Billions for banks, no cost of living raise for Social Security for at least 2 years.

[madfloridian]

That is a sure way to start losing support very quickly. Talk about getting priorities out of order?

Not good news on top of the defeat of the bill that would have helped several million rework their mortgages to avoid foreclosure. It was 12 Democrats who brought that bill down to defeat.

The passion for a party will die quickly if this is going to be the path we we choose.

No rise in Social Security benefits for at least two years.

WASHINGTON — For the first time in more than three decades, Social Security recipients will not get any increase in their benefits next year, federal forecasts show.

“Most seniors have never been through a year in which there was no Social Security COLA,” said David M. Certner, legislative counsel at AARP, the lobby for older Americans. Beneficiaries have received automatic cost-of-living adjustments every year since 1975. The increase this year was 5.8 percent.

In theory, low inflation is good for people on fixed incomes. But it is creating political and policy problems for Congress, which is just learning of the implications for Social Security and Medicare. The forecasts, by the Obama administration and the Congressional Budget Office, indicate that Social Security beneficiaries will not receive any cost-of-living increase in 2010 or in 2011. The COLA is intended to preserve the purchasing power of Social Security, by increasing benefits to keep pace with consumer prices. In the last year, overall inflation has been low, largely because of the economic downturn and a decline in energy prices.

A freeze in Social Security benefits would have major implications for Medicare because the COLA, in effect, puts a cap on premiums for Part B of Medicare, which covers doctors’ services.

...."Douglas W. Elmendorf, director of the Congressional Budget Office, predicted that inflation would remain low for several years, so Social Security might not pay a cost-of-living increase until January 2013. President Obama’s budget assumes no increase in 2010 or 2011, then a 1.4 percent COLA in 2012.

Mr. Certner, from AARP, described the outlook for consumers: “If, as expected, there is no COLA in Social Security next year but premiums for drug coverage increase, as expected, millions of beneficiaries will see their Social Security checks reduced for the first time.”

However there is no problem making sure the banks get their big dollars. And there is no problem funding the faith-based groups apparently.

This video shows a "clown", a comedian, pretending to crush a teen's genitals with a cinder block to show how harmful taking precautions like condoms would be.

You may recall the $800,000 "chastity clown" Derek Dye whose act involved pulling handkerchiefs out of his nose and comparing condom use to juggling machetes. High school students were in awe of his lameness while U.S. taxpayers - you and I - paid his salary.

Well, it seems there's another abstinence jester reaching out to America's schoolchildren - and this one is also being supported by your hard-earned tax dollars. Keith Deltano, a self-proclaimed "Christian comic" and former Tough Man competitor, is even more unhinged than the dubious Derek, if that's possible. The "classroom entertainer" preaches abstinence to youngsters using the old tried and true fundie formula of shame, fear, and misinformation. He distorts facts in order to convince students that practicing safe sex is a bad thing. If you can make it to the end of this video you'll get to see Deltano try his hand at rapper "swagga" - and fail miserably.

Here is more about the abstinence only group that got almost $800,000 of our taxpayer money to hire such "clowns" and dumb down our high school kids.

This is the html version with the pdf linked at the top.

AIDS Taskforce Criticizes Use of Taxpayer Funds to Support Far-Right Speaker

LEVELAND, OH—In January of this year, the AIDS Taskforce of Greater Cleveland (ATGC) criticized an Ohio abstinence-only-until-marriage organization for using, literally, a “clown” to teach abstinence to middle school youth. The ATGC was “deeply concerned” that Elizabeth’s New Life Center, an Ohio organization which receives nearly $800,000 a year in federal abstinence-only taxpayer support, took a “paternalistic” approach by utilizing an individual whose only qualifications were a “Bachelor of Fun Arts” from Barnum Bailey Clown College, and an abstinence educator certification that can be purchased for $50. (A copy of that individual’s presentation, supported through federal grants, can be viewed here; scroll down and click on the video player: http://www.amplifyyourvoice.org/u/AFY_Joe/2009/2/4/Tell-President-Obama-send-out-the-clowns.) In the meantime, despite widespread protest, “Derek” the “Abstinence Clown” continues to offer presentations for Elizabeth’s New Life Center, with taxpayer support.

Now, the AIDS Taskforce has learned that Elizabeth’s New Life Center (ENLC) plans to host a controversial, far-right physician, again with the use of federal funds, to present an ideological viewpoint far from the mainstream and accepted science. The Taskforce has sent a letter to Elizabeth’s New Life Center requesting that the group cancel the presentation (see attached), or “balance Dr. Meeker’s presentation with the addition of a speaker representing more moderate, mainstream, scientifically-grounded positions.” ENLC has not yet responded.

“We remain troubled that Elizabeth’s New Life Center continues to use taxpayer funding to foster far-right conservative ideology, but not to foster good science,” said Jessica Gupta, the Taskforce Public Policy Director. “Even a brief review of Dr. Meeker’s writings gives cause for concern. And while we support the right of free speech, we oppose the use of government money to fund ideology over science.

The AIDS Taskforce is also asking the Administration for Youth and Families of the federal Department of Health and Human Services, which funds Elizabeth’s New Life Center, to investigate the matter.

Billions for banks with few questions asked. Untold amounts for faith-based and abstinence only groups.

Nothing for seniors on Social Security for at least two years.

That is how a party loses.

[MADem]

1. Military retirees got the same percentage, they're probably outta luck, too. NT

[DJ13]

2. I was afraid that Obama's reigning in of spending was going to

.......disproportionately hurt those who can least afford it.

Being on SSDI myself I was hoping I was wrong.

The SS COLA hasnt kept pace with inflation for the last 10 years that I've been disabled, if anything there should be a realignment of benefits upwards by 10%, not a freeze.
:grr:

[madfloridian]

3. Seniors and the needy should not be treated that way while banks...

are treated like royalty.

I am very angry about our priorities today. I would imagine it shows.

No more money to save mega banks unless we can take care of our elderly and poor.

[MercutioATC]

47. Treated WHAT way??

They're not getting an increase because the cost of living hasn't increased. If it does, they'll get the legislated increase.

...and if the cost of living decreases, they don't see a decrease in benefits...


Sounds like fair treatment to me.

[madfloridian]

52. The cost of living is increasing. Everything is higher.

That is a ludicrous statement by the guy in the article and by you.

[MercutioATC]

54. Again, read Pinto's post in this thread. Everything is NOT higher.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5588013&mesg_id=5588189

[madfloridian]

59. Yes, the cost of living is much higher.

Medicine, groceries, taxes, insurance....everything.

