Workers will have MORE money in their pockets AND will have paid for a longer retirement at a higher standard of living
There are a number of well thought out plans to handle the problems proposed by opponents of Social Security and also those concerned about its sustainability. To have our political and media debate confined to one item like chained-cpi should make any reasonable voter pause and wonder “Is that all? How dumb can we be?” Take a breath and a half hour to review trhe fact that there a a lot of alternatives…don’t let your politician quote you a bumper sticker slogan. There are plenty of alternatives that won’t cut benefits for a well functioning program that could deliver a decent result.
“Workers will have MORE money in their pockets AND will have paid for a longer retirement at a higher standard of living.” Social Security cuts offered…why?
According to the 2010 CBO report Options for Social Security the chained CPI will “solve” about one third of the projected shortfall.
Since a tax raise of forty cents per week per year over the same time would solve the entire projected shortfall, it looks as though the chained CPI is going to save workers about 13 cents per week per year while their wages are going up eight dollars per week per year.
Of course the chained CPI is going to cost them a thousand dollars a year when they are too old to do anything about it.
Makes you wonder who the President’s financial advisor is.
The CBO report was from 2010. raising the cap to cover 90% of earnings would put the cap at about 150k, and their benefits would be increased.
This might be salable to them… if they figured the extra tax was a reasonable price to pay for the extra insurance… I am guessing their SS benefit would go from about 26k to about 35k. I don’t think they would be happy with that ratio.
In any case I would prefer to pay the extra 13 cents per week and keep Social Security “worker paid.”
You don’t want welfare. it’s ugly.
Everyone interested in actual SS numbers should read that CBO 2010 report ‘Social Security Policy Options’ or just refer to special figure 1. CBO scored 30 different policy options taken in isolation and although some would interact if enacted together for the most part you can treat the fixes as a cafeteria plan and mix and match to reach your 0.6 target. For example there is one fix that closes 0.9 of that 0.6 which makes room for proposals that shift benefits to the bottom in a way that still mets out at 0.6. Now in the event I agree with Dale that this particular combination adds up to ‘welfare’ and moreover that that would be a bad thing. But your views may vary.
The point being that most obvious changes to SS have already been scored, all you need to do is Google the cited document.
The U.S. government became Monetarily Sovereign on August 15, 1971. Unlike the states and local governments (which are monetarily non-sovereign) the U.S. government has the unlimited ability to create its sovereign currency, the dollar.
This means it can pay any bill of any size at any time. It never can run short of dollars. It no longer needs to ask anyone for dollars — not you, not me, not China.
Even if all federal taxes fell to $0, the U.S. could continue to pay its bills, forever.
Eliminate FICA and the federal government still could support Social Security and Medicare for every man, woman and child.
Thus, there is no Social Security crisis; there is no Medicare crisis. The only crisis is the crisis of ignorance.
Those who do not understand Monetary Sovereignty do not understand economics.
you seem to be saying we can all quit working and go on welfare and the government will just print money we can take to the store for all our needs.
But who will be running the store?
thanks for trying.
the world ended today.
welcome to hell.
Those who do not understand Full Faith and Credit of the United States and how that underpins Monetary Sovreignity are the ones that don’t understand international economics.
ignoring the issue of hyperinflation that issuance of an operationally unlimited amount of currency would have on pursuit of a fixed set of goods needed to keep the economic fires burning, why would suppliers of rare earths and manganese and other key commodities even accept payment in what can only be calle Fiat Dollars?
just because someone’s current credit score is 830 doesn’t mean they can write checks withiut end. at some point the recipients of those checks will want to see proof that they can be exchanged for useable goods. and the argument that you have boxes and boxes of blank checks isn’t going to preserve either your Credit or peoples Full Faith in the same.
subtract Faith and Credit and that magical Monetary Sovreignity turns into Momentary Sovreignity.
Bruce, to understand the true meaning of “full faith and credit,” go to: http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/?s=%22full+faith+and+credit%22
I always am amazed at the worry about hyper-infaltion (and the inevitable comparisons with the Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe), since never in its long history, has the U.S. had hyperinflation — not during wars, not during recessions and not during depressions.
But every debt hawk will tell you that hyperinflation is a bigger worry than our current recession and our future depression, both of which we have had many times (on average, one recession every five years.)
By the way, there has been no relationship between federal deficit spending — zero relationship — and inflation, much less hyper-inflation, since 1971, when we became Monetarily Sovereign.
For proof, see: http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/more-thoughts-on-inflation/
no doubt. but you didn’t answer Bruce’s objection.
The fact that we have not had an hyperinflation may mean only that we haven’t tried printing an unlimited amount of money.
i agree with you that deficit worries are hyperinflated at the present time. but that doesn’t make me believe in free money.
Coberly, thank you for your extreme comment.
You seem to be saying we can take money out of people’s pockets by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, aid to education, aid to the poor, food stamps and the thousand other items of federal spending that benefit the lower 99.9% — and still grow the economy.
Please explain how that works given that the formula for GDP is:
GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending – Net Imports.
O.K., if we print enough money and if we ever have full employment, we will begin to have inflation, which we can cure either by raising interest rates or cutting spending.
Meanwhile, we are IN a recession and HEADED FOR a depression — which inevitably are caused by auterity, all over the world. Austerity always, always, always destroy and economy.
So what do the debt-hawks want? Austerity.
It’s absolute madness.
MMT on a a thread on SS….maybe its own post is better. I can ask someone who knows MMT to take us there…but it is not complete as a model yet.
you’d be more interesting if you paid any attention to what i said, have said, about “cutting SS.” and the other issues you mention.
mostly i agree that these are bad things. and that there is no reason for deficit hysteria at this time.
as far as i know MMT is a perfectly sound idea, but you are not making a case for it here.