So what do you think about Obama's plan to make a special one-time $250 payment to Social Security recipients in lieu of a cost-of-living adjustment for 2010? I mean it kind of seems like moving the goalposts, or heads you win tails I lose, or something. After all, if you're going to index a benefit to the CPI, sometimes you win (like last year, when there was a 5.3% COLA raise, despite the fact that energy - the major inflation driver - is not as big an expense for retirees as it is for workers) and sometimes you lose (like this year).
On the other hand, most retirees, survivors, and disabled folks are not able to make the kinds of adjustments to income and spending that the rest of us do.
What do you think?
Friday, October 16, 2009
$250 for Seniors
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm not against it, actually. But it IS a publicity stunt because too many seniors think they are somehow being "cheated" by not getting a small raise in 2010--they aren't, of course, for all the reasons you pointed out. But it looks that way due to the increase in medicare premiums, which results not in a freeze on SS payments, but a slight reduction. It is sad that seniors as a group are so vulnerable to rightwing distortions of any policy initiated by the Democrats. I guess I don't blame the Dems or Obama for deciding to throw money rather than facts at the problem.
I'm against it, for the "moving the goal posts" reason you cite and the fact that we would be digging ourselves even deeper into debt.
And if I'm reading correctly in a new NYT article (Medicare Premiums to Rise 15% as Costs Jump - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/health/policy/20health.html?hp), nearly three-fourths of Medicare beneficiaries will not see any rise in premiums this year regardless:
"About 12 million people, or 27 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries, will have to pay higher premiums. The other 73 percent will be shielded from the increase because, under federal law, their Medicare premiums cannot go up more than the increase in their Social Security benefits."
So that makes it even harder to justify the $250.
I would be opposed to any payout intended to cover rising premiums. Health care costs are escalating out of control. Beneficiaries need to be part of the solution. That will not happen if they are shielded from realistic premiums.
Hi,
I want to make one guest-post in your blog, if I have your permission. The post contains 250 words above and totally unique on the basis of content.
Please contact me at diana.perkins1983(at)gmail(dot)com soon. Moreover, I will place your link in one of my finance PR 2/3 sites.
Post a Comment