• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Official: Obama Proposes Cuts to Social Security

Here is what Politico has to say.



Chain CPI primer: Obama's buzzword explained

What it does: Chained CPI would lower the cost-of-living adjustments for senior citizens who receive Social Security, veterans’ benefits, and other payments by switching to a different Consumer Price Index that grows more slowly.

What it could save: $130 billion. <<<<< Seems your Totals weren't all that accurate!

How it works: The new measure assumes that people change their buying habits when things become more expensive, so they don’t need their benefits to rise as much every year. If they’re buying groceries, for example, and the price of steak is rising, they could buy chicken or fish instead.

The pitfalls: Not everything works like buying groceries. Seniors tend to have more health care needs than therest of the population, and if their cancer treatment is getting more expensive, they have to go to their oncologist — they can’t get it from the CVS Minute Clinic.

But Obama would face a big backlash from Democrats – and from key allies like AARP and veterans’ groups – if chained CPI became part of a final deal. Liberals warn that it would take too big a bite out of Social Security benefits to seniors, who have expenses they can’t cut easily, especially medical care. AARP is sounding the alarms, warning that a 92-year-old senior would lose more than 8 percent of his or her Social Security benefits.

Obama’s offer to Boehner says it includes “protections for vulnerable,” but doesn’t give details. And Obama is insisting that Republicans would only get this kind of concession if they agree to more tax increases, which is a nonstarter right now.

And he’s probably not even going to gain anything with Republicans — because as Boehner’s office pointed out Friday, the chained CPI would also raise tax revenues by about $100 billion. That’s because it affects how the tax brackets are calculated. If inflation grows more slowly, the tax brackets each year are raised more slowly – so more people’s incomes will push them into higher tax brackets each year, and they’ll end up paying more taxes.....snip~

Chain CPI primer: Obama's buzzword explained - POLITICO.com Print View

"And he’s probably not even going to gain anything with Republicans" because they don't want SS fixed or Medicare fixed. They care only about taxes on their rich donors.
Aint it the truth.
 
"And he’s probably not even going to gain anything with Republicans" because they don't want SS fixed or Medicare fixed. They care only about taxes on their rich donors.
Aint it the truth.

That's funny.....I haven't heard any of them say that.
 
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama's proposed budget will call for reductions in the growth of Social Security and other benefit programs by including a proposal to lower cost-of-living adjustments to government social safety net spending, a senior administration official says.
The proposal attempts to strike a compromise with congressional Republicans on the Fiscal 2014 budget by combining the president's demand for higher taxes with GOP insistence on reductions in entitlement programs.

2013-03-02t221313z_1_cbre9210k7l00_rtroptp_3_usa-fiscal-obama-shutdown.jpg



The official, who spoke on a condition of anonymity to describe a budget that has yet to be released, said Obama would reduce the federal government deficit by $1.8 trillion over 10 years.

A key feature of the plan Obama is proposing for the federal budget year beginning Oct. 1 is a revised inflation adjustment called "chained CPI." This new formula would effectively curb annual annual increases in a broad swath of government programs, but would have its biggest impact on Social Security.

Obama's budget, to be released next week, comes after the Republican-controlled House and the Democratic-run Senate passed separate and markedly different budget proposals. House Republicans achieved long-term deficit reductions by targeting safety net programs; Democrats instead protected those programs and called for $1 trillion in tax increases.

The reductions in growth of benefit programs, which would affect veterans, the poor and the older Americans, is sure to anger many Democrats. Labor groups and liberals have long been critical of Obama's offer to Boehner for including such a plan.....snip~

Official: Obama proposes cuts to Social Security

Looks Like Obama just got a bunch of Democrats highly upset with him. Here the Demos were running around talking about how Republicans wanted to go after Social Security. Which Ryan talked about but not in a way to tear down the Entitlement. Repubs were looking for the age to be pushed back due to people living longer and the advances in healthcare. Now who does this affect more? The Middle Class and Poor or the Rich? Who was talking about fairness? Thoughts?

Instead of rolling back the CPI, if me, I would increase the age from the 62-67 time frame to 64-69 gradually much like the time when the age for maximum benefits was raised from 65-67. But the fact that the president has put SS on the table makes his budget worth looking at.


Personally, I would like to see the president embrace Simpson/Bowles and go from there. But this is movement and that in itself is a plus
 
That's funny.....I haven't heard any of them say that.

Really? You haven't heard them say revenues are off the table?
After an entire year of their candidate proclaiming that eliminating loopholes was the right way to go.
 
Instead of rolling back the CPI, if me, I would increase the age from the 62-67 time frame to 64-69 gradually much like the time when the age for maximum benefits was raised from 65-67. But the fact that the president has put SS on the table makes his budget worth looking at.


