hmmm. Interesting.

[Recursion]

25. What CPI-W breaks down into

(sorry, graph was way too big... looking for a smaller one)

Housing makes up a big part of it. The bottom falling out of the market (rents are lower in my neighborhood) may be dragging down the 1% increase in food prices and 3.8% increase in energy prices.

[spin]

26. Did Congress give itself a raise this year?

Answer:


No raise: House and Senate members have not voted to give themselves raises. The $4,700 and $5,300 figures are made up out of whole cloth. The true figure is $0. As we reported last year, Congress voted to freeze its own pay for 2010. Any pay raise for 2011 will take place automatically under existing law, unless Congress votes to freeze its pay again before then.

Update, May 17, 2010: There will be no House or Senate raise for 2011 either. Congress passed, and the President signed, H.R. 5146, which eliminates the automatic adjustment in pay for Members of Congress that would have taken place in 2011.
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/retribution-fabrication/

Text of bill HR 5146:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5146/text

[grasswire]

28. I doubt they are at risk of eating cat food, tho. n/t

[spin]

29. Good point. Most look well fed. (n/t)

[Greyhound]

48. Nope, just enjoying the many raises they've given themselves over the last

12 years;

On Jan. 1, 2003, they took a raise of $4,700.

On Jan. 1, 2002, they took a raise of $4,900.

On Jan. 1, 2001, they took a raise of $3,800.

On Jan. 1, 2000, they took a raise of $4,600.

On Jan. 1, 1998, they took a raise of $3,100

Seems public "service" has been one of the only fields that has enjoyed steady increases while real wages have just as steadily declined for us 'little people'.

[madrchsod]

30. if they readjusted the inflation formula for those on ss..

we wouldhave seen a raise last year and this year.

[pnwmom]

33. The same formula has been giving raises for 40 years. Why should it be readjusted now?

What happened is that the CPI reached a peak in 2008, at which point SS payments were raised in accordance with the COLA formula. But then the CPI dropped, while SS payments remained the same. The CPI needs to exceed its 2008 levels in order for payments to go up again.

[defendandprotect]

39. Because the GOP over decades destroyed the information gathering ....

the guidelines and in general all of the value of the statistics!

Notice that private salaries, for instance, are 40% lower than government salaries --

That's because those COLA's kept up with costs of government employees --

it's a figure that shows how severely our private salaries have been deteriorated by

stagnation --

and again, the COLA's for Social Security, poverty, etal have been gimmicked and

fixed by GOP over decades!!



As a matter of fact, do you even recall that during the Bush years, inflation was so high

that they didn't want to pay the full increase on Social Security that was due -- and they

didn't!?


Social Security checks -- and all private salaries should be at a minimum 40% higher than

they are --

[Statistical]

43. COLA is based on CPI-W so ....

when you say govt salaries went up higher than private salaries wouldn't that support CPI-W as a valid metric? Government salaries (which are indexed to CPI-W) rose faster than private sector salaries (which aren't).

The divergence of govt salaries from private sector jobs would indicate CPI-W is valid metric not an invalid one.
The formula hasn't changed. Nobody complained when Social Security increased over 11.8% compounded in 3 years (2006, 2007, 2008).

It seems to be only "broke" when it produces "low numbers".

"As a matter of fact, do you even recall that during the Bush years, inflation was so high that they didn't want to pay the full increase on Social Security that was due -- and they didn't!?"

False. By legislation COLA is equal to increase in CPI-w. SSA can't deviate from that (either more or less). When CPI-W declines there is a protection mechanism that prevents SS checks from declining. There is nothing Bush (or Obama) can do about it. That metric has been used for almost 40 years (began in 1972).

[defendandprotect]

49. They are automatic for government employees ...

and as far as I'm aware Congressional salaries are adjusted differently from

Social Security payouts!!

What the government salaries proves is that public salaries and Social Security payouts

are 40% less than they should be!

Again, Bush administration BALKED at paying what should have been paid under COLA to

Social Security recepients because of huge inflation at that time!

Anything based on 40 years ago is certainly deficient!

[Statistical]

54. Try reading for once ... THE SAME CPI applied to govt salaries is applied to SS.

"Again, Bush administration BALKED at paying what should have been paid under COLA to"
False. A pure BS answer which came from your ass.

