About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
 William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

Special Elections
- Strafford 03Bob Perry
- Hills 03Peter Leishman

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

No Need to Worry About Social Security

by: susanthe

Tue Mar 22, 2011 at 18:00:00 PM EDT
Nancy Altman, former aide to Alan Greenspan, spoke in Concord, NH last night. From the Concord Monitor:

"I object to the idea of fixing it, because Social Security isn't broken," she told the Monitor, adding that long-term projections show "a manageable but significant shortfall" that is one of the challenges to be addressed.

"We should address them, but not in a climate where young people don't think they're going to get benefits, that people don't think it's affordable. . . . It's a political question," she said.

The Social Security program, created in 1935, is expected to cost more than it takes in from taxes from 2015 onward. In 2037, the program's trustees said last year, its trust funds will be exhausted. At that point, tax revenue is expected to cover only about 78 percent of benefits.

A crisis is when you see a moose running out in front of your car. A crisis isn't something that's over 25 years away. There's plenty of time to tweak Social Security.  
susanthe :: No Need to Worry About Social Security
Altman said last night that her preferred solvency solution is to have wealthy Americans "contribute somewhat more," raising the cap on payroll deductions.

Or we could eliminate the cap altogether.

Here's where our legislators stand:  

Charlie Bass supported Bush's plan to privatize Social Security, before he was booted out of office in 2006.  Senator Jeanne Shaheen was and is opposed to turning the Social Security trust fund over to Wall St.

New Congressman Frank Guinta doesn't want his kids to know what Social Security is.

New Senator Kelly Ayotte is practiced at the art of not taking position :

Ayotte said we should keep "all ideas on the table" when it comes to reforming Social Security.

cross posted at http://susanthebruce.blogspot....

this post is also  part of the Social Security Works project to defend Social Security
Tags: , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
No Need to Worry About Social Security | 11 comments
A GOP stance I agree with? (0.00 / 0)
There's one 'solution' I agree with: means testing. We already do it in our tax code, why not with Social Security? To be honest, I'm surprised this is not a Democratic idea...

The real problem is the system is no longer (or close to no longer) taking in more revenue than it pays out, and will rely on the repayment of Federal government loans (assets to Social Security) to remain cash flow positive. The right's real point of contention is they don't want to pay those loans back.

Aaron / Deering. Kuster 2012: http://www.kusterforcongress.com/

the beauty of Social Security (4.00 / 3)
is simple. Everyone pays in = everyone benefits.

There's a reason why means testing is a bad idea. Means testing turns Social Security from a program that everyone benefits from into welfare. Turning it into welfare makes it easy to kill - and that's the goal of the folks who advocate for it.  

[ Parent ]
This is one place left (4.00 / 1)
where we are all in this together.  Don't take that away or we will have lost whatever we have of that value, being a community where we can count on each other.  
[ Parent ]
means testing is a bad idea (0.00 / 0)
What Susan said. And also, if it is means tested, then many people who qualify for it but don't want to think of themselves as on welfare, or don't want to go through the hassles sure to be put in place, won't take it, even though they earned it. There are too many seniors living with too few resources as it is.

Social Security is not the problem.  

[ Parent ]
Good point (4.00 / 2)
Hadn't thought of their end game there. Plus, I can imagine the craziness that would be the means test....

Aaron / Deering. Kuster 2012: http://www.kusterforcongress.com/

[ Parent ]
Be aware that Social Security benefits (0.00 / 0)
are already taxed like ordinary income. A chunk of your benefits - a bigger chunk, up to 85% of them - gets taxed at the same rate as the rest of your retirement money, depending on how much retirement money you've got.

So: George H.W. Bush is being taxed on 85% of his Social Security check.

[ Parent ]
There isn't plenty of time (4.00 / 2)
when Wall Street is waiting for all that money!
Solid stuff (4.00 / 1)
This is the same story I here from... pretty much every other economist who ever talks about social security. It's probably true.

I wish someone would inform the social security demagogues already.

On another note, if we decide to let in more young, productive immigrants, who pay into the system, we might not have to raise anyone's taxes.

Be fiscally responsible: nhecon.blogspot.com

I wish (0.00 / 0)
they would stop including social security as a budget expense, when it's really a stand-alone system. The only budget expense is repaying loans to the trust fund.

Aaron / Deering. Kuster 2012: http://www.kusterforcongress.com/

[ Parent ]
IIRC, happened under LBJ (0.00 / 0)
to help obscure the costs of the Vietnam War.

But I could be a dupe of the media on that...

[ Parent ]
Might be a good idea (0.00 / 0)
to grow the economy a bit (a lot!) before we invite more immigrants.  Oh, yes, and bring some good paying jobs back to this country.  Lots of work to move from our deadly fossil fuel energy economy to one that depends on renewables.

If I could repeat a complaint that I have to say regularly, we know how to fix all our problems, we have the money to do it (in the wrong pockets right now, but that can be fixed), all we lack is the will.  The political will.

[ Parent ]
No Need to Worry About Social Security | 11 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox