Five reasons why Social Security benefits should not be cut

[eridani]

http://www.offthechartsblog.org/use-a-scalpel-not-an-ax-for-any-social-security-cuts/

Social Security benefits are modest. The average benefit for the “big three” groups of recipients — retired workers, disabled workers, and aged widows — is only about $1,100 a month, or $14,000 a year. Over 95 percent of beneficiaries get less than $2,000 a month.

1. Most beneficiaries have little significant income from other sources.
2. For most seniors, Social Security will be the only source of income that’s guaranteed to last as long as they live and to keep up with inflation
3. As Americans try to stretch their savings in 401(k)s or other accounts (which can produce volatile and uncertain returns) to cover their full lifespan (whose length they can’t predict), preserving Social Security’s guarantee of lifetime, inflation-adjusted income will become even more important.
4. Social Security benefits in the United States are low compared with other advanced countries.
5. Future retirees already face a squeeze from a rising Social Security retirement age (which amounts to an across-the-board cut in benefits) and escalating Medicare premiums.

[Drale]

1. How about

its just plain un-ethical?

[BeFree]

2. If we didn't have it now

The economy would have gone into a depression deeper than the 30's.

SS is what's saving us from utter economic ruin.

[dionysus]

3. there isn't even one reason why it should be cut

[dkf]

4. We can wish it all we want but this is in the hands of future workers and voters.

Every generation has a decision to make. We can't obligate others to pay beyond what a current legislature will decide to do. To think we can make this promise on behalf of future voters is deceptive.

[rhett o rick]

8. So you favor cutting Social Security? nm

[dkf]

10. It's just like saying states will fully honor all pensions

But when the budget crunch comes we don't really know do we? Will they increase the age of retirement or change it to the top 5 years or cut health benefits and on and on.

Just realize that social security benefits are done legislatively. It seems untouchable as long as congress is too scared to touch it. But that is based on public sentiment. It may be unrealistic to assume no future congress will change things ever.

[Forkboy]

11. Is that a yes or a no?

[dkf]

12. Realistically I think we will need to means test and possibly change the bend formulas.

We need to have a floor amount, but this is no retirement fund that will generate any sort of positive return for anyone but the lowest income workers. At the top end this will be a plain old tax.

I think we should take a look at investing the surplus in the stock/bond market instead of using it as a piggy bank for the general economy. And the general fund needs to be brought under control.

You might call that cutting social security. Whatever.

[Forkboy]

20. Is that a yes or a no?

[snot]

26. That was a yes.

[dkf]

29. Cut social security to millionaires and billionaires. Yes

[rhett o rick]

42. Do you think Pres Obama should cut Social Security? A simple question. nm

[Hannah Bell]

9. usual blah blah blah bull

[leftstreet]

13. LOL You could substitute 'military budget' for SS and say the same thing n/t

[dkf]

15. Exactly. Can we guarantee now that we will not cut the military budget 40 years in the future?

[leftstreet]

18. Democrats shouldn't even be TALKING about cutting SS. Not now. Not ever

Military, yes.

[dkf]

28. What if it comes down to cutting SS or cutting food stamps or subsidized housing.

Would you still give full social security benefits to people with $5 million in assets to cut food stamps because you don't want to open up the system to means testing?

[TBF]

39. You're setting up comparisons that shouldn't be made -

Social Security was designed as a program in which everyone paid in, and then they could start withdrawing benefits for retirement when they reach a certain age. It has nothing to do with any other program.

If you're going to change it to "means testing" than do it honestly, figure out when it would start, and put it to a vote.

Republicans are always trying to throw it in with other entitlements as something that's a line item cut, like food stamps or other programs. It's not the same thing, it is funded separately with a line item deduct on our paychecks. It needs to be kept separate and if they try to cut it those details need to be very clear and not mixed in with other austerity measures.

[kelly1mm]

44. it used to be totally separate as the SS trust fund was solely funded

by payroll taxes. However, with the new 2% payroll tax holiday, general revenue funds are being put into the trust fund to make up for that 2%. Thus, one of the best talking points for SS over that last 65 years (that is was separately funded and not adding a dime to the deficit) has now been lost forever.

[TBF]

49. Yes and I am absolutely furious about that. nt

[rhett o rick]

43. Whether or not Social Security should be given to people with over $5 million is a different

question. Do you have any statistics as to how much Social Security goes to those people?

The question is should Pres Obama cut Social Security or raise the cap?

[Enthusiast]

32. Plus one thousand! nt

[Enthusiast]

31. You could but we won't.

We must retain our military superiority. To accomplish this we must continue to outspend the entire rest of the combined world on our military. :eyes:

[eridani]

21. The hell we can't . Boomers prepaid their retirement

If the government stole the funds, the government needs to put them back.

[JDPriestly]

24. Reducing Social Security benefits and pension payments are

theft pure and simple. The people who receive Social Security and pension money are receiving part of their earnings. It is not a gift. It is not optional. When I, at the age of 14, got my first Social Security card, I placed my trust in the people of the United States and in our government that when I reached the age of 65, I would receive enough of a benefit to live and die in dignity.

That was a covenant. If the people of the United States cannot keep a covenant that was made between the government and a little girl 14 years old, way back when, where is it?

Social Security is not a discretionary program. It is an obligation. How can you ask me to trust my government if my government reneges on this small obligation to me?

[Enthusiast]

33. Beautifully said, JD.

As always.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Here's another: the trust fund is very, very healthy

$2.6 trillion, expected to grow to about $4 trillion over the next decade.

Unless economic growth going forward is way lower than what's historical (and way lower than even this year!) Social Security is fully funded as far as the eye can see.

