Comments on: Social Security, Medicare Reform to Get an “Up or Down” Vote http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/ Firedoglake weblog Sat, 18 Feb 2012 04:57:00 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: robspierre http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833933 robspierre Wed, 18 Feb 2009 06:02:16 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833933 <p>Am I the only one that thinks that, in this time of crisis, we should be thinking about INCREASING Social Security benefits, to turn it into a full pension system? with a progressive pay-in for higher incomes and greatly increaed corporate contributions? </p> <p>We now know that 401K plans have been, at best, a failure and, more likely, an out and out fraud. None of these “defined benefit” plans provided enough to support most workers in retirement, even without the recent crisis. Nor could they. 401Ks were just a way to cut employee compensation–in the form of viable employer-funded pensions–thereby boosting corporate profits. That 401Ks could enrich mutual fund managers and market-timers at the expense of all sorts of financial neophytes was just gravy.</p> <p>So what alteratives are left for retirees? Shouldn’t we be making provision for the future while we can, while the magnitude of the crisis is clear and the basic Social Security system remains manifestly successful, stable, and effective?</p> Am I the only one that thinks that, in this time of crisis, we should be thinking about INCREASING Social Security benefits, to turn it into a full pension system? with a progressive pay-in for higher incomes and greatly increaed corporate contributions?

We now know that 401K plans have been, at best, a failure and, more likely, an out and out fraud. None of these “defined benefit” plans provided enough to support most workers in retirement, even without the recent crisis. Nor could they. 401Ks were just a way to cut employee compensation–in the form of viable employer-funded pensions–thereby boosting corporate profits. That 401Ks could enrich mutual fund managers and market-timers at the expense of all sorts of financial neophytes was just gravy.

So what alteratives are left for retirees? Shouldn’t we be making provision for the future while we can, while the magnitude of the crisis is clear and the basic Social Security system remains manifestly successful, stable, and effective?

]]> By: LiberalHeart http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833732 LiberalHeart Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:31:38 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833732 <p>NelsonAlgren, tell your dad to take early SS then put the monthly payments into CDs (or riskier investments if he has the stomach for it), collect the interest, then when he’s old enough for full SS — pay it back.</p> <p>The SS system allows for this. You withdraw from collecting SS, pay back what you’ve collected already, then reapply and get the full retirement age amount due you. Meanwhile, you have accumulated the interest (or other growth) on that money that was paid early. I find that not many people know about this option.</p> NelsonAlgren, tell your dad to take early SS then put the monthly payments into CDs (or riskier investments if he has the stomach for it), collect the interest, then when he’s old enough for full SS — pay it back.

The SS system allows for this. You withdraw from collecting SS, pay back what you’ve collected already, then reapply and get the full retirement age amount due you. Meanwhile, you have accumulated the interest (or other growth) on that money that was paid early. I find that not many people know about this option.

]]> By: tgusblue http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833731 tgusblue Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:28:36 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833731 <p>Here’s the official Obama Administration statement on Social security, form Whitehouse.gov</p> <p>“Protect Social Security</p> <p>President Obama and Vice President Biden are committed to ensuring Social Security is solvent and viable for the American people, now and in the future. Obama and Biden will be honest with the American people about the long-term solvency of Social Security and the ways we can address the shortfall. They will protect Social Security benefits for current and future beneficiaries alike, and they do not believe it is necessary or fair to hardworking seniors to raise the retirement age. Obama and Biden are strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security. As part of a bipartisan plan that would be phased in over many years, they will ask those making over $250,000 to contribute a bit more to Social Security to keep it sound. Obama does not support uncapping the full payroll tax 12.4 percent rate. Instead, he and Joe Biden are considering plans that will ask those making over $250,000 to pay in the range of 2 to 4 percent more in total (combined employer and employee).”</p> <p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/seniors_and_social_security/" rel="nofollow">http://www.whitehouse.gov/agen....._security/</a></p> <p>The salient excerpt:</p> <p>“They will protect Social Security benefits for current and future beneficiaries alike, and they do not believe it is necessary or fair to hardworking seniors to raise the retirement age. Obama and Biden are strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security.”</p> <p>How does that square with Capretta’s story about a Orszag’s “plan/”</p> Here’s the official Obama Administration statement on Social security, form Whitehouse.gov

