2013
The most liberal Democrats see the 75 year salvation for Social Security in simply removing the payroll cap on taxable income (while leaving the benefit calculation at the capped level). What could be easier, just raise taxes and lower spendable income for all upper middle class Americans? In the process we change Social Security into a senior welfare program and make the next generation even more dependent by lowering its ability to save for retirement.
A reasonable alternative is to slightly modify the cost of living calculation going forward. No benefits are cut. This and future generations share in the changes and federal revenue is increased in the process. The hold harmless provision in the Medicare law still protects the vast majority of beneficiaries from premium increases that exceed the Social Security COLA.
In the coming months the liberal propaganda machine will be gearing up in fear that there may actually be compromise on this issue. Left, right or middle nobody wants to harm seniors or ignore those who depend heavily on Social Security. Nobody wants to destroy Social Security. However, America is about more than seniors. We have a responsibility to all ages and all generations. It is reprehensible in the name of politics (think senior voting block) to further burden the middle class and those aspiring upward mobility with more taxes, especially when there are viable alternatives to spread the burden across generations.
As you listen to the political rhetoric and propaganda from the AARP and groups such as the Center for American Progress, keep the facts in mind and remember this is a Country with obligations to our young and our old.
We seniors had our chance, we have no right to diminish the opportunities of following generations.
From a WSJ article 3-12-13
Democrats, particularly more liberal ones, are worried about two positions Mr. Obama staked out in past budget talks. During the 2011 debate over raising the nation’s borrowing limit, he proposed a switch in the way the government calculates inflation, to a process called “chained CPI,” that would reduce benefits people receive under Social Security.
If adopted, chained CPI likely would be applied to a number of programs and to the tax code, cutting projected deficits by $230 billion over 10 years, the administration has said. A hypothetical Social Security beneficiary who retired at age 62 in 2002 with a monthly benefit of $1,000 would receive $1,309 a month now under the current cost-of-living adjustments, but $1,263 if the chained CPI approach had been in effect.
NOTE: The difference in the monthly benefit after ten years of inflation adjustment is only $46 a month on average.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
NOTE: The difference in the monthly benefit after ten years of inflation adjustment is only $46 a month on average.
I read there are different CPI calculations, including one that takes into account what Seniors tend to spend money on the most. This sounds like a better calculation to use than one for a young to middle aged family with children. I also must state I have/had family who worked to 65-70 years old, who counted on S.S. because company pensions after all those years didn’t pay the monthly insurance let alone food & property taxes. A majority of workers in this country still make less than 50,000 per year, which makes it very hard to save/invest hundreds of thousands to retire securely on. Not to mention fewer company pension plans if at all. I think the gross income taxed for S.S. can be raised higher without ruining their daily lives or investments. It was nice when I stopped paying .S.S. out of my pay check, but to see so many older people in this country deciding between food or meds does not inspire me that this once GREAT COUNTRY is moving in the right direction. As are you, I am doing well enough in 1 1/2 years of retirement so far! But I believe if congress really wanted to do their jobs, they could hire SOME people to find and stop the Fraud in many aspects of Government spending ( stealing, contracts, purchase orders, etc.) Also what they, themselves waste BILLIONS on! And the RICH GET RICHER, THE MAJORITY STILL MAKE LESS THAN 50K and always will and you & I are in the low middle, lucky to do good but not multi-millionares.
LikeLike
No problem with shared responsibility across generations- to the extent the increased burden is born solely by those whose benefits exceed the contributions/funding to the system. That is, many have contributed all their lives and have no hope to even recover the contributions and lost earnings on the taxes paid. Those should not have to shoulder increased burdens. Ok to raise my taxes and contributions in retirement … So long as any such added funding is included in a death benefit where I did not recover benefits equal to contributions/taxes
LikeLike
I have to disagree with you on this Jack. In fact, I’m going to use your point of view as the basis for a new post including my perspective on this issue.
LikeLike