[MercutioATC]

61. Not according to the CPI.

The CPI isn't perfect, but it's generally a pretty reliable indicator.

...and again, SS is meant to provide a safety net. If it's one's sole source of retirement income they'll be able to eke out an existence, but it won't necessarily be pleasant.

[madfloridian]

67. Well, then, okay.....all is fine and dandy.

I will not worry when the prices keep going up, when my insurance for home and car go higher, when my health insurance jumps by another 100 a month next year.

And property taxes on a house nearly paid for? Guess they are not going up either.

And darn those prescription drugs, they must not be going up either.

Good for the CPI to tell us what is reality even as we live it.

[taught_me_patience]

75. If you believe the "official" cpi numbers

then you ought to open your eyes. The CPI number is about as real as the unemployment number... total bullshit.

[MercutioATC]

99. The unemployment number isn't meant to measure the total number of unemployed Americans.

It measures the number of Americans receiving unemployment benefits.

Does it tell us how many people are actually unemployed? Of course not. That would be impossible to measure. However, it acts as a trend indicator...and it does that relatively well.

[Ikonoklast]

132. That is not accurate.

Unemployment statistics use a metric and very precise polling to determine who is actually unemployed.

Persons collecting unemployment compensation are only one part of that statistic.

See: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

[bvar22]

81. Yep. Sure glad I got my 401K to supplement SS....

....Oh wait.
.
.
.
My bad.

[MercutioATC]

96. Your 401k didn't HAVE to lose money.

Investment in equities implies risk. There are plenty of people who pulled their money out of equities before the crash.

Unless your 401k was restricted to equities-only investments, that's not a valid excuse.

[Raineyb]

91. Actually the CPI is rigged

And deliberately set up to understate the rise in the cost of living in order to short Social Security recipients of their rightful raises.

[MercutioATC]

98. You may not agree with the CPI numbers, but they're not "rigged".

...to short SS recipients or anybody else.

Inflation IS down. As a result, SS recipients, according to the long-standing system, get less of an increase (or none)...but their benefits never decrease even if we see DEflation.

[Raineyb]

107. It absolutely is

When you deliberately leave out things that people must buy (which generally do go up) and include occasional (assuming they're bought at all) things like computers it is nothing but rigged.

Just like our unemployment numbers are rigged to make the rate look lower than it is.

[Dr.Phool]

123. From Kevin Phillips.

Excerpts from his article in Harpers, published last year in the St. Pete Times. Read the entire article.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/article473596.ece

(snip)

Nothing, however, can match the tortured evolution of the third key number, the somewhat misnamed Consumer Price Index. Government economists themselves admit that the revisions during the Clinton years worked to reduce the current inflation figures by more than a percentage point, but the overall distortion has been considerably more severe. Just the 1983 manipulation, which substituted "owner equivalent rent" for home-ownership costs, served to understate or reduce inflation during the recent housing boom by 3 to 4 percentage points.

Moreover, since the 1990s, the CPI has been subjected to three other adjustments, all downward and all dubious: product substitution (if flank steak gets too expensive, people are assumed to shift to hamburger, but nobody is assumed to move up to filet mignon), geometric weighting (goods and services in which costs are rising most rapidly get a lower weighting for a presumed reduction in consumption), and, most bizarrely, hedonic adjustment, an unusual computation by which additional quality is attributed to a product or service.

The hedonic adjustment, in particular, is as hard to estimate as it is to take seriously. No small part of the condemnation must lie in the timing.

If quality improvements are to be counted, that count should have begun in the 1950s and 1960s, when such products and services as air-conditioning, air travel, and automatic transmissions — and these are just the A's! — improved consumer satisfaction to a comparable or greater degree than have more recent innovations. That the change was made only in the late '90s shrieks of politics and opportunism, not integrity of measurement.

Most of the time, hedonic adjustment is used to reduce the effective cost of goods, which in turn reduces the stated rate of inflation. "All in all," Williams points out, "if you were to peel back changes that were made in the CPI going back to the Carter years, you'd see that the CPI would now be 3.5 percent to 4 percent higher" — meaning that, because of lost CPI increases, Social Security checks would be 70 percent greater than they currently are.

Furthermore, when discussing price pressure, government officials invariably bring up "core" inflation, which excludes precisely the two categories — food and energy — now verging on another 1970s-style price surge.

Numbers that crunch

The real numbers, to most economically minded Americans, would be a face full of cold water. Based on the criteria in place a quarter century ago, today's U.S. unemployment rate is somewhere between 9 percent and 12 percent; the inflation rate is as high as 7 or even 10 percent; economic growth since the recession of 2001 has been mediocre, despite a huge surge in the wealth and incomes of the superrich, and we are falling back into recession.

(snip)

[truth2power]

136. The cost of living is higher. End of story. n/t

[nichomachus]

104. Tremendously idiotic post

Perhaps the most stupid I've seen on DU in ages.

The "cost of living" is going up dramatically, and everyone knows it.

However, the government cooks the books by eliminating from their calculations anything that people actually spend money on -- food, energy, health care -- you name it.

Everything I buy cost a lot more than it did a year ago -- but they tell me the cost of living isn't going up.

Bullshit

[madfloridian]

117. "The "cost of living" is going up dramatically, and everyone knows it."

Exactly right.

[gulfcoastliberal]

122. Totally agree. Idiotic.

Posting in the throes of Kool Aid addiction can be a terrible thing.

[MercutioATC]

126. SS COLAs are based on the CPI-W.

...the same CPI-W that gave SS recipients a 5.8% increase in 2009 when many were losing their jobs and almost nobody was getting raises.

Odd how people only bitch about the CPI-W when it doesn't work in their favor...

[Tansy_Gold]

130. The CPI has been rigged for so long that that 5.8% -- and all the prior

COLAs never kept up with real inflation.

Consider also that not ever SS recipient receives the full/top benefit. Many who have lost their jobs take "early" retirement benefits that are 75% of what they would have received had they waited until full retirement age. And SS isn't all that much to begin with.

How 'bout you try living on $1500/month with no health insurance?



Tansy Gold

[Mithreal]

131. Strongly agreed. Progressives should know better than to repeat

idiotic Republican and ConservaDem bullshit.

Hide the inflation, fun game for some, deadly for others.