“Protect Social Security

President Obama and Vice President Biden are committed to ensuring Social Security is solvent and viable for the American people, now and in the future. Obama and Biden will be honest with the American people about the long-term solvency of Social Security and the ways we can address the shortfall. They will protect Social Security benefits for current and future beneficiaries alike, and they do not believe it is necessary or fair to hardworking seniors to raise the retirement age. Obama and Biden are strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security. As part of a bipartisan plan that would be phased in over many years, they will ask those making over $250,000 to contribute a bit more to Social Security to keep it sound. Obama does not support uncapping the full payroll tax 12.4 percent rate. Instead, he and Joe Biden are considering plans that will ask those making over $250,000 to pay in the range of 2 to 4 percent more in total (combined employer and employee).”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agen….._security/

The salient excerpt:

“They will protect Social Security benefits for current and future beneficiaries alike, and they do not believe it is necessary or fair to hardworking seniors to raise the retirement age. Obama and Biden are strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security.”

How does that square with Capretta’s story about a Orszag’s “plan/”

]]> By: markdart http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833728 markdart Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:11:53 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833728 <p>I guess Governors and Congress folks are essentially different. Governors are on the receiving end of the past eight years of legislation from Washington. Whether Republican or Democrat they are largely in favor of HR1. When folks hear a constant monologue of how bad the government is and how we need to cut all those wasteful programs it all sounds good. However, when all the talk boils down to “my services” as “my kid’s education”, “my health care”, “my college tuition”, “my highways and bridges”, “my water”, etc. the monologue begins to sound hollow. Even more, when eight years of talk about reducing “my taxes” resulted in no detectable tax reduction for the majority of the electorate and far less economic security, their empty pronouncements begin to sound like fingernails on a chalk board. I suppose what we should deduce is that lofty pontifications of this type should be deciphered in terms of their concrete results, who benefits and who loses. If you think the last eight years benefited you then you are either wealthy or masochistic. Where was all this talk about deficit spending when two questionable wars were getting funded? I believe we had a budget surplus at the end of Clinton’s administration and over the next eight years we doubled the deficit. While the Republicans headed up HUD and the Treasury we saw homeowners lose and CEOs win. We saw the concrete effects of the verbosity of deregulation in the Consumer Product Safety Commission (poison toy commission) and the FDA (poison peanut butter commission). Did I mention the Republicans had six years in control of the Congress, eight years in the executive branch and a majority of conservatives on the Supreme Court? In spite of what Carl Rove said today on the Today show, the Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005 was killed before it got to the Senate because the Bush administration opposed it:<br /> “H.R. 1461 fails to include key elements that are essential to protect the safety and soundness of the housing finance system and the broader financial system at large. As a result, the Administration opposes the bill.” George W. Bush Statement of Administration Policy (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851)<br /> There is another word for this kind of blatant manipulation of language – sophistry, picking your pocket to sell you your own watch. The Republicans can talk down at Democrats for wasting money all they want but I am looking forward to seeing some money “wasted” on people and not the very wealthy or absurd wars.</p> I guess Governors and Congress folks are essentially different. Governors are on the receiving end of the past eight years of legislation from Washington. Whether Republican or Democrat they are largely in favor of HR1. When folks hear a constant monologue of how bad the government is and how we need to cut all those wasteful programs it all sounds good. However, when all the talk boils down to “my services” as “my kid’s education”, “my health care”, “my college tuition”, “my highways and bridges”, “my water”, etc. the monologue begins to sound hollow. Even more, when eight years of talk about reducing “my taxes” resulted in no detectable tax reduction for the majority of the electorate and far less economic security, their empty pronouncements begin to sound like fingernails on a chalk board. I suppose what we should deduce is that lofty pontifications of this type should be deciphered in terms of their concrete results, who benefits and who loses. If you think the last eight years benefited you then you are either wealthy or masochistic. Where was all this talk about deficit spending when two questionable wars were getting funded? I believe we had a budget surplus at the end of Clinton’s administration and over the next eight years we doubled the deficit. While the Republicans headed up HUD and the Treasury we saw homeowners lose and CEOs win. We saw the concrete effects of the verbosity of deregulation in the Consumer Product Safety Commission (poison toy commission) and the FDA (poison peanut butter commission). Did I mention the Republicans had six years in control of the Congress, eight years in the executive branch and a majority of conservatives on the Supreme Court? In spite of what Carl Rove said today on the Today show, the Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005 was killed before it got to the Senate because the Bush administration opposed it:
“H.R. 1461 fails to include key elements that are essential to protect the safety and soundness of the housing finance system and the broader financial system at large. As a result, the Administration opposes the bill.” George W. Bush Statement of Administration Policy (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851)
There is another word for this kind of blatant manipulation of language – sophistry, picking your pocket to sell you your own watch. The Republicans can talk down at Democrats for wasting money all they want but I am looking forward to seeing some money “wasted” on people and not the very wealthy or absurd wars.