[dkf]

16. As opposed to the general budget which sees an ever increasing debt.

But they both get their funds from the same pocket...the American populace. Or maybe we can pay all the social security debts we owe and have zero funds for education, food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid etc.

[eridani]

22. If the funds are the same, then why the FUCK is FICA listed separately

--on W2 forms?

[dkf]

27. The general fund owes the SS fund trillions

But the way the general funds don't pay the SS fund is if they cut benefits so they don't need to recompense it. So if there is a certain amount of general fund revenue, it can be used to keep SS benefits the same and pay it's debt to SS or they can cut benefits to SS and use it to fund other things like welfare benefits, education, foodstamps, veterans benefits, health care subsidies should HCR survive etc. In the end it's a choice of how to use finite tax dollars.

[eridani]

52. It's no more a viable choice than a corporations "choice" to loot its pension funds

--and refuse to pay the money. Tax the fucking financial parasites to pay down the debr.

[Enthusiast]

34. Again, you won't mention the military.

What possible justification is there for our military presence all over the world? What possible justification is there for outspending the rest of the combined world on military?

[dkf]

37. I don't because some think you can cut the military to zero and it solves all our deficits.

I find that extremely unrealistic. Things like Iraq and Aghanistan will be resolved before we get to SS crunch time, and I think we will be addressing the fat in the military budget sooner than later.

What is growing and growing if not managed is our entitlement programs.

[Lasher]

47. We can eliminate our deficits by reducing military spending and abolishing the Bush/Obama tax cuts.

But you only want social programs on the table for cuts. So do a lot of other people.

[TBF]

50. More right-wing propoganda from FOX news -

no our "entitlement programs" are not "growing and growing". Defense is the problem. I can't imagine why you keep making these inane arguments on this website.

[William769]

6. This is the second year in a row now we have not gotten a increase.

They say it's because the cost of living or something to that effect has not gone up.

Well I wish they would tell that to the people I pay my house insurance to, my car insurance to, my local grocery stores, my telephone company, my cable company, should I go on?

[Lugnut]

14. + 1000

My cost of living has damned well gone up in a very big way.

[Sirveri]

17. It's based on the CPI-W figures for 3rd qtr. Two years ago there was a mass spike in energy prices

Which caused a corresponding COLA increase. The year after that the inflation number was lower than it was one year previous, hence no COLA was paid. There is also a rule that inflation must be higher than it was two years previous, while inflation increased in 3rd quarter compared to last year, it was not sufficient to overtake the year previous, hence, no COLA. All of the numbers are derived from the BLS, and you can research them yourself. The primary cause for the huge spike two years prior was the price of oil, which had shot up to over 200 dollars per barrel at the time, the collapse in the price of oil came a couple months afterwards.

[Gman]

7. 6. I'm approaching SS age.

[eridani]

23. Then you'd better the hell raise holy hell with Obama and your representatives n/t

[Gman]

35. I wouldn't spit on my rep right now if he was on fire

he's not a teabagger, but embraced their support.

[eridani]

51. 61% of teabaggers don't want Social Security cut

Start hollering.

[Gman]

54. 61% of teabaggers get SS

[eridani]

55. That has a lot to do with it. Those sociopathic fuckers want goverment benefits for themselves--

--but not for anyone else. Still, it wouldn't hurt to try to get them to hassle their Repuke congresscritters about it.

[grahamhgreen]

19. 6) Because SS and the debt are entirely different revenue streams.

[snot]

25. Not to mention reasons 8 & 9

(6) many of us lost a big chunk of our retirement savings in 2008, got out of the market, and have been too sensible to get back in; and

(7) in the midst of one of the worst job markets in our nation's history, it's hardly the time to tell retirees or near-retirees they need to find more paid work so as to provide for themselves.

[Enthusiast]

30. K&R nt

[B Calm]

36. If they were to cut anything it should be cutting the retirement age to 55

thus opening up jobs to the desperately unemployed younger generation.

[TBF]

40. Thank you - and you'd think the assholes would be looking at Tunisia and

connecting the dots. The young people didn't have jobs there either, so they revolted. If it can happen in the Arab world it can happen here, and much faster than some of the folks here seem to think.

[indepat]

38. The administration and the Congress do no care what you or I think or about the five compelling

reasons not to cut social security benefits. The wealthy must have their tax cuts made permanent, the perpetual wars must continue, large corporation must be given tax breaks/cuts to encourage them to hire a few of the countless millions who are unemployed or under-employed, and the only pleasing way to meet those primary objectives is to cut social security, Medicare, and the entire social safety net. :shrug:

[TBF]

41. I have one word for them today: Tunisia. nt

[Cleita]

Exactly, except instead of young people you will be

seeing a whole lot of gray heads in the crowds protesting out there.

[TBF]

48. Hopefully some young heads too - lowering the retirement

age would help them because they could actually get jobs when they get out of school. Solidarity.

[eridani]

53. Not to mention which, people just starting their careers will have permanently

--suppressed lifetime incomes because of the meltdown. Telling them they have to wait longer to retire just as they start to face serious age discrimination is beyond sociopathic.

[Cleita]

46. Cyber burp

[Cleita]

45. Here's a sixth reason.

Mess with senior citizens over their old age programs, Social Security and Medicare, and you will see the resurge of activism that they brought to the sixties. I don't think our corporate whore politicians realize just how united we can be. Also herding grandma and grandpa into free speech zones, ignoring them and arresting them isn't going to make them look good either.

[eridani]

56. Indeed. Quite a few boomers have been forced into early retirement

That, plus re-engagement by the Millenials, could pack a real political whallop.