[EnoughOfThis]

118. The government pays???

Do we see what is happening here?? Now we are going to expect government to pay for an increase in benefits....that depends on an increase in taxes on SS payers. No problem, because there are plenty of people to pay.....but to what end and based on what requirements. I will pay more....but how do others pay more??

[rucognizant]

135. DEAD WRONG!!

mercutioATC! "increase because the cost of living hasn't increased" JUST WHERE DO YOU LIVE?
The cost of living hasn't increased? Yuh! snow plow guy, $10.00 last year. $20. this year 100% increase.; GAs prices halved but snow plow guy didn't! Due to weird weather, however you want to label it, it snowed practically every other day for 2 months straight this winter. And never went above freezing long enough to thaw even a little! Almost everytime adding a layer of sleet IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, to the top of the 3-5'piles. Not penetrable by morning short of a flame thrower or pick axe! The big town snow plow casts great boulders of ice,some as large as 4' in diameter....... across behind my car and my pathway out of the yard ( unfortunately 2 separate entities that need clearing.) The kitchen door, closest to the car, was unusable all winter.............The 2 roof peaks meet there, the snow slides off, and piles up, ( solid 6'ice pile there all winter) and the porch, & cellar door were closed off....

good I didn't need heater repairs. SO I spent the winter ione achy mass too exhauseted to do anything after clearing the minumum amount of snow to function as a human bering ( acquiring food to eat!)
Maybe if I had a little extra money I could find a kid to hire to do that ( I am 70!)
And I can't afford to buy flowers for my yard because I a catching up with the bills I didn't pay because of the snow plowing.

[RagAss]

138. Amen. !

What do they want now...for us to send their great grand kids to college?

[Warpy]

4. That's the fascist party for you

It was too popular to kill outright, so they're slowly starving it to death by not keeping up with inflation, just like they did to wages.

The trouble is that they're also starving people to death at the same time.

Shame on all of them. May they find themselves living on those benefits they cut for their next hundred lifetimes.

[EnoughOfThis]

119. Fascist Party??

We are in charge now. !!!!

[Dr.Phool]

125. And the question is?

The Money Party. Two different factions of corporate whores fighting over K-Street goodies.

Have you spayed and neutered your Blue Dogs?

[Warpy]

133. Not yet

Conservatives in both parties, especially the Wall Street Dems, are still in charge.

Only when their stuff fails will we get a shot.

[PSPS]

5. Correction: You should make that 'trillions' for banks.

The treasury has already been looted to the tune of $8.6 trillion.

[madfloridian]

6. You are probably right. And nothing for seniors.

Seniors who paid into this during their working years....not a freebie.

Only the banks get freebies.

[Hannah Bell]

33. and the entire SS trust fund we "can't pay back" = a hair over 2 T.

[Baby Snooks]

65. Thank you for the dose of reality...

Unfortunately it's a reality quite a few don't want to look at. It is important to note the FDIC amount is not included in the actual potential disaster since it is funded by the banks. Although the banks of course will cover expected increases through higher fees and lower interest rates to depositors. The claim about the Federal Reserve loans not involving taxpayer money is true to a point. The point being when the banks default on the loans. That has never happened. But most expect it will finally. And the Treasury Department of course will have to cover the bad loans. With taxpayer money.

What makes me so angry about all of this is the enormous bakery Wall Street was given while Main Street is only getting crumbs from the cake they were told the bakery might produce for them to eat.

"Let them eat cake..." The famous words Marie Antoinette uttered before the people hauled her off to the guillotine.

There isn't even cake at this point. Just the crumbs. Wall Street is eating the cake. And only leaving the crumbs.

[leftstreet]

7. The FaithBa$ed CEOs can pray for us once we're all F**ked

Maybe that's the strategy here.

K&R

[Selatius]

8. This country's government is deeply corrupt. I can't look at it in any other way.

Sure, we're not a third world kleptocracy. We simply lack the banana plantations.

[lib2DaBone]

30. I would have to agree... the source of our problem is coruption

Every Congress Person and Senator is bought and paid for by lobbyists.(this is not an exageration)

I don't see anything changing. We need to bring our jobs home from China, and we need to stop the cash flow to the banks and credit card companies. (Privatize the profits and Socialize the debts)

I think it is too late for talking.... it doesn't look good.

[Pharaoh]

68. well said lib2Dbone n/t

[bvar22]

9. Wait until....

Wait until "they" try to tell us that America can't afford a Non-Profit Public Option in the Health Care Reform Package.

I have nothing to base this speculation on except that cold feeling in the pit of my stomach, and the beating that Americans who Work for a Living have taken so far.....but I just KNOW that we will be hearing those words in the near future.

Hope I'm wrong.

[diamidue]

80. Wouldn't surprise me either.

I don't have any faith in this "Health Care Reform Package". I think it will serve the insurance companies, the medical establishment and the pharma industry more than it will serve the patients. But like you, I hope I am wrong.

[pinto]

10. A few FAQ's - Social Security, Medicare, COLA's (AARP)

What this overview doesn't take into account is Medicare D - the prescription drug program, of course, so it is somewhat dated. Yet, as a matter of law, Social Security benefits can't be less than a preceeding year {see last paragraph}, regardless of Part B premiums or any lack of COLA. And I would note that the Congressional Budget Office's estimates are what may happen under existing laws and regulations. A heads up, as it were, not a policy statement. That's not their role. AARP is doing it's job, as well, in getting the CBO info out to the public. It remains to Congress to take any action in light of these estimates, so the implication in the article that this is a done deal is a little over the top. ~ pinto

Social Security Benefits
Social Security COLAS and Medicare Part B Premium Increases
Fact Sheet
Laurel Beedon, AARP Public Policy Institute

David Gross, AARP Public Policy Institute

November 1998




Table of Contents:

•Introduction
•The Social Security COLA
•The Medicare Part B Premium
•The Effect of the Part B Premium on Beneficiaries' Social Security Checks
•Footnotes


Introduction

Social Security Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) beneficiaries receive an annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in their January checks.1 This COLA is based upon changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI).2

Changes in the monthly premium for Medicare Part B are also effective beginning in January of each year. These changes are related to the changes in year-to-year costs of Part B.

Because the amount of the Part B premium is generally subtracted from an individual's Social Security benefit, beneficiaries will receive a smaller increase in their Social Security check than the amount of the COLA.

What determines the Social Security COLA? What determines the Medicare Part B premium? This Fact Sheet discusses the answers.


The Social Security COLA

Since 1974, OASDI benefits have been adjusted annually to reflect changes in the cost-of-living based on the CPI.3 While the CPI is not perfect, it is the best measure currently available of the costs of goods and services that households experience.

