The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
SS to not increase this year https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4402 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | SS to not increase this year |
From AP Quote: 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. 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. Cost-of-living adjustments are automatically set by a measure adopted by Congress in the 1970s that orders raises based on the Consumer Price Index, which measures inflation. If inflation is negative, as in 2009 and 2010, payments remain unchanged. Still, seniors like McNeil said they'll be thinking about the issue when they go to vote, and experts said the news comes at a bad time for Democrats already facing potentially big losses in November. Seniors are the most loyal of voters, and their support is especially important during midterm elections, when turnout is generally lower. "If you're the ruling party, this is not the sort of thing you want to have happening two weeks before an election," said Andrew Biggs, a former deputy commissioner at the Social Security Administration and now a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. At St. Andrews Estates North, a Boca Raton retirement community, seniors largely took the news in stride, saying they don't blame Washington for the lack of an increase. Most are also collecting pensions or other income, but even so, they prepared to tighten their belts. Bette Baldwin won't be able to travel or help her children as much. Dorcas Eppright will give less to charity. Jack Dawson will buy cheap whiskey instead of his beloved Canadian Club. "For people who have worked their whole life and tried to scrimp and save and try to provide for themselves," said Baldwin, a 63-year-old retired teacher, "it's difficult to see that support system might not sustain you." Baldwin and her husband mapped out their retirements, carefully calculating their income based on their pensions and Social Security checks. Trouble is, they expected an annual cost-of-living increase. "When we cut back, we're cutting back on niceties," Baldwin said. "But there are other people that don't have anything to cut back on. They're cutting back on food and shelter." Many at St. Andrews said the cost-of-living decision won't affect who they vote for next month. But seniors tied the Social Security issue to what they see as a larger societal problem with debt, entitlements and hopefulness for the future. "I'm kind of glad in a way," Stella Wehrly, an 86-year-old retired secretary, said of the freeze. "One thing depends on the other and when people aren't working there's not enough people feeding into the Social Security system." Wehrly and her husband, Hank, said curtailing government spending is necessary to maintain the Social Security system. "We have a generation now that we're not going to leave a very good legacy for," she said. Jack Dawson, 77, said the freeze is the right move considering the state of the government and the American economy. "Who would be surprised what's happened?" he asked. "I feel this is the right decision in light of the malaise." More than 58.7 million people rely on Social Security checks that average $1,072 monthly. It was the primary source of income for 64 percent of retirees who got benefits in 2008; one-third relied on Social Security for at least 90 percent of their income. At the Phoenix Knits yarn shop in Phoenix, 73-year-old owner Pat McCartney said she already worries about paying for utilities, groceries and gas. Not having the increase makes her worry even more. "If I have any major expense, I don't know what I'll do," McCartney said while helping customers with their knitting. "I live on Social Security." In Kansas City, Mo., Georgia Hollman, 80, said Social Security is her sole source of income. She would have liked a bigger check, but said she's grateful for what she gets. "There isn't nothing I can do about it but live with it," she said. "Whatever they give us is what we have to take. I'm thankful we get that little bit." It's nice to see that the folks that don't really need the money are perfectly ok with cutting back, and even many of those who do really need it are understanding, but the guy at the beginning.. Well, apparently he doesn't get that just because his utilities went up doesn't mean he needs an increase, especially in negative inflation. Near the end of the article, it highlights how extensive SS dependance is. |
Author: | Xequecal [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:49 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I'm going to laugh if the conservatives are right and there is actually rampant, hidden inflation occurring. That would mean they actually get what they wanted, by not increasing SS payments the fed is essentially cutting it, and at the same time the government is making money by issuing debt at 2.5%. |
Author: | Lenas [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:53 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Hard to care about social security benefits when I likely wont be getting any. |
Author: | Rynar [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Doesn't affect me. Like Ladas said, those of us in my age braket won't ever see a dime, and my extended and immediate family has prepared for itself, and takes care of each other. None of them rely on SS. |
Author: | Elmarnieh [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:17 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Negative inflation? Oh ye olde frolic with yon CPI? |
Author: | Khross [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Diamondeye wrote: ... especially in negative inflation ... Whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis?