Neither Obama nor Bush nor King George has any say on if COLA is applied.

If CPI indicates a rise in prices above the previous CPI high then benefits are increased. There is absolutely nothing that the President can do to avoid that. Nothing.

SSA is required by law to ONLY apply COLA increase equal to CPI. Period. SSA can't give more. SSA can't give less. SSA can't give an increase where none is warranted. SSA can't freeze and increase where one is warranted.

Only Congress can alter that by either:
a) changing legislation - hasn't changed since 1972
b) issuing a one time special increase (other than COLA)

The President can do neither. Period. Any claim otherwise is pure and utter BS.

[defendandprotect]

63. Congress has control over COLA's .... they've voted themselves automatic pay increases ....

and royal health care benefits!!

Let me suggest that when you get so frazzled as this ....

A pure BS answer which came from your ass.


It's a sign you're losing it --

[Statistical]

70. On they haven't Congress gave up control in 1972.

Starting in 1975 and every year since then COLA has been applied automatically by SSA. There is no voting, no debating, no deciding. It is what it is. Congress has absolutely no input on COLA since 1975. Both federal workers and social security benefits are based on COLA calculations which happen automatically each year without input from Congress.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/colaseries.html

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/latestCOLA.html


What is a COLA?
Legislation enacted in 1973 provides for cost-of-living adjustments, or COLAs. With COLAs, Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits keep pace with inflation.

No COLA
There will be no increase in Social Security benefits payable in January 2010, nor will there be an increase in SSI payments.

How is a COLA calculated?
The Social Security Act specifies a formula for determining each COLA. In general, a COLA is equal to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) from the third quarter of one year to the third quarter of the next. If there is no increase, there is no COLA.

COLA Computation
For the December 2009 COLA, we measure the increase (if any) in the average CPI-W from the third calendar quarter of 2008 to the third quarter of 2009. These averages are 215.495 and 211.001 for the third calendar quarters of 2008 and 2009, respectively, and are derived from monthly CPI-Ws developed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

[defendandprotect]

90. CONGRESS created the COLA for Social Security .....

CONGRESS debates increases in Social Security and the COLA's --

Who do you think increased the FICA payments in 1980 which moved the burden

of FICA payments onto the shoulders of the poor and middle class?

Who do you think will be deciding whether or not to increase the cap earnings for FICA?

Again -- show me a year since Ike when the inflation rate hasn't been at least 3.2% ==

[Recursion]

102. No, they don't

CONGRESS debates increases in Social Security and the COLA's

No. This is simply factually false.

Who do you think increased the FICA payments in 1980 which moved the burden

of FICA payments onto the shoulders of the poor and middle class?

It was Greenspan's idea, and Congress passed it. The idea was to create the trust fund that the SSA now sits on.

This has absolutely nothing to do with COLAs.

Again -- show me a year since Ike when the inflation rate hasn't been at least 3.2% ==

Well, the past two years come to mind.

[DJ13]

69. And yet, the military had a 2% increase last year

Obviously theres different metrics for SS than other government employees.

[Statistical]

71. It wasn't COLA.

Govt wages increase by COLA (indexed by inflation) then by any supplemental increase authorized by Congress.

Congress can also provide for supplemental increase to Social Security.

None of that changes the fact that COLA increases have been outside Congress control since 1975.

[Individualist]

81. Wrong again! "Govt wages increase by COLA (indexed by inflation)"

See post 78.

[Recursion]

103. Govt wages increase by *AT LEAST* COLA

Congress could decide that all GS-8s should make more than they do and set the base pay higher. That then becomes the new basis against which COLAs (when they happen) are applied.

[Individualist]

107. Federal raises are based on ECI, Social Security COLAs on CPI.

See post 78. Computation of federal raises has nothing to do with COLA.

[defendandprotect]

91. You've just belied your own debate .... did you read your own post . . ?

EXACTLY what I have been saying to you --

Congress can also provide for supplemental increase to Social Security.


Congress debates these issues and GOP has been turning down any increase to Social Security --

recognizing and debating, as well, the insufficiency of the COLA payments and the accuracy

of the inflationary information/statistics and means of gathering that information.


Keep in mind, COLA itself was created by Congress!!



EXACTLY what I have been saying to you --

Congress can also provide for supplemental increase to Social Security.