The annual Social Security COLA appears in the January checks. The COLA for a given year always reflects the changes between the two prior years. The COLA received in January 1999, for example, is calculated by comparing the average CPI-W in the third quarter of 1998 to the average CPI-W 4 in the third quarter of the previous year, 1997. That is, the arithmetic average of the CPI-W for the months of July, August, and September of 1998 would be compared to the average for the same months in 1997. The percentage increase from third quarter 1997 to third quarter 1998 becomes the COLA increase in benefits checks received in 1999.

(¶ Click here to see Impact of the 1.3 Percent COLA on Average Social Security Benefits from December 1998 to January 1999.)

Top of Page


The Medicare Part B Premium

Medicare Part B - which provides health insurance for people over age 65 and for individuals with disabilities - is financed primarily from two sources: (1) premiums paid by beneficiaries, and (2) general revenues. In recent years, beneficiaries' premium payments have been set at approximately one-fourth of Part B program costs and this will continue in 1999. In 1998, the monthly Part B premium was $43.80, the same as it was in 1997. In 1999, the premium will be $45.50. Because Part B costs are projected to rise rapidly, Part B premiums are expected to increase, on average, by more than 9 percent per year between 1998 and 2004.5 This is partly due to rising health costs and the shift in more medical services from hospital in-patient (Part A) payments to Part B out-patient and doctors' offices.6


The Effect of the Part B Premium on Beneficiaries' Social Security Checks

COLAs allow Social Security benefits to keep pace with inflation. However, because beneficiaries' Part B premiums are deducted from their Social Security benefits, the annual increase in the check they receive will be less than the COLA (except in those rare years that the Part B premium does not increase). Even though the increase in the Part B premium may result in a lower check than expected, a provision in the law prohibits Social Security checks from dropping below the dollar amount of the previous year.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Footnotes
1 Social Security benefits will increase 1.3 percent in 1999 as a result of the annual cost-of-living adjustment.
2 If the CPI increase is less than one-tenth of one percent, there is no automatic increase for the current year; the COLA for the following year will reflect the increase in the CPI for a two-year period.
3 Two CPIs are used to index federal spending: the CPI for Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W); and the CPI for all urban consumers (CPI-U). The CPI used to adjust Social Security benefits is the CPI-W, the older of the two. Created in 1919, the CPI-W represents households in which at least half of the income is earned from clerical or wage jobs.
4 By law, the third quarter (July-September) is the COLA computation quarter.
5 This estimate is an AARP Public Policy Institute calculation, based on projections in the 1998 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Supplemental Medical Insurance Trust Fund.
6 While this change extends the solvency of the Medicare Part A trust fund, it also increases beneficiary premiums more than would have occurred had all home health costs remained in Medicare Part A. The premium increases associated with Medicare Part B's home health costs are being phased in between 1998 and 2004.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Written by Laurel Beedon and David Gross, AARP Public Policy Institute
November 1998
©1998 AARP
May be copied only for noncommercial purposes and with attribution; permission required for all other purposes.
Public Policy Institute, AARP, 601 E Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20049

Pub ID: FS73

[madfloridian]

11. Appreciate the details, but it does not stop my anger.

"Even though the increase in the Part B premium may result in a lower check than expected, a provision in the law prohibits Social Security checks from dropping below the dollar amount of the previous year."

Social Security payments should be a priority of a Democratic administration....not an afterthought.

Not something is taken care of after all the big guys are satisfied.

[MercutioATC]

13. Social Security is NOT a retirement plan, it's a safety net.

COLA increases are based on...well, cost of living. If the cost of living stays level, so should SS checks.

We're not supposed to be giving SS recipients raises, folks...we're supposed to make sure the safety net generally increases as the cost of living does.

[madfloridian]

15. Bull hockey.

.

[MercutioATC]

27. So you believe it IS supposed to be a retirement plan??

...or you believe SS recipients should get more money every year whether the cost of living increases or not?

[madfloridian]

31. Much has been paid into the FICA system. Why not yearly raises?

You make it sound like Social Security is welfare.

[MercutioATC]

43. Because SS is a clearly defined benefit. Increases are tied to cost of living.

It's certainly not welfare, but neither is it a free-for-all. If one's cost of living doesn't increase, SS doesn't increase.

SS recipients have the additional advantage of having their benefit stay the same in the event that cost of living decreases.

[madfloridian]

45. The cost of living is increasing. Everything is higher.

So why not the COLA

[MercutioATC]

51. Everything is NOT higher. Read Pinto's post (link included)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5588013&mesg_id=5588189

COLAs are calculated based on specific indicators. You might not like the indicators they use, but that doesn't mean that the system isn't fair.

[madfloridian]

53. Tell that to my checkbook.

and my hubby's checkbook.

I am so damn tired of meaningless rhetoric.

[MercutioATC]

58. Ok, so we should base COLAs on YOUR checkbook?

Look, I've twice directed you to Pinto's post which describes exactly how the COLA is calculated.

You might not like how they do it, but the indicators they use and the method of calculation are reasonable.

SS is NOT a retirement plan, it's a safety net. SS will provide a very modest living for people who don't have other resources...and that's its purpose.

[madfloridian]

60. At this point, I don't give a damn.

The banks are getting everything they wanted with no accountability.

Social Security was double-taxed by our Democrats in the 90s I believe.

I don't give a damn what you call Soc. Sec.. labeling does not matter in this case.

What matters is that seniors and needy are being screwed...again.

[MercutioATC]

62. SS and the bank bailouts are completely separate issues.

That said, SS recipients are NOT getting "screwed". They're getting benefits exactly the same way they have for decades.

[Better Believe It]

16. Why aren't we suppose to give Social Security recipients raises?

I think we should.

And legislation should be proposed to not only increase the small benefits most people receive, but to also lower the full Social Security retirement age to 60.

Can we do that?

[MercutioATC]

28. Why should SS recipients get raises? COLA increases, yes, but guaranteed yearly raises?

:wtf:

As for increasing benefits and lowering the eligibility age to 60, it would break the system.

[CTyankee]

103. Perhaps it should not be either.

The fact of the matter is that expenses rise as you age and you may not be in a position to make up the difference in your income. Perhaps you can't work at all any more or if you do there is no "moving up the ladder" as it was when you were younger. Even if you do not have a chronic illness like heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc you have other problems. Your body is not built to last forever and eventually some things take their toll.

