General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums7 Facts About Retirement in America That Should Make Obama Tremble Before Cutting SS and Medicare
http://www.alternet.org/economy/7-chilling-facts-about-retirement-america-should-make-obama-tremble-cutting-social-security***SNIP
1. Retiring on thin air: In a recent report by the Employee Benefits Research Institute (EBRI), we find that a whopping 57 percent of American workers have managed to put away less than $25,000 for retirement less than the one years annual income for the median American adult. In 2008, that number was 49 percent, and the problem is getting worse every year. Half of American workers are either not too confident or not at all confident that they will be able to make ends meet in their retirement. In her must-read New York Times op-ed, economist Theresa Ghilarducci doesnt mince words or numbers. She estimates that close to half of middle-class workers will be poor or near poor in retirement and reduced to living on a food budget of about $5 a day. That wont even buy a decent bag of cat food.
***SNIP
2. Pension perils: American workers like pensions better than higher incomes, more vacation time and bigger bonuses. And its no wonder: retirees with pensions have far more income security than their pension-less counterparts. In 2011, one out of three older adults enjoyed some form of pension, but that number has been shrinking for decades. Since 1985, 84,350 pension plans have vanished. Corporate pensions have gone the way of the dodo bird and the precious few private pensions that remain are in jeopardy. Public pensions are the targets of cynical austerity hawks who use the excuse of state and municipal budget crises that have little to do with pensions (and much to do with Wall Street) to make war on workers retirements.
***SNIP
3. The 401(k) catastrophe: Its high time to face it: the 401(k) experiment, which started in the 80s, has been a complete disaster. 401(k)s dont even come close to providing the retirement security promised to workers. To expect Americans to morph into finance experts who can evaluate mutual funds and stockmarket choices may be one of the most absurd legacies of the last three decades. And, as Helaine Olen outlines in her book Pound Foolish: Exposing the Dark Side of the Personal Finance Industry, people trying to save for retirement have become a prime target of hustlers who push mutual funds with hidden fees and needless charges which pile up and rob the contributor of hard-earned money.
***SNIP
4. Political games dont wash: Social Security raiders tell us that the program needs to be fixed, with very little to back up their claims. There is nothing wrong with the program now, so they forecast and lets remember how good these same people were at forecasting the financial crisis some kind of future crisis
liberal N proud
(60,347 posts)American workers like pensions better than higher incomes, more vacation time and bigger bonuses.
Well they took away the Pensions and reduced the vacations, with no change in increase in income just screwing us even further into that old age poverty.
pocoloco
(3,180 posts)people have always been the most perfect cash crop with no
problems as long as they are kept piss ignorant.
djean111
(14,255 posts)You honestly think, with all the brains he has, and has surrounded himself with, he doesn't know all this?
dotymed
(5,610 posts)know what they have done to average Americans. They do not care as long as they have their luxury. Please, everyone needs to use the word "oligarchs" to describe these people. Hopefully it will enlighten some of our less political citizens....
UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)He'll leave office convinced that he'll be vindicated in the future.
byeya
(2,842 posts)of their paymasters. The Howard Zinns of the future will tell the truth though.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Barack Obama (D)eceiver
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)It's our money he's gambling with, and he has no right to use social security as a poker chip.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
KG
(28,753 posts)than the rest of us, he doesn't know how much americans depend on SS Medicare.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)... we're paying for it.
And he's not running for another term so why would he give a flying fuck what any of us think, if he ever did before?
Ishoutandscream2
(6,664 posts)Sad, but very true. He and his family are all set.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 8, 2013, 10:17 AM - Edit history (1)
Chi-School, Hayek, Uncle Milty and Martin Feldstein's HBS Folly bullshit has got to go the way of the dodo if America expects to survive. Neoliberalism is killing America's middle/working/poor.
forestpath
(3,102 posts)Divernan
(15,480 posts)"7. Women at risk: Woman were instrumental in getting Obama elected, and yet he is proposing to throw them under the bus. As Manisha Thakor points out, women live longer than men and need more support in old age. Thakor notes that recently, ABC World News Tonight anchor Charlie Gibson reported that when it comes to healthcare, male retirees required $170,000, while female retireres had to come up with $240,000. And yet how are they going to find this money when they retire with two-thirds of the assets of men?"
mother earth
(6,002 posts)weapon of choice is our gov't, our elected politicos, you know...the ones who "represent" us? Oh, that's right, none of that breed is left, what we have is a rogue gov't....hmmm....isn't there a procedure to establish emergency gov't in a situation where the one you thought you had is completely hijacked & broken? (Food for thought, cuz it will probably get to that.) We are being "entertained" by theatrics that produce NOTHING but more gutting of our collective rights & protections & our taxpaying wallet. They have no right to cut SS, why would we agree to something as evil as that, let's vote in a SS increase...like those pay raises they give themselves.
I think a new day is dawning in America, SS is one huge-ass red flag. It's time to wake up & understand our gov't is screwing all of us over, the 99% that is. Believing it still works is like believing in the tooth fairy.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)John McCain, Sarah Palin....