Congress debates these issues and GOP has been turning down any increase to Social Security --

recognizing and debating, as well, the insufficiency of the COLA payments and the accuracy

of the inflationary information/statistics and means of gathering that information.


Keep in mind, COLA itself was created by Congress!!




And, just in case you missed this post by Individualist --


"Pay increases for current federal employees and cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for retired
federal employees

often differ because they are based on changes in different economic variables.

Increases in pay for civilian federal workers are indexed to wage and salary increases in the
private sector, as measured by the Employment Cost Index (ECI), whereas federal retirement and
disability benefits are indexed to price increases as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
Both the ECI and the CPI are calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor"

http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/94-971_20100120.pdf



And, I will add again, in the case of Social Security the inflationary statistics themselves,

the caps, and the scheduled COLA payment are often a subject of debate in Congress where they

can elect to supplement them - to increase the cap -- to increase the FICA rate, etal.





.

[Individualist]

74. Federal employees received a 2% pay raise in 2010

http://www.myfederalretirement.com/public/344.cfm

SS recipients and retired federal employees got no COLA.

[Recursion]

111. Do you understand that raises and adjustments are two separate things?

Social Security recipients never get a "raise" in that sense.

[Individualist]

113. Of course, but apparently you don't.

It was you ("Govt wages increase by *AT LEAST* COLA") and another poster who were trying to tie federal raises to COLA's. I've been providing proof that that isn't the case at all.

[Recursion]

114. Umm... CONUS COLAs are granted to CONUS federal employees

I know that from having received them.

[Individualist]

115. The vast majoritiy of federal employees do not receive COLAs.

As a federal employee or retired federal employee, you should know that.
http://www.fedsmith.com/article/667/opm-proposes-cola-changes-some-federal-employees.html

Surely you know that your CONUS COLA is a supplement to your federal wages. Therefore, your statement that "Govt wages increase by *AT LEAST* COLA" is misleading to say the least. You're being deliberately obtuse.

[Individualist]

78. You're the one who needs to try reading for once

"Pay increases for current federal employees and cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for retired
federal employees often differ because they are based on changes in different economic variables.
Increases in pay for civilian federal workers are indexed to wage and salary increases in the
private sector, as measured by the Employment Cost Index (ECI), whereas federal retirement and
disability benefits are indexed to price increases as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
Both the ECI and the CPI are calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor"

http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/94-971_20100120.pdf

[RaleighNCDUer]

144. Please define 'government salaries'.

Cuz i know for a fact that great numbers of government employees receive LESS than what their private sector counterparts make.

If you are talking politicians - maybe. If you are talking department heads, maybe - I don't know. But us schmucks at the bottom, the office clerks, the museum curators, the lab techs, etc., who get government paychecks mostly would do much better on the outside. THE benefit of government work is stability and job security (and both of those are dwindling).

[Greyhound]

53. But, as you well know, the CPI factors have been changed over and over

to show what a 'great job' they're doing.

The price of beef has gone up, substitute tuna. Tuna is more expensive, use chicken. The price of fuel is on the rise? Weight the calculation to blunt the specific. Housing has gone through the roof? Re-calculate the type of housing considered.

[Statistical]

56. No they haven't.

The relative weight changes based on consumption habits.

100 years ago 60% of budget was spent on food and shelter. Today that would be out of place. BLS looks at consumption habits to see how much to weight each subgroup. So if consumers spend 28% of their income on rent/housing then the price of rent/house makes up 28% of the aggregate total.

"Re-calculate the type of housing considered."
Wrong again. they don't look at any particular "type of housing" they look at the average of where Americans are living. If anything the trend of McMansions (resulting in higher % of income being spent on housing) has overweighted housing. However as Americans give up McMansions, get foreclosed, and move into more sustainable homes that % will drop however the % are all relative. Someone spending less (as a % of total income) on housing will spend more on something else (transportation, clothing, food, etc).

[Greyhound]

73. You seem to be involved in this professionally. Go pay your subscription fee and

access the research that explicitly details each change, who did it, and the results of over 40 years of these little tweaks.
:hi:

[defendandprotect]

65. Absolutely ... and if you saw the statistics on poverty recently it was sadly laughable...!!!

Again, government salaries have benefited from automatic COLA payments which

makes government salaries 40% higher than private salaries ....

which is a firm indication of how stagnant private salaries are and the new

levels of poverty we are creating.

