More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dean Baker

GET UPDATES FROM Dean Baker
 

The Drive to Cut Social Security: Why Are the Gang of Six Scared of Information?

Posted: 07/21/11 05:28 PM ET

A central theme of the Gang of Six's deficit reduction crusade is lowering the annual cost of living for Social Security. They propose to change the formula so that the annual adjustment would be 0.3 percentage points lower than would otherwise be the case.

This cut will add up through time. After 10 years the reduction in benefits will be close to 3 percent. After 20 years it will be close to 6 percent and after 30 years, when beneficiaries are in their 90s, it will be close to 9 percent. A typical beneficiary gets close to $1,100 a month, so the Gang of Six would be taking close to $100 from their monthly check when they are in their 90s.

Since one third of retirees are almost completely dependent on Social Security, this will be felt. Anyone who questions the impact of such cuts should ask Speaker Boehner about a 9 percentage point increase in the top tax rate.

The rationale for the Gang of Six's Social Security cut is that the current inflation index doesn't take account of the fact that people can switch away from goods with rapidly rising prices to goods with slow rising prices. Research from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) shows that accounting for this switching would reduce the inflation rate by about 0.3 percentage points.

However, we know that the elderly have different consumption patterns than the population as a whole. They spend a larger share of their income on health care and less on computers and cell phones. BLS research shows that the rate of inflation experienced by the elderly is actually somewhat higher than the standard index used to adjust Social Security benefits. This research implies that if we are interested in an accurate cost of living adjustment, as the Gang of Six claim, then we might have to increase, rather than decrease, the annual adjustment.

The elderly cost of living index that shows they experience a higher rate of inflation is an experimental index, not a full price index like the other indexes calculated by BLS. However, it could be a full index if the Gang of Six and the rest of Congress wanted it to be. In other words, if the Gang of Six is really interested in a more accurate cost of living adjustment for Social Security, they can propose legislation that would direct BLS to construct a full elderly index. This would let them know whether it is necessary to raise, lower, or leave along the annual cost of living adjustment, to ensure that Social Security checks keep pace with the cost of living.

However the Gang of Six shows no interest in going this route. The only possible conclusion is that the Gang of Six is scared of what a full elderly index might show. In short, the gang of six is scared of the information. They obviously have made the decision to cut Social Security and they are not going to let evidence stand in the way.

 

Follow Dean Baker on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DeanBaker13

 
 
  • Comments
  • 570
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (11 total)
photo
brainsurgery1
Person of Interest
01:20 AM on 07/25/2011
It is as if once Bush proposed privatizing Social Security the repubs/tea baggers have seen to it that the means will justify the end of SS. Destruction of the economy, huge subsidies to private investors, record unemployment, etc provide the means to justify the end of SS and Medicare. Ever since the gigantic failure of private investments there has been a drive to end the prepaid public benefits, evidently, so everyone must go down with the Wall Street casino together.
abhorson
Si Si Chiquita. There's a woman worth her ransom
02:51 AM on 07/24/2011
See if I get this straight - I pay "the gov" 14% of my money (employee-er contribution) for X-years (pretty much 40-45 yrs) ...

If I die early - I get nothing back ... gov gets to keep it.
If I don't die too early - gov promises no guaranteed rate of return, no guaranteed age of benefit, no guaranteed benefit level - can change all these at-will.

Actually - if I live to get the "benefits" (how the HELL can they be called " benefits " !?) - I will almost surely get LESS than I put in (otherwise the ss fund is "bankrupt" and they have to raise age or lower payouts) ...

And people are clamoring for MORE OF THIS ???

I'll give anyone who likes social security 1% more than the government if you start giving me that same amount every month - and to be "funny" I'll invest it all in government bonds that way it's JUST AS SAFE as their offer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
brutalefrank
revenue, revenue wherefore art thou oh revenue.
12:31 AM on 07/24/2011
The main problem is the people making changes (or advocating change) to SSI, have spent most of their life behind a desks, in good paying jobs and keep getting elected no matter their age.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rtx47
08:29 PM on 07/23/2011
Social Security was not supposed to be replacement income. As one gets older hopefully one is living-off ones' principle and other savings.