This is a reality with older people. There should be a mechanism, whether it be SS benefits or health care reform, that can help the elderly. Affordable senior housing comes to mind if, like me, you want to downsize because care of your property and escalating property taxes are eating up large parts of your income, even as your expenditure on business attire or the cost of commuting to work lessens. I am in that situation now...

[Dragonfli]

12. K&R

[corpseratemedia]

14. i'm tired of this "bad or worse" shell game with repubs vs. dems

dems esp. should be representing their constituents, not their lobbyists


i'm tired of this "choice" thats shoved down our throats because some repubs have invaded like a parasite and taken over the democratic party

i'm tired of dem reps unquestionably counting on progressive votes because the repubs put themselves in the fascist corner

the game is rigged so you'll never get universal health care or stop the pillaging by banks or the deliberate sinking of social security

it's so fucking wrong and corrupt that these crooks, which is apparently what the traitor-dems are, help and shield massive criminal enterprises by stealing trillions from people who paid into the system with honest work, hoping to retire one day, or counting on a safety net that they created with their taxes, not bilking millions with deceptive loan schemes like their pals did

[Honeycombe8]

17. That's apples and oranges, really. The two have nothing to do w/each other.

We should all decide each case on its own merits and not compare them.

The banks - the financial system is the backbone of our economy. To a degree, we have no choice but to try to prevent the financial system from collapsing. If our financial system collapses, the Social Security recipients might not receive ANY benefits. And sooner or later, that would be YOU.

Soc. Security - we've known for years that this program is in serious trouble. Congress hasn't gotten to this problem yet, but I hope it will soon. I suppose the recipients can be glad that at least it's not a benefit cut, which it may become in the near future. Or increased taxes. Or increased age of retirement (again). Or a lessening of who will qualify to receive benefits. Or all of those things. But with all the baby boomers starting to retire, this program is in serious trouble and will need an overhaul. It will be painful. BUT if healthcare reform gets passed, then that will help us ALL, including our senior citizens.

[madfloridian]

18. Wrong.

It's about priorities....and Social Security could be self-sustaining if not messed with by those who want to do away with it.

The propaganda from the right has worked on nearly every issue for years.

Congratulations to the Republican Noise Machine. They have done such a good job that our Democrats are falling all over themselves to ignore the elderly and poor.

[Honeycombe8]

21. Right. You said it yourself, "Social Security should be self-sustaining."

One program has nothing to do with the other.

I don't know if you've been sleeping the last 10 years, but Social Security has been on the brink of failing for years. We have all known that it needed major rehauling, but * wanted to privatize it, so the rehauling didn't happen.

So here we are, with not enough money to pay benefits for all the baby boomers retiring (and now being forced into retirement because of the economy).

The benefits could have been cut. They weren't. It's sad and terrible. But the program is in deep trouble because our government stole the Social Security funds for something else.

In the coming years, the program changes will be: lessening of the amount of benefits, increasing age of retirement (again), increase in FICA taxes, maybe narrowing people who qualify to receive benefits.

The money just isn't there. What don't you understand about that? The money is not there. Say it again. The money is not there.

If there's a freeze for awhile, and major rehauling, then maybe the plan can get back on its feet and resume COL increases for the millions of baby boomers set to retire in the next few years.

The financial system is critical to getting the Social Security system and all other of our programs on their feet again. Nothing happens without a financial system at the core. Talk about priorities. There's your priority.

It's like you're worrying about the temperature in the car affecting the elderly because it's getting warm, when the car is almost out of gas....and you think it's unfair to spend money to put gas in the car instead of spending money to get a/c. First things first. If there's no gas in the car, it doesn't matter how good the a/c is without gas to run it.

[madfloridian]

24. Sarcasm from you....have I been sleeping the last 10 years.

Cute and not very smart.

You know what, since neither party is going to protect those on Social Security, then my vote doesn't matter.

[Hannah Bell]

38. SS has been nowhere near "on the brink of failing". on the contrary, it's produced

approximately a trillion-plus in SURPLUS collections over the last 10 years.

"financial system" = control of money, production & gov't by an increasing small elite class: rentier economy.

[MercutioATC]

44. SS is slowly bleeding money.

...and it'll be an issue sometime after 2041 if we make no changes.


You're right, hardly "the brink of failure".

[Hannah Bell]

46. and it's not bleeding money now, it's accruing it.

[MercutioATC]

49. Right.

I agree that we should address the eventual projected shortfall now, but it's not an immediate issue.

[Hannah Bell]

56. since the SS Trustees can't even predict SS's short-term finances accurately,

there's no reason to suspect their 30-year forecasts are any better.

The most accurate of the forecasts they make has consistently been the low-cost estimate; it predicts there will never be a shortfall.

You don't hear about that one is the MSM, though.

There's NO reason to "address" a shortfall 30 years before the fact.

If it happens, you raise taxes. If it doesn't, you don't.

[Hannah Bell]

34. it *is* self-sustaining.

[madfloridian]

19. And another thing.....

If our Democrats and their DLC types here at DU think stuff like this will fly...then let them try it for a while.

And see what happens.

None of these things are separate at all....it just shows what our party thinks is important.

No more excuses.

[earth mom]

134. Social Security is NOT broken. Stop buying into the lie. nt

[ContinentalOp]

137. Social Security IS kind of broken...

but not for the reasons Republicans argue. It's arguably "broken" because our inflation numbers (and there for the CPI and COLA) are broken and so you end up with situations like this where there's no cost of living adjustment even though the price of everything is obviously going up. It was broken this way intentionally.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Among other things

people who can predict such a thing two years out should have also been able to see and prevent this 'crisis' we are having...but they were all 'shocked' by it all.
Maybe Obama will remember his forgotten campaign promise to remove the Fed Income Tax burden from Social Security beneficiaries making under 50,000 a year. That would be some balance. But he's not mentioned that since he won.

[madfloridian]

22. FYI for those who think SS is just a welfare thingy

Here is info on FICA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Insurance_Contributions_Act_tax

"The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax (pronounced /ˈfаɪkə/) is a United States payroll (or employment) tax imposed by the federal government on both employees and employers to fund Social Security and Medicare <2> —federal programs that provide benefits for retirees, the disabled, and children of deceased workers. Social Security benefits include old-age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); Medicare provides hospital insurance benefits. The amount that one pays in payroll taxes throughout one's working career is indirectly tied to the social security benefits annuity that one receives as a retiree."