Yes -- I've watched many of the GOP arguments -- as it sounds like you have, as well --

where they devalue as much as possible inflationary costs.

As I've said before, everything anyone had pre-Bush is now worth about 50 cents --

at most 60 cents! We have a long way to go to make up for that!!

And, certainly the Bush administration did BALK at paying out COLA's based on the

inflation rates they had created -- and they "recalculated" the statistics and

lowered the payout!

On the other hand, Seniors seem to be in a coma when it comes to what's going on --

as long as they have AARP, a private insurance company, it seems they feel secure!!!




:evilgrin:



:)

[Greyhound]

75. Back before we were proclaimed over paid and obsolete, I needed this info

to earn my pay.

Obviously I no longer have the income to maintain the substantial subscription fees, so the last data I have is about 5 years old.

It is also copyrighted (and enforced, this how they make their money, after all) so I can't even post it without potentially causing DU more headaches (not to mention that it would be deleted), but it is all there in black & white. Every administration of both parties going back to Kennedy has engaged in this, not necessarily for bad reasons, but each little 'tweak' echoes through the years as they accumulate.

[Statistical]

35. Did you advocate a change in the formula in 2008 when it resulted in 5.8% increase in benefits?

[defendandprotect]

50. That was a lesser payment than it should have been at that time based on COLA ... !!!

And you still want to argue that the payouts aren't political and aren't gimmicked?

Wow -

[Statistical]

57. they aren't.

There is NOTHING bush can do to change SS payments. Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

By law SSA can ONLY change SS benefit payments by the increase in CPI. Period.
The only one who can change that is Congress. Period.

SSA has increased by the amount mandated by COLA every single year since 1972. It requires no approval or authorization by either Congress or the President. The amount can't be deviated from without passing further legislation. COLA is based on the change in CPI-W from the previous year.

These happen automatically every year and there is no ability to change that (other than passing new SS legislation).

[defendandprotect]

61. And Congress HAS changed it ... especially GOP Congresses ....

[Statistical]

64. Nope. SS legislation of 1972 put current system in place. It has been in place since then. n/t

[defendandprotect]

66. Congress changes the way inflation is monitored .....

and thereby changes the statistics and the collection of those statistics --

and the way the inflation is calculated.

We've had decades of GOP arguing against increases in Social Security payments --

and COLA's -- and, as I've said before, the checks hould be at least 40% higher if

not doubled.

Anyone who thinks they've recovered from the Bush administration inflation is delusional.

PLUS ... we also had Obama correctly stating that we are in a "Depression."

That was probably about two months ago now -- and quickly withdrawn from Yahoo and

"recession" put in and "depression" washed away.

However, many in Congress have been calling this "the Great Recession."


And, let's also consider what it might cost a senior to borrow, let's say $2,000 from the

bank for dentures .... what do you think it would cost?

Meanwhile, do you know what anyone would get from a bank in interest on $2,000?

Or a CD?


Meanwhile, we are subsidizing corrupt and criminal capitalism/corporatism --

i.e., providing WELFARE for capitalists!

[Statistical]

68. "We've had decades of GOP arguing against increases in Social Security payments -- and COLA's"

False. There is no arguing, there is no debate, there is no voting.

The law was passed in 1972 and automatic COLA went into effect in 1975. Prior to that it was voted on by Congress but it hasn't been that was for 35 years. Every year since 1975 COLA has been applied automatically.

It doesn't require the effort or action on President or Congress.
It happens automatically every single year regardless of who is in office.

Your claim otherwise isn't based on any facts or reality.

I mean we had a 5.8% increase under Bush and a pair of 0% under Obama.
If Congress and/or President had control of that wouldn't you think the reverse would be true?

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/colaseries.html

[defendandprotect]

86. Evidently you've never watched C-span and Congressional debates ...?

They make the decisions on what inflationary statistics will be --

what will be included and what will not be included --

Again -- ALL OF THE INFLATIONARY STATISTICS HAVE BEEN GIMMICKED AND FIXED OVER

YEARS BY GOP.

And, again -- show me one year since Eisenhower when inflation wasn't at least

3.5% -- ?????????????????????

[Recursion]

104. You've never answered how Congress is supposed to "fix" the inflation stats

I'm mostly curious how you think that would happen.