]]> By: iremember54 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833699 iremember54 Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:35:40 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833699 <p>Wake up America You and your Children are going to take another big shot not needed by their want to fix so called entitlements. If the people let them get away with what they are about to do they deserve what they get.<br /> They have stolen all the extra money from Social Security to spend on other things. When if it had been invested at compound interest S.S. would have been solvent to oblivion. Now they will cut benefits raise retirement age and the cap or raise taxes to cover their crimes. If a crook stole your money you would be calling for him to be hung yet your Reps and Senators have stolen it and you pat them on the back.<br /> They could fix it by starting a well designed lottery with many small winners so people would play and play. They could support S. S. willingly without have more money stolen in the form of taxes.<br /> If they had passed national healthcare medicare wouldn’t be a problem but they keep fooling the people and ripping them off.</p> Wake up America You and your Children are going to take another big shot not needed by their want to fix so called entitlements. If the people let them get away with what they are about to do they deserve what they get.
They have stolen all the extra money from Social Security to spend on other things. When if it had been invested at compound interest S.S. would have been solvent to oblivion. Now they will cut benefits raise retirement age and the cap or raise taxes to cover their crimes. If a crook stole your money you would be calling for him to be hung yet your Reps and Senators have stolen it and you pat them on the back.
They could fix it by starting a well designed lottery with many small winners so people would play and play. They could support S. S. willingly without have more money stolen in the form of taxes.
If they had passed national healthcare medicare wouldn’t be a problem but they keep fooling the people and ripping them off.

]]> By: MarkH http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833698 MarkH Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:22:44 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833698 <blockquote><p>Ok. Then Congress can simply vote “no” since they’re responsible for writing the laws and shouldn’t accept anything rammed down their throats no matter who is in the White House. Not to mention taking away benefits is political suicide and President Obama will be lucky not to be citizen Obama in 2012 if he tries to do that. Raise the salary cap! Sheesh.</p></blockquote> <p>In the spirit of BIpartisanship the House Dems should vote their conscience and we would expect that to be ‘no’ to anything really stpuid. heh</p> <p>I think president Obama wants to fix the economy and fixing SS is one thing which helps further the impression we’re headed toward fiscal sanity.</p> <p>It’s quite interesting in a way that during a recession he’s probably going to have more pressure to NOT raise the retirement age! And, with the public anger about Wall St. behavior and pay there’s a pretty good case to be made for just raising the SS pay cap to adjust for inflation.</p> <p>On top of that there is a great argument to be made for raising payouts to help fixed-income people just now.</p> <p>It might have been political when Obama first discussed this during the campaign, but now we’re in this recession and Wall St. has gone cuckoo, it’s not really such a bad thing.</p> <p>Now, on Medicare, who knows.</p>

Ok. Then Congress can simply vote “no” since they’re responsible for writing the laws and shouldn’t accept anything rammed down their throats no matter who is in the White House. Not to mention taking away benefits is political suicide and President Obama will be lucky not to be citizen Obama in 2012 if he tries to do that. Raise the salary cap! Sheesh.