It's the yuppies who have done this to their own generation.
mother earth
(6,002 posts)wealth for all, and then there is greed. Choose well.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Where my parents and my friends parents were and remain RWers who passed on the tradition to my peers. I am seeing a collusion among the materialistic money obsessed Gen xers and their parents.
That's what is happening in Mid Missouri which formerly a swing state has turned dark read as those Gen xers have demographically gained some political momentum.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
Autumn
(45,120 posts)This will never have any effect on him, his wife or his children.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)(Not that anyone would object to being a financial supporter of Monsanto, Dow, GE, Exxon, Microsoft, Lockheed, Halliburton etc and sharing in the rewards when they achieve the goals they push for.)
It gets the same care by them in the same way on its voyage back to you. Makes sense really. There is no honor among thieves.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)He got re-elected. Now he can propose whatever he wants.
He can piss off the 1% if he wants because he doesn't need their money to get re-elected. He can piss off the 99% because he doesn't need our votes.
Now we get to see the real President Obama.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)People simply chose not to look at the obvious.
All one had to do was look at his background and at his stances, when he decided to make them known.
He is the most far-right president in American history.
Skittles
(153,226 posts)instead of being wowed by how awesome he was at GIVING them, they would be more clued in
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)what he said and looked into his background.
He was dead last on my list of Democratic candidates for prez in 2008, even below Gravel.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)after he leaves office to grow his wealth.
And those speaking engagements will make him billions.
Win-the-fight
(47 posts)this is driving the cost of living so high
suffragette
(12,232 posts)Thank you for posting this!
I do agree with other posters about Obama not trembling.
He has continually (except during campaign times) indicated that he agrees with global austerity measures, going so far as to note he is in "violent agreement" that this is the direction to go :http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-obama-g-20-press-conference-toronto-canada
And part of that has been purposefully conflating Social Security with the deficit and introducing decisions at key points (such as the Fiscal Commission) which are aimed at cutting Social Security, just as austerity measures have been doing this globally.
He's made an agreement and keeps taking actions to fulfill it - the problem is that the agreement is not with citizens here, but with financiers and the politicians who are in the club with them.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)I was always scared of him from the time he got the nomination. Something simply didn't sit right with me about him.
He scares me far more than the nutters in the GOP.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)duffyduff
(3,251 posts)BTW, I am more of a Democrat than he is.
You don't kiss the ass of the GOP when they are down. He does it time and time and time again.
A court appointment here, a speech there doesn't change the man's overall neoliberal bent.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)...And what exactly do you mean by "I could tell one Barack from the other"? Where are you going with that comment?
Skittles
(153,226 posts)that is confusing
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)"any Democratic Party program"? That is the stupidest thing I've read on DU in a looooong time.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Try another line.
I am not "concerned" about him at all except for his right-wing leanings.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)is suspicious, to put it kindly. More to the point, it's ludicrous. You're upset, but there's no need to go overboard and start spouting juvenile extreme statements. Esp since there is no evidence that Obama is against Social Security. Quite the contrary.
Maybe you don't understand political parties. See, the President...he's the head of the party he belongs to. Obama upholds the Democratic Party Platform; it was written with his input. Here is Obama's belief regarding Social Security and Medicare:
During their working years, Americans contribute to Social Security in exchange for a promise that they will receive an income in retirement. Unlike those in the other party, we will find a solution to protect Social Security for future generations. We will block Republican efforts to subject Americans' guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market through privatization. We reject approaches that insist that cutting benefits is the only answer. President Obama will also make it easier for Americans to save on their own for retirement and prepare for unforeseen expenses by participating in retirement accounts at work.
The Republican budget plan would end Medicare as we know it. Democrats adamantly oppose any efforts to privatize or voucherize Medicare; unlike our opponents we will not ask seniors to pay thousands of dollars more every year while they watch the value of their Medicare benefits evaporate. Democrats believe that Medicare is a sacred compact with our seniors. Nearly 50 million older Americans and Americans with disabilities rely on Medicare each year, and the new health care law makes Medicare stronger by adding new benefits, fighting fraud, and improving care for patients. And, over 10 years, the law will save the average Medicare beneficiary $4,200. President Obama is already leading the most successful crackdown on health care fraud ever, having already recovered $10 billion from health care scams. We will build on those reforms, not eliminate Medicare's guarantees. The health care law is closing the gap in prescription drug coverage known as the "doughnut hole." More than five million seniors have already saved moneyan average of $600 last yearand the doughnut hole will be closed for good by 2020.
In short, Democrats believe that Social Security and Medicare must be kept strong for seniors, people with disabilities, and future generations. Our opponents have shown a shocking willingness to gut these programs to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest, and we fundamentally reject that approach.
http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform
DemocratsForProgress
(545 posts)by the same poster...
suffragette
(12,232 posts)I still think Cheney is the stuff of nightmares.
And I've supported Obama on choices such as Sotomayor and will continue to do so when he takes a direction consistent with Democratic policies.