And, yes, I watch C-SPAN in my spare time. I've never seen Congress vote on what the inflation rate is.

[defendandprotect]

116. What you mean is you didn't like the answer ....

Congress debates whether or not Social Security is sufficient --

whether the inflationary statistics are fair -- overly fair -- too fair --

whether caps and/or FICA itself should be raised --

Who makes rules for Labor Department and collection of statistics?

[Recursion]

118. Slow down

Congress debates whether or not Social Security is sufficient --

When? In what context?

whether the inflationary statistics are fair -- overly fair -- too fair --

When? Why? Once the CPIs are set the payout changes are automatic. Congress doesn't even bring a bill forward to do it. When have you seen them debate about this?

whether caps and/or FICA itself should be raised --

Sure, they debated this about 30 years ago. Have they since?

Who makes rules for Labor Department and collection of statistics?

Ultimately it's the Secretary of Labor. Though more realistically she hires the people who hire the people who hire the people who make the rules.

[defendandprotect]

124. Who will decide whether SSA should increase the ceiling on earnings re FICA?

Congress --

Who will decide if the FICA rate itself should be raised?

Who oversees the Labor Department -- ?

Ultimately the answer is CONGRESS --

[Recursion]

125. That's a weird way to put it

Who will decide if the FICA rate itself should be raised?

Well, I mean, Congress might, but there's no particular requirement for them to take that up. If you're asking who has the power to set the FICA levy rate, then yes, the answer is Congress.

What does that have to do with a COLA? Again, the issue with the COLA was not the lack of money, but the fact that there hasn't been appreciable inflation since 2008.

[defendandprotect]

128. Okay ... as I said before, I have one rule: disingenuous puts you on "ignore."

Bye --

[defendandprotect]

40. Agree ... Democrats should have adjusted the formula which was destroyed by GOP....

[Statistical]

45. formula hasn't change.

The same formula from 1972 resulted in the largest increase in SS in 2006 (under Shrub) and the only back to back no increase (under Obama).

Unless you think Republicans game the formula to HELP seniors and Democrats game the formula to HURT seniors you claim is all smoke and mirrors.

[defendandprotect]

47. A formula based on 1972 thinking ... ???? Since then rent control is gone ...!!

Health care is a huge issue --

Medicines a huge cost --

And -- let's be clear, the Bush COLA increases should have been higher and they balked at that!


PLUS, all government salaries are 40% higher at the least than private salaries because

they are based on COLA's -- private salaries are being permitted to stagnate -- and so is

Social Security payouts.


Both private salaries and Social Security should be at the minimum 40% higher -- !!

[Statistical]

51. The prices are resampled each year.

So since there is no rent control and those prices rose they were reflected in CPI. Each year over 80,000 products are sampled to get a representative sample of prices across multiple sectors (rent/housing, transportation, energy, food, clothing, utilities, services, appliances, consumer goods, etc).

Health care is a huge issue -- Health care is included in CPI
Medicines a huge cost -- Medicine is included in CPI.

"PLUS, all government salaries are 40% higher at the least than private salaries because they are based on COLA's"

COLA for govt salaries is determined by CPI. The same formula you say is broken for SS you claim is good for govt salaries. :rofl:

Govt salaries = good (COLA raises based on CPI)
SS benefits = bad (COLA raises based on CPI)

Think you are trying to say two things at the same time. If CPI was broken one would expect govt salaries to lag behind private sector not the other way round.

[defendandprotect]

62. I may be wrong .... How much is Social Security paying for dental care????

I just had a tooth capped -- $1600 --

Are all Senior citizens wearing denture plates?

[Mimosa]

88. ^ RIGHT! ^

Thanks for elucidating the truth DefendandProtect.

[Bluenorthwest]

82. 2006 was not the largest increase at all. Where do you get this?

Largest was 1980, which was 14.3%. 1981 was 11.2%.

[defendandprotect]

37. Rising rent and health care costs? You just want a pink pony, stop whining...!!!

[Obamanaut]

58. People knew about this many months ago. There are also a couple

hundred responses here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9297542

This should not seem to be the surprise that it is being made out to be. There will probably be no increase until 2012, and that is predicted to be a modest less than 2%.