In the spirit of BIpartisanship the House Dems should vote their conscience and we would expect that to be ‘no’ to anything really stpuid. heh

I think president Obama wants to fix the economy and fixing SS is one thing which helps further the impression we’re headed toward fiscal sanity.

It’s quite interesting in a way that during a recession he’s probably going to have more pressure to NOT raise the retirement age! And, with the public anger about Wall St. behavior and pay there’s a pretty good case to be made for just raising the SS pay cap to adjust for inflation.

On top of that there is a great argument to be made for raising payouts to help fixed-income people just now.

It might have been political when Obama first discussed this during the campaign, but now we’re in this recession and Wall St. has gone cuckoo, it’s not really such a bad thing.

Now, on Medicare, who knows.

]]> By: TataTeriyaki http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833697 TataTeriyaki Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:06:48 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833697 <p>What’s AARP doing about this?</p> What’s AARP doing about this?

]]> By: mntleo2 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833681 mntleo2 Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:49:39 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833681 <p>But Congress seldom does “repair” anything. Look at what “repairs” they have done for the Bankruptcy bill, the Medicare Bill and the horrible 9/11 bill that is decimating our rights this minute to name just a few. Nothing. Nothing … Not one damn thing! I am sorry if it ain’t done right the first time well it stays broken from what I see …</p> <p>My 2 cents</p> <p>Cat In Seattle</p> But Congress seldom does “repair” anything. Look at what “repairs” they have done for the Bankruptcy bill, the Medicare Bill and the horrible 9/11 bill that is decimating our rights this minute to name just a few. Nothing. Nothing … Not one damn thing! I am sorry if it ain’t done right the first time well it stays broken from what I see …

My 2 cents

Cat In Seattle

]]> By: mntleo2 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833677 mntleo2 Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:46:25 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833677 <p>There are already divisions between the rich and poor. As for older vs younger, I think not. I work with young folks and they are very supportive of older workers’ concerns. They are smart enough to see that soon, the same concerns will be theirs if they are not addressed. </p> <p>About the division between the rich and poor… As an activist for may years for people who are low income, I can tell you they have been the most greedy and heartless group of people almost acrtoss the board that I have seen. They have lived off the poor for centuries with little or no concern and it has not changed in this time. As matter of fact in the last few decades the rich have been in the forefront pushing for punitive policies for those in need, demonizing the poor while they systematically loot the treasury ~ and blame the poor for their own greed. I am not too concerned about them nor do I think anything will happen to them. After all they live in gated communities with lots of protection, they have little to worry about except keeping the millions they already have. </p> <p>However I will say as an activist, this IS warfare between the rich and the poor, because things keep getting worse and worse. Until they get the picture, like they do not seem to be doing with this so-called Social Security “crisis” that they created in part because they refuse to add anything, well you can bet there WILL be war in the legislature down to the city council meetings and neighborhoods. </p> <p>One thing under the radar as they continue to shove us into the same cramped box: Immigrants, low income citizens, elders and youth of all races and cultures, are finding common ground because guess what? Low income people are ALL crossing language, culture, and racial lines and finding they have in common a great deal of things: kids and grandkids, the discrimination and lack of livable wages, soaring housing costs, soaring energy costs and all of it creates an even heavier burden on the poor more than any other class. </p> <p>At this time the poor pay a higher percentage of their incomes for taxes than the rich ~ in my state it takes almost 20% out of a family’s cost of living at poverty level incomes while the rich pay less than 2%, but it is little different in other states no matter what type of revenue they use ~ income taxes, property taxes, whatever, it always falls heaviest on the poor. See what your state does and who pays your taxes here: <a href="http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/text.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/text.pdf</a> </p> <p>No one will address this unless the poor begin to scream about it and scream we will! We are already at our legislators and we write letters and we attend the council meeting and we get …the sound of crickets. We are mad as hall and we are *not* going to take it much longer! </p> <p>You are concerned for good reason. But perhaps if more people were supportive of what is happening with the lower income classes, it would help avoid what is coming to them as the poor ARE the canaries in the mine for the rest of the American people. Because as of now this unrest is already happening and believe me, it is not going to get any better until it is addressed instead of ignored as it is being ignored now. Just maybe if nothing else, if upper income people realize that helping the low income eventually helps themselves, maybe it will begin the change will prevent any thing else from happening that is boiling beneath the surface. </p> <p>My 2 cents</p> <p>Cat In Seattle</p> There are already divisions between the rich and poor. As for older vs younger, I think not. I work with young folks and they are very supportive of older workers’ concerns. They are smart enough to see that soon, the same concerns will be theirs if they are not addressed.