I was looking for an old check from before I retired, but I remember an amount like $435 a month into this program. And that was from the 80s.

Can't find the old paychecks, but I will. That is not welfare. Stop making it sound that way.

Let the Democrats keep this up, and there will be a price to pay for it.

[Baby Snooks]

63. The reality of Social Security...

The majority of people would have done better to have put their FICA withholding in a CD and let it draw interest. Most do not really get back what they put in it. And the more you put in the less you get back.

But the problem with that is just what we are seeing - all anyone would have gotten back is whatever the FDIC insured which appears to be changing as a result of the insolvency of so many banks which need more deposits into savings accounts. The rest? Well, too bad.

The Republicans of course will make this an issue simply because they have so few things at this point to make an issue of. The Democrats are going to be portrayed as evil creatures putting the poor retired seniors out on the streets. And they will produce all sorts of charts and studies to show how Wall Street would have saved them.

The problem with that is what we are seeing - they would have gotten nothing back because nothing on Wall Street is insured. But some fools will forget that and wish they had put their money in stocks and bonds instead of letting the government handle it for them. After all, they can barely make ends meet. Thanks to the government. The Republican spinmeisters are probably already hard at work putting together the charts and studies. If at first you don't succeed as they say.

Reality is social security is all the majority of Americans have to retire on. Which is why so many cannot retire. I saw some figures a couple of years ago when the debate about privatization was the raging debate in Washington. It was alarming how many in this country did not have retirement accounts of their own because they were already struggling to make ends meet and had no "disposable income" to save with. All they had was social security. They would have been harmed rather than helped by privatization.

But so many who did retire are having to go back to work in order to make ends meet. And then have to work even more when they lose part of their social security benefits just because they went back to work.

I don't blame Obama but Obama should have addressed the problem. If nothing else, maybe it would have opened up people's eyes about Congress. And how it really works. And how it really doesn't work. Not for the interest of the American people anyway.

[DesertFlower]

114. i just checked my husband's pay stub.

$714 in social security tax and $166 for medicare.

[Mike 03]

23. It's not a matter of priorities; it's a matter of saving our economic system, period.

The banks are insolvent. If they are not saved, you can forget about our accounts, pension funds, 401Ks. That would be a much worse disaster than delaying raises in social security COL raises.

It's not even a close call.

The Fed and Treasury are making the exact right decision. There's no doubt about it. You wouldn't want to live in a world where they didn't save our banks.

[madfloridian]

25. Wrong.

The two are not the same.

But keep thinking that and get the GOP back in power.

[Mike 03]

32. Huh? You are the one who is wrong, IMHO. Our leaders are Dems and they are doing

exactly what needs to be done. They are the ones who will fix this economy not the fucking Repukes.

On Edit:

It's easy to spew your advice, but how about some rationale for what your are suggesting?

[madfloridian]

35. No, they are wrong in this instance.

The banks get the money and no accountability.

Social Security recipients are double-taxed, and are not going to receive cost of living raises.

Please do not tell me the cost of living is not going up. That is baloney.

If Democrats continue on this path, there will be less and less willing to understand.

[BzaDem]

93. Care to produce actual data, other than your checkbook?

Like maybe some Consumer Price Index data? If you don't think the consumer price index is a correctly weighted basket of goods, then by all means say why. But saying "that is baloney" over and over again without producing any actual evidence doesn't serve any purpose other than to make you feel better.

[madfloridian]

106. Do I care to produce actual data? No.

For anyone to even think that the cost of living for seniors is going down is a sin and a shame.

But then DU ain't what it used to be...it is the defender of corporate things.

Seniors and the needy be damned.

[EnoughOfThis]

120. Senoirs.....Richest

An inconvenient truth......seniors are our richest population....which makes sense that we make more money and save more money as we get older. Can we focus on the people that are disadvantaged, instead of this one-size-fits-all crap. There are people that need out help....but not everyone. We can't help everyone.....nor should we.

[ContinentalOp]

139. There is plenty of evidence that the CPI is bogus.

Read up on "hedonics." There was a thread a while back where somebody was complaining about the price of a new car. A 1974 Chevy Malibu (the car mentioned in that thread) was $3800 for the most expensive model. That's $15,812 in 2007 dollars according to official inflation statistics, but a new Malibu starts at $22,000. "Hedonics" says that the new car is worth the extra $7000 over the official inflation numbers because it has air bags, a CD player and other things that weren't even available in 1974.

The problem is you can't buy a car without these new features, and you can't buy a house that isn't "better" than the 1974 house by these subjective "hedonic" measurements. So since everything is "better" now, it's a convenient way to mask the true inflation rates. And one resulting benefit of these artificially low inflation numbers is that you don't have to pay people as much in cost of living adjustments.

[GinaMaria]

76. Thank gawd they saved my 401K

:eyes: It's not worth much now and probably won't fund my retirement. In fact I've pretty much forgotten about it. I also won't get back what I put into SS and I'll end up working very late in my life. I'm not sure I'll want to live in world where I can't afford the property taxes on my home and cat food is good eatin'.

[madfloridian]

26. Here come the bank defenders.

Welcome.

Don't pretend this is not a problem, to let the seniors hang like this.

It's pretty obvious when a post about Soc. Sec. is filled with negative remarks just where we are headed in the party.

[MercutioATC]

29. What's "negative" about agreeing with COLA increases for SS recipients?

You know, increases based on the cost of living?

The banks are a completely separate issue, but I see neither the feasibility nor the responsibility to give annual increases to SS recipients when not justified by an actual increase in cost of living.

[bkkyosemite]

89. Where do you live on the moon? I am on SS and I can tell you ..you are wrong!!!

And you certainly do not know what it is like to live on a fixed income it is very evident by your posts.

Obama is leaving the elderly and the disabled out to dry and I have emailed him several times on this issue.

[MercutioATC]

101. What am I "wrong" about?

Obama hasn't done a thing to the elderly and disabled. The formula is exactly the same as it's been for decades.

The CPI shows cost of living basically flat over the past year...so there's no SS increase. It's that simple.

[madfloridian]

108. It is a lie. The cost of living is not flat for seniors for sure.

Everything goes up as one gets older...insurance, health care, prescription drugs.

It is not just misleading, it is lie.

I told my hubby that people here were saying the cost of food was going down. Since he bought groceries recently, he cracked up laughing.

It's a joke, and it is not funny.

[Mike 03]

36. It's not "either/or"... I wish you would not be so defensive and listen to the rationale

for why we can't allow the banks to go down, precisely for the reasons you are hoping we can save the lives of people who depend on public programs?