Personally, I would like to see the president embrace Simpson/Bowles and go from there. But this is movement and that in itself is a plus

Krugman has come out and slammed it, as well. Sanders is vowing to fight it should it attempt to pass.

Well and throwing back half the 800 billion he took from Medicare would at least have to cause the House to look at it.....which they did and seeing that it would raise taxes on the elderly. It's not going anywhere.....in Obama's way.
 
Really? You haven't heard them say revenues are off the table?

Yeah I did.....but that has nothing to do with fixing the problem. Besides.....Obama was given his revenues and was offered an Addition 600 Billion. It was turned down. Moreover even the OP confirms the Left would have a problem with this issue. Especially AARP who is already out warning their people.
 
Krugman has come out and slammed it, as well. Sanders is vowing to fight it should it attempt to pass.

Well and throwing back half the 800 billion he took from Medicare would at least have to cause the House to look at it.....which they did and seeing that it would raise taxes on the elderly. It's not going anywhere.....in Obama's way.

I will wait and take a look at it before I make up my own mind.
 
Krugman has come out and slammed it, as well. Sanders is vowing to fight it should it attempt to pass.

Well and throwing back half the 800 billion he took from Medicare would at least have to cause the House to look at it.....which they did and seeing that it would raise taxes on the elderly. It's not going anywhere.....in Obama's way.

So because the left predictably slams it, the right will use that as an excuse not to close a single loophole on the wealthy. That's the GOP way. Do you think cutting SS was Obamas idea?
 
So because the left predictably slams it, the right will use that as an excuse not to close a single loophole on the wealthy. That's the GOP way. Do you think cutting SS was Obamas idea?

I would recommend that you look up Ryans Plan. As he addressed the issue about those who are the Wealthy. Kinda like goes with the same Idea of stopping Millionaires from Collecting food stamps. ;)
 
I would recommend that you look up Ryans Plan. As he addressed the issue about those who are the Wealthy. Kinda like goes with the same Idea of stopping Millionaires from Collecting food stamps. ;)

I've got breaking news. Ryan lost the election and his plan was rejected by the voters.
 
I've got breaking news. Ryan lost the election and his plan was rejected by the voters.

Yeah I have some breaking news for you too. This Plan came about after he lost the Election.....while now over half the country regrets bringing Obama to his 2nd term.
 
Really......


Really:


"CMS and the Kaiser Family Foundation tell ABC News that there will be no benefit cuts to Medicare. They say instead of Medicare’s being cut, there will be much more spending at the end of a 10-year window, but it does slow the rate of that growth. This is all unless Congress makes drastic changes to Medicare, for example passing House Budget Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan’s Medicare Plan.

CMS says—and Kaiser agrees—that spending will be reduced by getting rid of fraud and ending overpayments to private insurance companies. It sends a message to those insurance companies: Operate more efficiently.

And instead of cuts, the CMS says they will be able to fund new benefits, including free preventive care and broader prescription coverage, including closing the “doughnut hole” affecting seniors."

Fact-Checking Romney: Does Health Reform Cut Medicare, Levy $500 Billion Tax? - ABC News
 
Really:


"CMS and the Kaiser Family Foundation tell ABC News that there will be no benefit cuts to Medicare. They say instead of Medicare’s being cut, there will be much more spending at the end of a 10-year window, but it does slow the rate of that growth. This is all unless Congress makes drastic changes to Medicare, for example passing House Budget Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan’s Medicare Plan.

CMS says—and Kaiser agrees—that spending will be reduced by getting rid of fraud and ending overpayments to private insurance companies. It sends a message to those insurance companies: Operate more efficiently.

And instead of cuts, the CMS says they will be able to fund new benefits, including free preventive care and broader prescription coverage, including closing the “doughnut hole” affecting seniors."

Fact-Checking Romney: Does Health Reform Cut Medicare, Levy $500 Billion Tax? - ABC News

The White House says Obama’s budget will flesh out his last offer to Boehner, which includes $400 billion in Medicare savings – but a lot of that is just industry payment cuts, so Republicans are likely to push for more changes to benefits.....snip~

Yeah.....like Politico shows. Really! ;)
 
Here is what Politico has to say.............


That doesn't refute the 3 main parts of the Simpson Bowles plan -

""The Social Security changes.*Simpson-Bowles makes three main changes to Social Security. It increases the taxable maximum on income to 90 percent of all income, which raises $238 billion over the next decade. It uses a different measure of inflation to slow cost-of-living adjustments. It raises the retirement age to 68 in 2050 and 69 in 2075."
 
Instead of rolling back the CPI, if me, I would increase the age from the 62-67 time frame to 64-69 gradually much like the time when the age for maximum benefits was raised from 65-67. But the fact that the president has put SS on the table makes his budget worth looking at.