About the division between the rich and poor… As an activist for may years for people who are low income, I can tell you they have been the most greedy and heartless group of people almost acrtoss the board that I have seen. They have lived off the poor for centuries with little or no concern and it has not changed in this time. As matter of fact in the last few decades the rich have been in the forefront pushing for punitive policies for those in need, demonizing the poor while they systematically loot the treasury ~ and blame the poor for their own greed. I am not too concerned about them nor do I think anything will happen to them. After all they live in gated communities with lots of protection, they have little to worry about except keeping the millions they already have.

However I will say as an activist, this IS warfare between the rich and the poor, because things keep getting worse and worse. Until they get the picture, like they do not seem to be doing with this so-called Social Security “crisis” that they created in part because they refuse to add anything, well you can bet there WILL be war in the legislature down to the city council meetings and neighborhoods.

One thing under the radar as they continue to shove us into the same cramped box: Immigrants, low income citizens, elders and youth of all races and cultures, are finding common ground because guess what? Low income people are ALL crossing language, culture, and racial lines and finding they have in common a great deal of things: kids and grandkids, the discrimination and lack of livable wages, soaring housing costs, soaring energy costs and all of it creates an even heavier burden on the poor more than any other class.

At this time the poor pay a higher percentage of their incomes for taxes than the rich ~ in my state it takes almost 20% out of a family’s cost of living at poverty level incomes while the rich pay less than 2%, but it is little different in other states no matter what type of revenue they use ~ income taxes, property taxes, whatever, it always falls heaviest on the poor. See what your state does and who pays your taxes here: http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/text.pdf

No one will address this unless the poor begin to scream about it and scream we will! We are already at our legislators and we write letters and we attend the council meeting and we get …the sound of crickets. We are mad as hall and we are *not* going to take it much longer!

You are concerned for good reason. But perhaps if more people were supportive of what is happening with the lower income classes, it would help avoid what is coming to them as the poor ARE the canaries in the mine for the rest of the American people. Because as of now this unrest is already happening and believe me, it is not going to get any better until it is addressed instead of ignored as it is being ignored now. Just maybe if nothing else, if upper income people realize that helping the low income eventually helps themselves, maybe it will begin the change will prevent any thing else from happening that is boiling beneath the surface.

My 2 cents

Cat In Seattle

]]> By: Knut http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833620 Knut Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:15:16 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/17/social-security-medicare-reform-to-get-an-up-or-down-vote/#comment-1833620 <p>Here’s what I see as the trade-off and the Obama strategy. Give up just a little on Social Security — cosmetic stuff to head off the Blue Dogs, in exchange for something that includes a single-payer option for medical care. Given that medical care is the real problem, it is a good trade-off, especially since nothing prevents Congress from restoring the SS benefits down the line, as they surely will, since the cost isn’t all that much to begin with. There is a lot of shadow-boxing here. The most important thing, though is securing some kind of socialized health care for Americans. </p> <p>That’s the game I think is being played out here. It also traps the thugs into coming out (once more) against Social Security. At a time when it is more necessary than ever.</p> Here’s what I see as the trade-off and the Obama strategy. Give up just a little on Social Security — cosmetic stuff to head off the Blue Dogs, in exchange for something that includes a single-payer option for medical care. Given that medical care is the real problem, it is a good trade-off, especially since nothing prevents Congress from restoring the SS benefits down the line, as they surely will, since the cost isn’t all that much to begin with. There is a lot of shadow-boxing here. The most important thing, though is securing some kind of socialized health care for Americans.

That’s the game I think is being played out here. It also traps the thugs into coming out (once more) against Social Security. At a time when it is more necessary than ever.

]]>