Please, why can't you at least listen?

[madfloridian]

42. We could help the banks and seniors also. It should not be either/or

Please stop trying to make me sound unintelligent. I very much resent that.

[Mike 03]

48. I'm not trying to make you sound unintelligent. I'm sorry if it seemed that way.

I was just trying to have an intelligent discussion.

Take care.

[Mike 03]

39. P.S. Sorry, and nevermind. Maybe you know or understand this in more depth than I do.

Thanks for at least raising this issue. At least it's an important issue, to say the least.

Mike

[Hannah Bell]

50. as well as posts about libraries, public schools, & autoworkers.

so, what *does* the party stand for, these days?

apparently, for shoveling money to thieving financiers.

[madfloridian]

55. Yep.

Just about right.

[madfloridian]

37. If costs of living are so low, why is everything costing more?

I don't want to hear that argument.

Groceries are higher, insurance is through the roof, taxes are higher for the average person every year.

[Mike 03]

40. I sure as hell agree with you on this point. My cost of living has gone up at least 10% over the

last eight months, regardless of what statistics show.

[Individualist]

71. CPI is a damn joke

since it doesn't include food and energy. No doubt the apologists will tell us we can live without both.

[JVS]

72. Well come on, those old people could be getting killer deals on new cars right now!

[Individualist]

73. Yep,

and I'll bet I could get a diamond tiara on sale now too. May as well get four or five while I'm at it.

[JVS]

74. but instead we just piss the money away on food, rent, and medication

I feel so ashamed.

[madfloridian]

84. Yep, all those unnecessary things....food, rent, medication.

For shame, hide your head. :evilgrin:

[Sgent]

124. It does include cost and energy

the "core cpi" used by economic analysts doesn't include food and energy -- but the one used for SSA COLA adjustments does.

See: http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpiqa.htm

Has the BLS removed food or energy prices in its official measure of inflation?

No. The BLS publishes thousands of CPI indexes each month, including the headline All Items CPI for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) and the CPI-U for All Items Less Food and Energy. The latter series, widely referred to as the "core" CPI, is closely watched by many economic analysts and policymakers under the belief that food and energy prices are volatile and are subject to price shocks that cannot be damped through monetary policy. However, all consumer goods and services, including food and energy, are represented in the headline CPI.

Most importantly, none of the prominent legislated uses of the CPI excludes food and energy. Social security and federal retirement benefits are updated each year for inflation by the All Items CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). Individual income tax parameters and Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) returns are based on the All Items CPI-U.

[GinaMaria]

77. I'm with you

Where do you have to live that you don't feel an increase in cost of living? Groceries, property taxes, condo assessments, bus fare, health insurance, it's all gone up for me.

[Mike 03]

41. Kick and rec. Good discussion, in spite of the fact we have differing opinions here. NT

[madfloridian]

57. Please do not tell us the cost of living is not going up.

Don't demean our intelligence.

Insurance, esp. in FL, property taxes, even our income taxes shot up this year though we are retired.

Groceries higher, medication is much higher...

That is an arguement that is not reality based.

[Lasher]

82. And how about energy prices?

Specifically, how about fuel oil, natural gas, and gasoline? Energy prices are way down, and they are an important component of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), which is used to calculate SS COLAs.

[madfloridian]

83. The price we pay is NOT way down in spite of those energy prices.

Somehow it never makes its way down to us. :shrug:

[Lasher]

85. Gasoline was $3.61 a gallon one year ago.

Today it is $2.07. If you buy gasoline that cost decrease should have made its way down to you. But that's really not exactly the point. The CPI-W is based on national averages, not on individual cases.

[madfloridian]

86. Oh, okay then. I will tell my energy providers.

So they can lower our bills. That will work, I am sure.

Meanwhile, insurance is soaring, prescriptions drug prices are rising, property taxes are rising.

Health care insurance is cutting benefits and raising costs.

And Harry Reid wants to tax any health benefits.

Please tell me what costs are going down....please.

Groceries are not going down.

[Lasher]

90. Well I think I did point out an important cost decrease - gasoline.

It might seem ironic but if you are not currently in the labor force, you are not even included in the population that determines CPI-W. The CPI-W measures consumer price inflation for a subset of the CPI-U population: residents of urban areas who live in households that:

receive more than half of their income from clerical or wage occupations, and

have one earner employed for at least 37 weeks during the previous 12 months.

The CPI-W covers about 32 percent of the U.S. population.

http://www.seattle.gov/financedepartment/cpi/overview.htm

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

Edit: Prices went up for everything during the last 12 months, except for transportation/energy. Hit this link to see for yourself. Scroll down about halfway to Table B, Percent changes in CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). I once knew how to post tables here without getting them all funky with the columns out of whack, but I forgot.

[JVS]

95. Do you have examples that are not products that were caught in a speculative bubble?

[MercutioATC]

102. The reason doesn't matter...prices on some things (housing, gas, etc.) are lower.

Speculative bubble or not, we're paying less for them.

[JVS]

111. Yes it does matter because it creates a large net change in one commodity that disguises the....

that the other commodities (and in particular things like food and medicine which are inadequately weighted already in the indices) are rising. If gas is half off, but everything else you buy is up 10%, and you buy a lot more of the other stuff than gas, your're not experiencing lower prices.

[Bluenorthwest]

116. I just paid $2.50

and four years ago it was $1.86. Just saying. Up is down. Increase is decrease!

[Lasher]

121. Well OK but we were discussing the next annual SS COLA

So in that context nothing beyond 12 months ago is relevant unless you want to discuss previous COLAs. FYI, Gas Buddy has historical prices that go back a few years.

[MannyGoldstein]

64. So What?

Bankers earned that. It's their due, for co-opting government all the way up to Summers.

Now put another middle-classer on the barbie and get me cold one.

[nradisic]

66. That is just so wrong....

I truy believe in Karma and the bankers will get their share soon enough....the system is so broken...

[Wednesdays]

69. k&r

:kick:

[farmboxer]

70. America is a plutocracy, so the rich will always get their way

no matter what. It's a disappointment, but the Banks/Wall St. can celebrate.

[customerserviceguy]

78. Similarly

the tax brackets, personal exemption amount, and standard deduction amount won't be going up, either. They have been indexed for inflation for about twenty years, and 2010 marks the first year since then that they won't be adjusted.

That should lead to more collection by the government of tax revenue, for better or worse.