It is just as easy for seniors on fixed incomes to clip coupons, go to 2 for 1 specials at Publix or Winn Dixie (we do) as it is for a younger family who has no income at all.

Both of us in our house are over 65.

[Statistical]

59. There might be an increase in 2011. We are close on CPI. 214.2 vs 215.5

CPI (prices) rose 1.4% in 2010 but that wasn't enough to make up the loss in 2009.

CPI-W 3rd qtr avg is used for COLA increases in SS.

CPI-W 2007 (3rd qtr): 203.8
CPI-W 2008 (3rd qtr): 215.5
CPI-W 2009 (3rd qtr): 211.0
CPI-W 2010 (3rd qtr): 214.2 (aprox Sept data not available yet)

SS was adjusted upward for 2009 by 5.8% (the difference between 2007 & 2008 CPI-W).
In 2009 there was no CPI increase (CPI 2009 was below CPI 2008) thus there was no COLA increase for 2010.
In 2010 there was a CPI increase over 2009 but it is just below 2008 peak) thus there will be no COLA increase for 2011.

Hypothetically had inflation been a little strong and say 2010 were 216.0 there would be a tiny cOLA increase instead.

So the target for 2011 is > 215.5. If CPI-W in 2011 is >215.5 then there will be an increase in 2012. The amount is equal to the difference.

Some hypothetical.
CPI-W 2011 216 = 0.2% COLA increase
CPI-W 2011 217 = 0.7% COLA increase
CPI-W 2011 218 = 1.2% COLA increase
CPI-W 2011 220 = 2.1% COLA increase
CPI-W 2011 225 = 4.4% COLA increase



However all this is academic. You can never "get ahead" w/ COLA. Say COLA rises 5.8% sound great. No it just means that prices rose 5.8% so while the number on the check is larger your buying power is the same.

With SS for your entire retirement buying power remains the same. The nominal value of your check may increase but in real terms (adjusted for inflation) you will never be able to buy more than you could with your first check.

[Individualist]

60. Has it occurred to you that there are seniors whose retirement income is lower than yours?

Your assumption that seniors on fixed incomes do not clip coupons or go for 2 for 1 specials is wrong. In addition to doing those things, two other senior friends and I have a coupon pool. One of those friends told me recently that the monthly grocery bill for her, her husband and their two dogs has gone up $150 a month since late last year.

I've already had to cut back on dosage of prescription medicines and eat only two meals a day. What do you suggest I cut out next - breakfast or dinner?

If you had to live for just two months the way some of us live, you'd change your tune.

Incidentally, many of us knew this was coming. The fact that we knew does NOT make it easier to survive.

[SammyWinstonJack]

67. +1!

:thumbsup:

[Obamanaut]

83. My post does not suggest that there are no seniors whose retirement

incomes are lower, or higher, than ours.

We do 2/1 sales, and coupons.

[defendandprotect]

89. What your post suggests is a lack of empathy and concern .... sadly!!

[Obamanaut]

93. Some people, young and old, have low incomes. Stores have

coupons and specials. Young and old can take advantage of these coupons - we do. That is what my post suggests, that those things are available and people can/should take advantage of them. It is possible that folks exist who don't know about these store specials. Sharing this information does indeed suggest empathy and concern.

Don't you agree that sharing this information is preferable to multiple complaints with no suggestions as to how to ease the burden? Post 37 is an example of how not to offer a suggestion on ways to ease that burden.

There is even a DU section for people who like to save and use coupons - something to do with frugal living. Check it out.

[defendandprotect]

117. Do they all have cars? Places to store large quanities of goods?

The money to bridge a large purchase of something on sale?

How about the stores in poor neighborhoods -- are they just like yours?

Sharing this information does indeed suggest empathy and concern.

And, that statement suggests you're even further into an empathy-less existance

than I thought!

[Obamanaut]

134. You are right also. It IS better not to share information or to make suggestions.

Thanks for clearing this up for me. As for the other ideas, it appears that some readers think that any suggestion is either bad or unworkable, no doubt unless that suggestion comes from those readers.

Large purchase? How about 2 cans or four jars of something. No cars or stores nearby? Public transportation is available in many places, but I know, you will now tell me that public trans does not exist everywhere. But, *A* solution is not necessarily *THE* solution for everyone.

For some, the glass is half empty, for other half full. Have a good day with your nearly empty one.