Personally, I would like to see the president embrace Simpson/Bowles and go from there. But this is movement and that in itself is a plus

That is what he is negotiating for, just as he stated in his acceptance speech after winning reelection. But you realize the Simpson Bowles plan for SS also includes a hefty increase in the cap for wealthy contributors.
 
That doesn't refute the 3 main parts of the Simpson Bowles plan -

""The Social Security changes.*Simpson-Bowles makes three main changes to Social Security. It increases the taxable maximum on income to 90 percent of all income, which raises $238 billion over the next decade. It uses a different measure of inflation to slow cost-of-living adjustments. It raises the retirement age to 68 in 2050 and 69 in 2075."

But see that's just it.....with this OP and thread. They aren't talking about the 3 main parts of Simpson Bowles.

Liberal think tanks like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities have said it could work – if it includes help for the seniors who need it most, like an extra one-time increase after they’ve been getting benefits for 15 or 20 years. They also want to exempt Supplemental Security Income, a program that helps the low-income elderly and the disabled.....snip~
 
Well and throwing back half the 800 billion he took from Medicare would at least have to cause the House to look at it.....which they did and seeing that it would raise taxes on the elderly. It's not going anywhere.....in Obama's way.

Its soooooo funny to hear conservatives saying they want more waste and fraud in the entitlement programs! :lamo
 
But see that's just it.....with this OP and thread. They aren't talking about the 3 main parts of Simpson Bowles.

Liberal think tanks like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities have said it could work – if it includes help for the seniors who need it most, like an extra one-time increase after they’ve been getting benefits for 15 or 20 years. They also want to exempt Supplemental Security Income, a program that helps the low-income elderly and the disabled.....snip~

What it does: Chained CPI would lower the cost-of-living adjustments for senior citizens who receive Social Security, veterans’ benefits, and other payments by switching to a different Consumer Price Index that grows more slowly.

What it could save: $130 billion.

How it works: The new measure assumes that people change their buying habits when things become more expensive, so they don’t need their benefits to rise as much every year. If they’re buying groceries, for example, and the price of steak is rising, they could buy chicken or fish instead.

The pitfalls: Not everything works like buying groceries. Seniors tend to have more health care needs than therest of the population, and if their cancer treatment is getting more expensive, they have to go to their oncologist — they can’t get it from the CVS Minute Clinic.....snip~


Since you have that tendency to not go back and read what has been said.
 
Its soooooo funny to hear conservatives saying they want more waste and fraud in the entitlement programs! :lamo

What's really funny is hearing Liberals say they give a damn and care for the Poor and the middle class. Now that is some hilarious ****! :lol:
 
But see that's just it.....with this OP and thread. They aren't talking about the 3 main parts of Simpson Bowles.

Liberal think tanks like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities have said it could work – if it includes help for the seniors who need it most, like an extra one-time increase after they’ve been getting benefits for 15 or 20 years. They also want to exempt Supplemental Security Income, a program that helps the low-income elderly and the disabled.....snip~


You don't know much about negotiations and compromise do you? We are at the very beginning of the negotiation process on SS.
 
You don't know much about negotiations and compromise do you? We are at the very beginning of the negotiation process on SS.

Guess you didn't hear about those on the Left already complaining. Which really doesn't give you much on any incite, and clearly when Boehner already pointed out what the Repubs said with the issue and Obama's idea even tho it would raise even more revenues for him.....on Friday. It's called DOA.....kinda Like Obama Gun Control issue and Feinstein's.
 
That is what he is negotiating for, just as he stated in his acceptance speech after winning reelection. But you realize the Simpson Bowles plan for SS also includes a hefty increase in the cap for wealthy contributors.

I have no problem with that. That would be step two after raising the eligibility age to match today's demographics or living longer. When SS was set up, 65 was the average age a person died, if we went by that criteria, one wouldn't be able to draw SS until he reached the mid 70's.
 
Guess you didn't hear about those on the Left already complaining. Which really doesn't give you much on any incite, and clearly when Boehner already pointed out what the Repubs said with the issue and Obama's idea even tho it would raise even more revenues for him.....on Friday. It's called DOA.....kinda Like Obama Gun Control issue and Feinstein's.



That's the way compromise works, neither side gets everything they want in order to reach a way forward that works best for everyone. If this Congress doesn't do it, we will eventually vote in one that will.
 
I have no problem with that. That would be step two after raising the eligibility age to match today's demographics or living longer. When SS was set up, 65 was the average age a person died, if we went by that criteria, one wouldn't be able to draw SS until he reached the mid 70's.

It will all be part of the compromise, including the raise in CAP on contributions.
 
Somewhere in hell Ronald Reagan is laughing his ass off.
 
Back
Top Bottom