[Bozita]

79. A year ago, dollar stores had 2lb bags of rice and pasta @2 1lb. packs/dollar

Now, it's no rice in dollar stores and pasta is a buck a pound.

[JDPriestly]

87. That is how a party loses. Truer words were never spoken.

I campaigned for Obama in Southern Ohio. Many of the swing voters -- the voters that cast their ballots for Obama -- were senior citizens. And, from what I learned from these voters, Obama should not take their support for granted. I remember one elderly, very Catholic woman who said she was choosing between two issues -- abortion (which would have been a vote for McCain) and her Social Security (by which she meant voting for Obama).

Also, I must say that, while technically, the CPI may not be rising, food prices are rising in many respects. Sure, you get bargains if you shop the seasonal produce and other items, but in general, food prices are up. And that really hurts seniors who rely primarily on Social Security for their income because seniors mostly buy food. The older you get, the longer your clothes seem to last.

Obama is really messing up with this one.

[Individualist]

88. Government of, by and for the corporations

Business as usual.

[madrchsod]

92. well i `m pissed off to say the least....

trillions to the banks and 0 for the people who are retired....? the only thing that will save obama`s ass on this one is the republicans have`t anywhere to go on this for now. he`d better hope the economy starts to grow by next year or he`ll lose the house.

contrary to popular opinion social security is all i have because i was one of those who`s trade was sold to south east asia. i`m not the only person in the usa who does`t have a "golden nest egg"

once again those who have the least get fucked over....

[JVS]

94. What's so frustrating about this is that the whole stimulus package was looking for shovel in hand..

projects where an outlay of money would be sure to generate more spending and not simply be socked away to the bank. In such a situation, giving more money to the old is a no-brainer. Very few old people on fixed incomes would be able to save such a bonus if they wanted to. Giving a dollar to them is a guarantee for economic activity.

[madrchsod]

113. everyone on ss or ssi is getting 250 this month

we decided we are going to spend that money buying us made products or taking a few days off and going on a vacation

[MercutioATC]

97. SS wasn't raided for bailout money. The SS increase is the same as it's always been!

No, the government didn't change the rules and give MORE money to SS recipients than it usually does...but it didn't take any away, either.

[blindpig]

100. Hideously fucked up priorities.

Yet we are supposed to nod our heads sagely, thankful that the 'adults' are in charge.

Fuck that shit, this is class warfare.

[madfloridian]

105. It is a lie for anyone to say the cost of living is going down.

For seniors it is going up more than for other groups if you consider Medicare payments to doctors are less, insurance of all kinds goes higher and higher, Medicare withholding will go up again next year and the next. Prescription drugs prices took a sharp rise recently. Property taxes are not going down, in many areas they are going up.

Insurance in Florida is being given permission to go up 10% a year...that is for about 30 companies. The big guys will not even be regulated.

It is an insult to seniors to say the cost of living is going down.

It is a lie.

[florida08]

109. yes it is a lie

We should understand the tricks that are used by our government to "tone" down bad reports. In the Crash Course series he address this subject.

But In 1996, Clinton implemented the Boskin Commission findings, which now have us measuring inflation using three oddities: substitution, weighting, and hedonics. To begin with this list, we no longer simply measure the cost of goods and services from one year to the next, because of something called the "substitution effect." Thanks to the Boskin Commission, it is now assumed that when the price of something rises, people will switch to something cheaper. So any time, say, that the price of salmon goes up too much, it is removed from the basket of goods and substituted with something cheaper, like hot dogs. By this methodology, the BLS says that food costs rose 4.1% from 2007 to 2008.

However according to the Farm Bureau, which does not do this and simply tracks the exact same shopping basket of thirty goods from one year to the next, food prices rose 11.3% over the past year, compared to the BLS which says they only rose 4.1%. That’s a huge difference. In my household, our experience is better matched by the Farm Bureau.

One impact of using substitution is that our measure of inflation no longer measures the cost of living, but the cost of survival.
But the most outlandish adjustment of them all goes by the name “hedonics,” the Greek root of which means “for the pleasure of.” This adjustment is supposed to adjust for quality improvements, especially those that lead to greater enjoyment or utility of the product, but it has been badly overused.

Here’s an example. Tim LaFleur is a commodity specialist for televisions at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, where the CPI is calculated. I’m guessing he works in a place that looks like this. In 2004, he noted that a 27-inch television selling for $329.99 was selling for the same price as last year, but was now equipped with a better screen. After taking this subjective improvement into account, he adjusted the price of the TV downwards by $135, concluding that the screen improvement was the same as if the price of the TV had fallen by 29%. The price reflected in the CPI was not the actual retail store cost of $329.99, which is what it would cost you to buy, but $195. Bingo! At the BLS, TeeVees cost less and inflation is heading down. At the store, they’re still selling for $329.99.



More at Fuzzy Numbers
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse/chapter-16-fuzzy-numbers

[madfloridian]

110. "our measure of inflation no longer measures the cost of living, but the cost of survival. "

Very interesting post...Thanks.

And I wonder how some will survive with health care, insurance, and prescription drugs rising as well as the cost of food.

And property tax is not going down..and probably won't.

:hi:

[florida08]

112. honestly I don't know

My light bill use to just consist of of KWH and a few taxes. After oil shot up a few years ago I had a new charge. Power cost adjustment..to cover their price for oil. Now that has been as much ad $70 added to my bill during the summer heat. That hasn't gone away either since oil has come down. My property tax and homeowners insurance both have increased with insurance almost doubling. Health insurance goes up every year. I think it's despicable to deny the COLA for SS recipients. Congressmen sure get theirs every year don't they?

And SS is insurance..something recipients paid in all their life and are duly entitled to. John McCain gets his. Imagine that.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/John-McCain-Quietly-Draws--by-Frank-J--Ranelli-080801-637.html

[madfloridian]

115. Those power bills never go down, and conserving makes little difference.

Our health insurance has quadrupled at least since we retired. Property taxes also four times more than then.

Homeowners insurance is sky high and getting higher.

[madrchsod]

127. i can`t believe the shit i read today about why it`s ok

because we old people have it so good. what the hell...inflation is down! what the hell can of democrat would think it`s ok for old people who have very little to sacrifice even more. i expect this from the eat shit and die republicans but democrats?

[JVS]

129. Evidently republicans becoming "purists" is a license for us to become total shitbags

[HopeOverFear]

128. I'm on SSDI and this doesn't bother me at all.

I'm grateful that my benefits aren't decreasing.