[defendandprotect]

135. USEFUL information is always worthwhile sharing ...

Public transportation? NYC bus ride is now $2.50 --

Again, you know a lot about coupons but not very much evidently about empathy.

[Individualist]

119. What part of I use coupons and participate in a coupon pool do you not understand?

[Individualist]

121. Understatement!

[WinkyDink]

95. Coupons come in newspapers, which require paid subscriptions.

[Obamanaut]

96. Page after page of coupons are available at the front door of the store.

Coupons are also delivered into our mailbox in the free sales information from various stores.

Check out the frugal living section of DU, you might be able to find other sources for coupons

[WinkyDink]

98. I do shop daily. Guess what? The best coupons are often omitted from the store-front pamphlets.

Moreover, those NEVER have the company-produced coupons (P&G, e.g.).
I clip coupons, but am not religious about it. I took satisfaction last week in saving $70 that way.

I just think that it is a dearth of understanding and empathy to suggest that elderly people (my mother, for example, lived through the Great Depression) practice frugality, when many have been doing just that---coupons, discount stores, etc.---and now have even fewer options, given the medical needs of so many.

Meanwhile, property taxes never diminish, and usually always rise.

Have I mentioned Long-term Care insurance costs? Or should the old not worry about it, and just wait until they lose every bit of savings to the "home"?

In ANY case, in a country where billionaires reside, where Wall Street STILL gives out Croesus-like bonuses, to suggest there is no "need", no "statistical evidence" for a COLA, is the height of both cruelty and, IMO, prevarication.

[defendandprotect]

120. Nice post ... further, the coupons are also a way to create a two-tier system ....

and waste the time of consumers --

If the store wants to run a sale -- RUN IT FOR EVERYONE!

Many poor people don't have ways to accumulate large quanities of goods --

often they don't have cars -- or houses to store them in!

They don't have extra funds to bridge a large purchase of something on SALE!

We've had tremendous inflation over the decade of this war -- it's bankrupted our

Treasury -- which the FED also took advantage of in creating/lending money to banks

which they in turn borrowed at 0% interest and then invested in government securities

at 3.5% and 4% --!!


It's really sadly humorous to watch how the right wing gets so hooked up on what the

poor are getting but are so blinded to capitalism's crimes and corruption!

And so blinded to MIC corruption and crimes.

Easier for them to challenge and question the poor !!

And the need to challenge authority is something they flee from!!


:)

[WinkyDink]

97. Well, in keeping with your tone, those younger families should have known NOT to procreate.

[Obamanaut]

106. My tone did not suggest anything of the sort. My post was that it is

as easy for seniors to use coupons/specials with their low incomes as it is for younger people who have no income (because they may have lost their jobs.)

My post did not mention family size/procreation. Couples can and do have financial difficulties, as do families that include one or more children.

All of these groups (seniors, families of size varying from just two and upwards) can use these methods to stretch the food dollar. If they don't have the proper coupon at the front of the store and people don't have a newspaper subscription, how about yesterday's paper at the library or at the local convenience store - there is one on nearly every corner.

I've discovered in this thread how easy it is for so many folks to discard ideas with various reasons why they won't work, rather than think of ways to modify them so they will.

That is part of the problem: "What you said won't work for meeeeee." Well, find something that will.

[defendandprotect]

122. Your posts suggest obsession with what the poor are getting ... and fleeing

from challenging real corruption and crime by capitalism --

Coupons are simply another form of game-playing --

SALES should be available for everyone -- not a few -- not a two-tiered system.

Coupons are the answer to all life's problems, eh?

Wow ...

[Obamanaut]

126. Oh good grief.. I give up. You win. You are right. I am wrong. Now

do you feel better?

[defendandprotect]

129. I feel you're about one post from "ignore."

[Obamanaut]

130. 1 nt

[KG]

79. i hear there's a sale on catfood at aldis

:eyes:

[Naturyl]

84. Oh joy, another year without a raise.

Yeah, people getting $674 a month (all SSI recipients) don't need a raise. That's plenty.

And last year they had the nerve to justify it on the basis "there was no inflation."

Yeah, and the moon is also made of green cheese.

[Mimosa]

87. Food and energy prices have definitely risen.

Always enough money for wars, though.

[leftyladyfrommo]

109. over $300 billion so far for Afghanistan? 9 years in.