More importantly, seniors are the responsibility of their children and grandchildren. An school education cost $100,000+ and college education may cost even more.

So rather that expect the govt to hold the financial bag for seniors, its time society expects and demands that children do their share of caring with the govt/ SS as back-up.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimtodd
Unrepentant child of '60s
03:50 PM on 07/23/2011
They call it a bi-partisan commission, but it had no real Democrats on it, only Obama conservadems. I so hope people are not taken in by the puppet show in DC. Neither Obama, the gang of six, nor the GOP/teavangelicals are trying to rebuild the economy. Their actions to date have almost universally served to increase the number of unemployed not reduce it. Things such as raising the retirement age and reducing educational support put more workers into an overcrowded market. When a company wants to reduce long term expenses, they offer early retirement incentives. They don't coerce workers to stay in their jobs longer before retiring. That is just one example, but it illustrates the lack of forethought being exercised by our politicians.
We have some very basic decisions to make as a country and people. They are not complicated. Mostly it comes down to one question, what do we want as the average American life.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fwwest
70 year old grandmother
12:31 PM on 07/23/2011
I meant no "COLA"
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fwwest
70 year old grandmother
12:23 PM on 07/23/2011
There has been "COLA" for Social Security in 3 years!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:48 AM on 07/23/2011
A "Gang" of six?This name...they call themself..does not set a Great Example,in the White House.How about the "Gang"...Of Ignorance! I am on Social Security,I have become Known,at the White House,Lately..Because of the Ignorance that has Happened,within.If the "Gang",of Six...wants to Play "Hardball"....I can do that too!!In a Court of Law!

ICC Court,Name Change
Marinchek
Marn
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
08:38 AM on 07/23/2011
What's the current state of Social Security? Does reading this article improve your current level of personal understanding of the Mother Of All Entitlement Programs? Didn't do it for me. Rewrite, or choose a different information source? Let's have a better breakdown of how Social Security's doing, how good the abuse prevention measures are, and whether we can expect anything to be there in 20 years.  If we want to help ALL Americans, we need to work on lowering basic costs of living, instead of conniving more ways to commit back-door taxpayer abuse by lobbying Congress to shower more dough on people being systematically extorted(seniors now, and in the future). A senior citizen should not be viewed as a govt. disbursement officer or exploitable business opportunity.  How about 40% off for seniors on groceries, meds and rent and insurance and stuff? They've earned it, and giving heavy discounts is another way to skin the livability rat for people in that age group. Heck, make it 50% off. They've done their time.
09:14 AM on 07/26/2011
What's the current state of Social Security?
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/2011/II_A_highlights.html#76460
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim Pasterczyk
Banned!
03:38 AM on 07/23/2011
Well some of them are scared of information because facts have an inherently liberal bias as compared to simple minded faith.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
juna
gardens and organic vegies (veggies)
11:03 PM on 07/22/2011
You can bet that the elderly will not be forgetting these Republican antics on voting day. They will rue the day they ever thought about tampering with Social Security or Medicare. Unless....the voting machines are rigged.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
GaryNMaine
Words offer the means to meaning...
12:12 PM on 07/23/2011
Speaking of elections being 'rigged,' the GOP is working feverishly to eliminate the need for elections.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
juna
gardens and organic vegies (veggies)
10:34 PM on 07/23/2011
Eliminate them altogether? Please explain!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
brutalefrank
revenue, revenue wherefore art thou oh revenue.
12:34 AM on 07/24/2011
only the chosen few will be allowed to vote.
07:07 PM on 07/22/2011
"Since one third of retirees are almost completely dependent on Social Security"

SS was never meant to be like this, maybe it's a good thing that younger people will realize that they should plan for their own retirement and hope SS doesn't go belly up by the time they are of age.
photo
Heartlight3
Every act is an act of self-definition.
11:42 PM on 07/22/2011
Have you ever tried saving for retirement while working for minimum wage?
08:45 AM on 07/23/2011
Have you ever tried saving for retirement while working for twice minimum wage?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justice76
Be the change you wish to see in the world
03:02 AM on 07/23/2011
Exactly! People should depend on pensions from their union jobs. After 30 or 40 year of paying into the system, they certainly deserve it...oh wait, the GOP is trying to destroy all unions.

