2016 Postmortem

flpoljunkie

(26,184 posts) Thu Feb 7, 2013, 05:52 PM Feb 2013

So-Called Social Security ‘Crisis’ Solved With Facts

So-Called Social Security ‘Crisis’ Solved With Facts

February 6th, 2013 3:08 pm
Jason Sattler

If you’ve been following the debate over a so-called “grand bargain” to cut the long-term deficit, you may have been surprised to hear Social Security mentioned by both the GOP and the president, as if the program is part of what Republicans call our “spending problem.” It isn’t.

“Under the law Social Security is not supposed to be part of the budget,” writes Dean Baker, an economist and the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “It is an entirely separate program financed on its own.”

And as a self-funded program, it has sufficient funds to pay full benefits until 2033. After that, it is funded to pay 75 percent of obligated benefits.

Raising (actually eliminating it according to the referenced study) the cap on taxed income over 10 years is the single most popular proposal to help fund the program fully for the foreseeable future. This option is far more popular than raising the retirement age to 67, another option that has been discussed in the “grand bargain.”

read more...

http://www.nationalmemo.com/so-called-socia-security-crisis-solved-with-facts/

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So-Called Social Security ‘Crisis’ Solved With Facts (Original Post) flpoljunkie Feb 2013 OP

President Obama isn't concerned about facts...he cares about "balance." You know, the kind of forestpath Feb 2013 #1

The president has not considered raising the Social Security eligibility age. flpoljunkie Feb 2013 #2

I didn't say he did. But he does want to make sure that the older SS recipients get, the forestpath Feb 2013 #4

So far obama2terms Feb 2013 #3

So last term jinx1 Feb 2013 #5

"raising the retirement age to 67"? Thor_MN Feb 2013 #6

Don't raise the retirement age... av8r1998 Feb 2013 #8

Raising the retirement age to 70 would reduce monthly benefits by 21% for future retirees flpoljunkie Feb 2013 #9

??? ^^^ av8r1998 Feb 2013 #10

You're right. The suggestion has been to raise full retirement age to 68 or 70. flpoljunkie Feb 2013 #11

It already is 67! It's Medicare that is still age 65 for eligibility. SharonAnn Feb 2013 #12

. blkmusclmachine Feb 2013 #7

forestpath

(3,102 posts)

1. President Obama isn't concerned about facts...he cares about "balance." You know, the kind of

Reply to flpoljunkie (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 06:34 PM

Feb 2013

"balance" where an 80-year old in a cold room saves up to buy a can of beans while a rich CEO can buy all the gourmet food he wants.

flpoljunkie

(26,184 posts)

2. The president has not considered raising the Social Security eligibility age.

Reply to forestpath (Reply #1)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 06:44 PM

Feb 2013

forestpath

(3,102 posts)

4. I didn't say he did. But he does want to make sure that the older SS recipients get, the

Reply to flpoljunkie (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 07:49 PM

Feb 2013

less SS they will get, which is indefensible.

obama2terms

(563 posts)

3. So far

Reply to forestpath (Reply #1)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 07:37 PM

Feb 2013

Obama hasn't touched Social Security, he put on the table during the fiscal cliff dealings but that wasn't part of the final deal.

jinx1

(45 posts)

5. So last term

Reply to flpoljunkie (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 08:26 PM

Feb 2013

The president was willing to lead them to the water, let them see themselves and them watch them walk away as fast as possible. This term he won't even take them to the water, he is done with their disturbing means of negotiation. For that reason he is not interested in negotiating with them when they get "STUPID"!

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)

6. "raising the retirement age to 67"?

Reply to flpoljunkie (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 08:36 PM

Feb 2013

For people my age, and anyone younger, it already is.

av8r1998

(265 posts)

8. Don't raise the retirement age...

Reply to Thor_MN (Reply #6)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 09:02 PM

Feb 2013

Or maybe raise the retirement age?
I don't know.

I do know that when the program was conceived of, life expectancy was much shorter than it is now.

Social Security will need to change. That could mean a lot of things but as life expectancy goes up and retirement age doesn't, the next generation gets deeper and deeper in the hole to their parents.
That's not a sustainable path, by any math.

It will require more revenue, better planning, or a smaller obligation.

That's just simple math.

flpoljunkie

(26,184 posts)

9. Raising the retirement age to 70 would reduce monthly benefits by 21% for future retirees

Reply to av8r1998 (Reply #8)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 10:28 AM

Feb 2013

Raising the retirement age to 70 would reduce monthly benefits by 21% for future retirees. It would reduce Social Security's 75 year financing gap by 25%. This compares unfavorably to eliminating the earnings cap over 10 years--which reduces the shortfall by 71% over 75 years.

http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/files/research/What_Do_Americans_Want.pdf (p. 13)

av8r1998

(265 posts)

10. ??? ^^^

Reply to flpoljunkie (Reply #9)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 10:42 AM

Feb 2013

In aggregate or by individual?
Not sure I understand, please clarify

And is this based on current life expectancy? Or a calculation of rising life expectancy?
Inflation adjusted, in real dollars, or absolute dollars?
Or ... maybe that's all in the link that I can't read on my phone.