Just think what that could have done for seniors in this country. And for poor children and poor families.

I'm stating figure off the top of my head but, no matter, it is a whole lot of money.

[defendandprotect]

136. Thank you ... !! We don't talk often enough about that here at DU .....

It's bankrupting our Treasury and has been from the start --

and Dems have been refinancing it since '06!!

EVEN Ike talked about the wastefulness of MIC $$ and what else we could

be doing with it -- buying a bomb vs buying health care!

I'm amazed that this country hasn't risen up yet -- what the hell is in our water??




:)

[leftyladyfrommo]

110. 1.292 trillion for Afghanistan and Iraq

802 billion for Iraq
455 billion for Afghanistan

[defendandprotect]

137. Thank you ... there should be a huge billboard here at DU with those figures on it + death toll-!!

[leftyladyfrommo]

143. Boy, that's a good idea.

I wish there were billboards with updated tallies on the side of every major highway - where people could be reminded of this travesty on a daily basis.

[laughingliberal]

132. CPI manipulation since Reagan has been a scam to save the government money & hide the real costs.

Over the years, the methodology used to calculate the CPI has also undergone numerous revisions. According to the BLS, the changes removed biases that caused the CPI to overstate the inflation rate. The new methodology takes into account changes in the quality of goods and substitution. Substitution, the change in purchases by consumers in response to price changes, changes the relative weighting of the goods in the basket. The overall result tends to be a lower CPI. However, critics view the methodological changes and the switch from a COGI to a COLI focus as a purposeful manipulation that allows the U.S. government to report a lower CPI.

John Williams, a U.S. economist, described his view of this manipulation when he was interviewed in early 2006. Williams prefers a CPI, or inflation measure, calculated using the original methodology based on a basket of goods having quantities and qualities fixed.

David Ranson, another U.S. economist, also questions the official CPI's viability as an indicator of inflation. Unlike Williams, Ranson doesn't espouse the viewpoint that the CPI is being manipulated. Instead, his view is that the CPI is a lagging indicator of inflation and is not a good indicator of current inflation. According to Ranson, increases in the price of commodities are a better indicator of current inflation because inflation initially affects commodity prices and it may take several years for this commodity inflation to work its way through an economy and be reflected in the CPI. Ranson’s preferred inflation measure is based on a commodity basket of precious metals.

What is immediately apparent is that three different definitions of the CPI are being used. Since these definitions are not operationally equivalent, each method of measuring inflation would lead to different results.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/07/consumerpriceindex.asp

There are economists here and there who think inflation is overestimated. However, these tend to be the same types of right wing hacks who think tax cuts pay for themselves. Otherwise, I've seen estimates that inflation is anywhere from 3% to 5% higher than CPI indicates.

[defendandprotect]

139. Thank you ...! And, of course, we've never had less than 3.5% inflation since Ike ....

Just considering the tremendous increases in energy -- gas for your car, to heat

your home -- it is obvious.

PLUS, whose medical expenses went down in the last years?

Anyone who has gotten any dental care -- or health care -- or simply pays for

insurance just in case -- knows that the prices are all UP!

Gotten any eye glasses?

And, btw, the QUALITY of goods is down --

People talk about replacing toaster ovens as though they are pretzels!

and the QUALITY of medical care is down --

America ranks 37th in the world now in health care -- !!!

Infant deaths are up again, especially among the poor --

NYC just increased rates for bus and train to $2.50 each way!!

Costs of food keeps rising -- fresh fruit is way high -- even in summer.

Remember when department stores used to DELIVER furniture as part of the deal?

Remember when you actually got SOME interest on your savings?

And how many consumers have been burned by credit card scams and interest rates?

Liar loans on homes?

Anyone been to a Broadway show lately, or to dinner out?

How about vacations? Anyone still taking vacations?



And remember: Be sure to use your coupons!!! :evilgrin:

[kenny blankenship]

138. Not only is eating overrated, but food tastes less good as you age, bringing you less pleasure.

Plus, as you get older your metabolism slows down, so you need less and less food. And that is why frozen SS benefits are not such a big deal even in a period of rising food costs. The government has got this all figured out for us. But you know old people - always worrying over nothing!

[Bluebear]

146. The Pentagon, meanwhile, is on no such diet. nt