|
Author: | Diamondeye [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Khross wrote: Diamondeye wrote: ... especially in negative inflation ... Whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis?I'm just quoting the article. |
Author: | Khross [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Right, again, "whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis"? |
Author: | Müs [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Khross wrote: Diamondeye wrote: ... especially in negative inflation ... Whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis?Deflation. |
Author: | Khross [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:59 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
I think you're missing the point, Arafys ... |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I wonder what percent of people paying into social security didn't receive a COLA last year. |
Author: | DFK! [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 9:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Khross wrote: I think you're missing the point, Arafys ... Yeah, for those who don't know, the current CPI doesn't cover jack ****. Define "jack ****," you might say. "Jack ****," in this instance is: food, energy, and healthcare. So none of the 3 things with the largest inflationary numbers year over year for, I dunno, the last decade or so, are being counted into that "negative inflation" number. Also: Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what percent of people paying into social security didn't receive a COLA last year. QFT. |
Author: | Müs [ Mon Oct 11, 2010 9:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Khross wrote: I think you're missing the point, Arafys ... Wouldn't be the first time |
Author: | Midgen [ Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:07 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Müs wrote: Khross wrote: I think you're missing the point, Arafys ... Wouldn't be the first time If he's like me, he's well practiced at intentionally avoiding the point at all costs... |
Author: | Hannibal [ Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what percent of people paying into social security didn't receive a COLA last year. Isn't that 0% since they did that $250 check to cover things? Or am I thinking about another vote buyout program? |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
No I said those "paying into" social security, or more rightly those of us still working for living, who are not paying into a qualifying alternative program. I believe that only went to those drawing out of social security. |
Author: | Jasmy [ Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: SS to not increase this year |
Yeah...that $250 only went to those drawing SS now...whole lot of good that did my dad, since he has to pay taxes on it anyway, along with everything else he is getting that is being double taxed! Man worked his whole life and paid into the system, ends up being screwed! |
Author: | Vindicarre [ Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:57 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Speaking of that $250, guess who wants to do it again: Politico wrote: White House press secretary Robert Gibbs released this statement after the Social Security Administration announced inflation was too low to justify an increase in benefits:
"Many seniors are struggling in the face of the economic downturn, having seen their savings fall. Today’s news that the Social Security Administration will for a second year not provide a cost of living adjustment for social security benefits highlights these struggles. The President will renew his call for a $250 Economic Recovery Payment to our seniors this year, as well as to veterans and people with disabilities. Last year, under the Recovery Act, 56 million people benefited from the first Economic Recovery Payment — including about 50 million Social Security beneficiaries. We’re grateful that Speaker Pelosi has indicated she will bring the new Economic Recovery Payment to a vote and we urge members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to support our seniors, veterans and others with disabilities who depend on these benefits." |
Author: | DFK! [ Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:15 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Will $250 really buy those votes in these idiots' minds? |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Vindicarre wrote: Speaking of that $250, guess who wants to do it again: Politico wrote: White House press secretary Robert Gibbs released this statement after the Social Security Administration announced inflation was too low to justify an increase in benefits: "Many seniors are struggling in the face of the economic downturn, having seen their savings fall. Today’s news that the Social Security Administration will for a second year not provide a cost of living adjustment for social security benefits highlights these struggles. The President will renew his call for a $250 Economic Recovery Payment to our seniors this year, as well as to veterans and people with disabilities. Last year, under the Recovery Act, 56 million people benefited from the first Economic Recovery Payment — including about 50 million Social Security beneficiaries. We’re grateful that Speaker Pelosi has indicated she will bring the new Economic Recovery Payment to a vote and we urge members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to support our seniors, veterans and others with disabilities who depend on these benefits." You know, that's **** offensive, and normally I try to avoid using the fact that something's offensive to me in support of a point. That's more of a vote-buying scheme than giving it to seniors; trying to buy the votes of not only veterans but people who support them. Veterans are not entitled to an extra $250 out of nowhere just because the economy is bad. I don't think we even have the justification that pay is frozen like SS is by a "negative inflation" economy. I could really use an extra $250, but I could use a hell of a lot more for the government to stop spending money it doesn't have. But hell, who cares about that when we can make veterans, generally among the most motivated and employable people in the country, into helpless victims and play on sympathy to get votes. I don't know how many veterans they have in mind for this but if you're going to spend it at least just put it towards the defense budget and stop handing out cash. If the economy sucks, it sucks. Veterans can take their lumps like everyone else. |
Author: | Wwen [ Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Oh no, people who helped vote us into this **** are having a tough time. Boo **** hoo. I also agree about the veteran thing. I also never liked the, I forget the name, something sergeants association. They lobby congress for benefits for vets. I have issues with that, but that's a whole other topic. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:22 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Wwen wrote: Oh no, people who helped vote us into this **** are having a tough time. Boo **** hoo. I also agree about the veteran thing. I also never liked the, I forget the name, something sergeants association. They lobby congress for benefits for vets. I have issues with that, but that's a whole other topic. Meh. Have problems with Congress, not with lobbyists. Just because they ask, doesn't mean Congress has to cave in. |
Author: | Rynar [ Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:17 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Wwen wrote: Oh no, people who helped vote us into this **** are having a tough time. Boo **** hoo. I also agree about the veteran thing. I also never liked the, I forget the name, something sergeants association. They lobby congress for benefits for vets. I have issues with that, but that's a whole other topic. Meh. Have problems with Congress, not with lobbyists. Just because they ask, doesn't mean Congress has to cave in. This. Additionally, if our congress were in some way constrained in the limits of it's power to act, lobbyists wouldn't even exist. |
Author: | DFK! [ Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Tell me again why the SS has stopped recruiting this year? |
Author: | RangerDave [ Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Anyone else instantly see Nazi images every time the abbreviation SS is used? On a related note, SSN (for social security number) makes me think of submarines, and submarines always make me think of Hunt for Red October, which makes me think of Sean Connery, which, of course, makes me think of Alex Trebek. "I'll take 'the rapists' for $500." |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |