Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Lower gas prices means no Social Security increase next year
Don't forget the grocery store prices, and my wallet screams anytime we look at costs on a restaurant menu. There are times that I don't know how a young couple with two children can afford a meal out at a middle of the line restaurant.
Yes, next year the double squeeze is coming, and it won't be stealthy--- one from the top, one from the bottom, with a lot of tiny cuts and stabs to come later. Health care insurance premium increases (next month?) should bring the picture more in focus, with increased co-pays and deductibles. These will be accompanied by a bunch of "sorries" and "unfortunates."
"Disinflation" my ass.As if we were born yesterday..... but what are ya gonna do?
Yes, next year the double squeeze is coming, and it won't be stealthy--- one from the top, one from the bottom, with a lot of tiny cuts and stabs to come later. Health care insurance premium increases (next month?) should bring the picture more in focus, with increased co-pays and deductibles. These will be accompanied by a bunch of "sorries" and "unfortunates."
"Disinflation" my ass.As if we were born yesterday..... but what are ya gonna do?
New York Times Headline: Women, children and minorities hurt the most.
@hank You have that profligate seniors problem, too? Just looking at the way they drive tells you all you need to know about 'em, hogging 2 lanes instead of one whenever they take a hank-ering.
"Social Security benefits would have got cost-of-living boost if elderly inflation was used... Social Security recipients miss out on $44 a month due to inflation measure"
@little5bee- The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from! Take a number from here... take a number from there... look! we proved it!!
The same statistical sleight-of-hand as discussed in the "The Poor in the US Are Richer than the Middle Class in Much of Europe" thread. There is an entire cohort of statisticians who will pimp for anyone willing to pay them to prove anything. "Smoking is good for you!" "The earth isn't warming!"
It is quite possible, in fact very likely that government understands their inflation numbers don't coincide with the spending habits of social security recipients. So isn't using the existing formula an intentional way of cutting social security benefits? Absolutely. Easier then then trying to increase the payroll income cap, wouldn't you say? Try getting congress to agree that's a good idea.
The Marketwatch column confuses "elderly inflation" with inflation experienced by SS recipients (and also with CPI-E).
Here's SSA's page discussing the objective of cost of living adjustments, and how they relate to price indexes.
Among other things, it points out that living expense changes and price changes are not identical. That elderly and SS recipients are two different cohorts (1/5 of SS recipients are under age 62, and 1/5 of seniors do not receive SS). That patterns of medical expenses are different for seniors (and not incorporated into price indexes, including CPI-E). And so on.
If you want to get right to the section on limitations and problems with CPI-E, here's a link to the section within the page.
So much of the discussion (not here, of course) amounts to smoke and mirrors, or what OJ wrote, "sleight of hand".
Another example. The "hold harmless" rule saying that your SS check cannot go down because of Medicare increases doesn't prevent the value of that check from decreasing. In fact, the value of that check will decrease in 2017, assuming any COLA. That's because the net dollar amount will not increase (any increase will be offset by an increase in Medicare premiums). So nominal amount will not drop, but value will due to inflation.
If it looks like there's a lot of grumbling about no SS increases this year (when inflation is low), wait until next year or whenever inflation picks up, and the SS checks still don't go up (after Medicare deductions). But, hey, the nominal amounts won't drop. Smoke and mirrors.
"If it looks like there's a lot of grumbling about no SS increases"
It would be really interesting to know what percentage of the SS grumblers also vote for politicians who promise "smaller government and absolutely no tax increases".
"If it looks like there's a lot of grumbling about no SS increases"
It would be really interesting to know what percentage of the SS grumblers also vote for politicians who promise "smaller government and absolutely no tax increases".
Most people vote for their for their self interest. At my age I'm voting for SS increases, and kicking the can down the road ... about 25 years down the road.
When Social Security begins to look as bad as some of our roads in Michigan, than I'll start to grumble.
Agree with OJ - promising to cut taxes seems like an easy sell for today's politicians. Umm ... do folks really make the "connect" between lower taxes and decreased services? I rather doubt it.
I suppose, if one lived long enough, and these stealth money grabs continued unabated, it could get to the point where one would just not file a return for a couple of years to buck-up one's margins, so to speak, to make ends meet. And then hope the call didn't come for awhile, for the reckoning, whereupon one might end up like Peter's Schiff's father:
Comments
Yes, absolutely unreal. Scary, actually.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-cost-of-living-increase-for-social-security-in-2016-2015-10-15
"Disinflation" my ass.
New York Times Headline: Women, children and minorities hurt the most.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/15/us-retirement-medicare-cola-idUSKCN0S925S20151015?feedType=nl&feedName=PersonalFinance
nhold-harmless-rule-protects-social-security-from-medicare-premium-increases
@little5bee- The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from! Take a number from here... take a number from there... look! we proved it!!
The same statistical sleight-of-hand as discussed in the "The Poor in the US Are Richer than the Middle Class in Much of Europe" thread. There is an entire cohort of statisticians who will pimp for anyone willing to pay them to prove anything. "Smoking is good for you!" "The earth isn't warming!"
Here's SSA's page discussing the objective of cost of living adjustments, and how they relate to price indexes.
Among other things, it points out that living expense changes and price changes are not identical. That elderly and SS recipients are two different cohorts (1/5 of SS recipients are under age 62, and 1/5 of seniors do not receive SS). That patterns of medical expenses are different for seniors (and not incorporated into price indexes, including CPI-E). And so on.
If you want to get right to the section on limitations and problems with CPI-E, here's a link to the section within the page.
So much of the discussion (not here, of course) amounts to smoke and mirrors, or what OJ wrote, "sleight of hand".
Another example. The "hold harmless" rule saying that your SS check cannot go down because of Medicare increases doesn't prevent the value of that check from decreasing. In fact, the value of that check will decrease in 2017, assuming any COLA. That's because the net dollar amount will not increase (any increase will be offset by an increase in Medicare premiums). So nominal amount will not drop, but value will due to inflation.
If it looks like there's a lot of grumbling about no SS increases this year (when inflation is low), wait until next year or whenever inflation picks up, and the SS checks still don't go up (after Medicare deductions). But, hey, the nominal amounts won't drop. Smoke and mirrors.
It would be really interesting to know what percentage of the SS grumblers also vote for politicians who promise "smaller government and absolutely no tax increases".
and kicking the can down the road ... about 25 years down the road.
Agree with OJ - promising to cut taxes seems like an easy sell for today's politicians. Umm ... do folks really make the "connect" between lower taxes and decreased services? I rather doubt it.
http://www.schiffradio.com/death-of-a-patriot/
(caution: if you're having a bummer of a day, you should probably put off reading this until you're having a better one)