Well certainly they could depend on pensions that were promised by companies like United Airlines, Delta, IBM, and Pfizer...oh wait, they defaulted on their pensions and or cut millions of dollars from the pension reserve.

Well surely those janitors, housekeepers, food delivery persons, babysitters, store-clerks, waiters, and/or minimum wage employees have been setting aside hefty chunks of their paychecks for retirement into their 401Ks…oh wait, they kind of need what they earn for little things like food, rent, child and healthcare. Besides, those crooks on Wall Street kind of destroyed quite a few 401Ks.

Well of course people could rely upon money that they've invested in real estate. I mean if there is one thing you can depend on in this country it’s that your land will always be worth something...oh yeah, there was that thing about the housing bubble bursting. Something about unscrupulous real estate practices and dishonest/unethical behavior within mortgage lending companies.

Well darn! I’m sure there must be something else out elderly people who are ready to retire. But what on earth could that be?
08:20 AM on 07/23/2011
Well surely Life Insurance will be there if you or your spouse go to the great hereafter. That would help pay for medical care, the funeral and other cuts in Social Security. Oh wait, our life insurance company said they had a clause that I had to say I wanted to keep my insurance past 65 or they could cancel me. I didn't know that, so they cancelled me. Well at least my husband has life insurance. Oh wait! His payments are going to gradually go up to $1,000 a month for his policy of $32,000. I am sure he wouldn't have bought that policy if he had been told that. He bought that policy 30 years ago.

What this country needs is more deregulation of business dealings, do ya think?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kyleewonder777
01:53 PM on 07/23/2011
Thank you for your post justice, you are fanned!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
R Davis
“The truth is rarely pure and never simple.”
04:27 PM on 07/22/2011
I guess more grandparents and great grandparents will be eating dog food.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Morrisfactor
Just a little bent
11:47 AM on 07/23/2011
R Davis-

Geez, have you noticed how expensive dog food has become?

We won't even be able to afford that....
04:06 PM on 07/22/2011
Let's lower the Gang of Six's retirement and health benefits increases by .3% per year for the rest of their lives.

Better still, let's tie their pensions to Soc Sec and their health benefits to Medicare.

After all, they are getting taxpayer-funded benefits. Why shouldn't the taxpayer get a break on THOSE costs?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Grace Note
Is it just me?
10:08 AM on 07/23/2011
seconded!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kyleewonder777
01:55 PM on 07/23/2011
I think that is a great answer, if our public officials were not sitting on top of the pile, retirement wise, on our dollar, and they had to rely on the same system that we do, I think they would have a whole different picture of what retirement is really like
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
firewmn
~now you're play'n with fire~
03:37 PM on 07/22/2011
seniors get cuts while energy company make record profits-
05:38 PM on 07/22/2011
These are two unrelated issues and it makes no sense to compare the two. My property taxes have gone up 40% in 2 years and the public employees in my state are still getting 2-7% raises. Now there are 2 issues that are related.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:25 PM on 07/22/2011
Though I'm not clear on how increases in your property taxes are related to cuts in Social Security?

My understanding is that property tax increases here are primarily due to reductions in funding from the state, which are primarily due to reductions in federal funding and to the Bush recession. But I suppose it's more satisfying to blame it all on teachers and cops?
07:19 PM on 07/22/2011
Bs. 43 Republican senators voted to continue subsidies (that's a flat out cash payment) for oil companies a few weeks ago, now they want to cut SS. Seems related to me. Seems like they want to take my retirement money (and yours) and give it to Texaco.
Go back to sleep.