But I expected better from him in many areas, which is why I find his New Democrat (like New Labour) stances disheartening, and I will not support those.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)They are strictly neoliberal in content.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)suffragette
(12,232 posts)just like his buddy, Blair.
And realizing that took time for me and disturbs me greatly.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....For all of the ranting and raving here on DU, it must be sitting on the President's desk awaiting his signature.
Oh, wait....there is NO legislation?
The House GOP Tea-Nazis won't agree to additional taxes on the wealthy?
The Senate Dems will never agree to cutting earned benefit programs?
Hmmm. Well, then....
durablend
(7,465 posts)Granny thanks you people for 'almost-but not quite' throwing her under the bus.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)Skittles
(153,226 posts)got it
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)Skittles
(153,226 posts)OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....are either retired or thinking about retiring. The Senate Dems are protecting those benefits while the House GOP Tea-Nazis are trying to take them away.
Who do you think those GOP voters described above will lean toward in 2014....Dem candidates, or the other guys?
This isn't gin rummy, this is Big Boy politics. You pull votes wherever you can, and however you can.
Skittles
(153,226 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 8, 2013, 11:31 PM - Edit history (1)
it should not be gin rummy OR "BIG BOY POLITICS" - this is POOR LEADERSHIP
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....the GOP Tea-Nazis who continue to lose voters by pushing extremely unpopular issues and alienating minorities?
Think about it. It'll come to you eventually, unless you're so locked into Obama-hating that you can't see the forest for the trees.
Skittles
(153,226 posts)not at all - I DO NOT HATE SOMEONE I VOTED FOR TWICE. GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD. WE SIMPLY WANT A DEMOCRAT TO FIGHT LIKE A DEMOCRAT!!!!
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....to ensure that we win the all-important mid-term elections in 2014. Would you like to go back to the way we fought in 2010 and got our butts kicked?
Wedge issues are the key, whether you want to believe that or not.
By the way, don't you think going all-caps is a little juvenile?
Skittles
(153,226 posts)I cannot deal with someone who is more offended by capital letters than by a Dem prez playing with SS and Medicare. BYE!
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I cannot believe that anyone here would call SS a 'wedge issue'!! Are you trying to defend the president's political disaster with this? Because if so, you are failing as all you are doing is confirming what so many millions of Americans are so angry about. So he DOES view SS as nothing but a 'wedge issue' after all.
Thanks, I like to be as fair as possible, and want to be sure I am not judging someone wrongfully, but you have put my mind at rest. Anyone who views SS as a 'wedge issue' does not belong in politics, let alone the WH.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)anything to do with the deficit. I take advice from people I respect, mainly Democrats who care about the elderly, the poor, the disabled and dependent children.
Although it is ironic now to see Republicans grabbing this issue handed to them by a Democratic president, and claiming, as predicted, that it is THEY who will protect SS.
I won't be taking any breaks from anywhere until we remove from Congress every, last Turd Wayer who is working to destroy SS.
You keep on posting here. I wouldn't presume to give you any advice as I am confident that thankfully, those who support this terrible proposal are vastly in the minority and it's probably good to know the arguments they plan to make in defense of this harmful proposal.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)In which Party?
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)moves we keep hearing about. As Obama himself said, rather condescendingly I thought at the time, but then I'm not too bright I suppose 'the people do not understand economics'. Really, did he really think we didn't know what a 'derivative' was and does he really think we don't understand what 'Chained CPI' is. I wonder where he got that idea from. He appears to be surrounded by people who have no clue about economics himself. Maybe he got the idea from them.
Here's what I 'get'. No Democrat will ever even suggest cuts to SS, no matter what they call them, no matter whether they are 'just playing games' or 'bluffing' or 'playing chess'. No Democrat will do what even Republicans are afraid to do.
SS is a MAJOR political issue. It is no 'wedge' issue. It is one of the most important, up front issues in this country. Maybe if you think about it for a while, you'll 'get' why that is.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....elections, but you and others are too busy running around screaming "The sky is falling!" to be objective about what you're seeing and/or hearing.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)this country's most vulnerable citizens, it is a primary issue.
And if it is a 'vote pulling' issue, then why is a Democrat handing it to the Republicans to use against Democrats? As predicted, they have already begun to do just that. Bachman being to first to grab it and claim that SHE will protect SS from democrats who are willing to cut benefits?
Where is your logic here? Even if we didn't care about the millions of now frightened seniors, how on earth does it benefit Democrats to be the ones to open the door to the cutting of SS benefits, and worse, to FEED the lie that Republicans have been telling, that SS had anything to do with the deficit?? Why on earth would Democrats want to do that? They have now tied SS to the Deficit. That is a LIE! SS had nothing to do with the deficit.
There is no room to be objective about this kind of harm. We have spent years refuting the lies about SS. NOW we have a Democrat basically confirming the lie that SS is in anyway tied to the Deficit.
And unless the President has retracted that offer, I don't understand why you are not running around like every other democrat, 'screaming 'The sky is falling'. I'm sure you were doing so when Bush tried to pull his nonsense with SS. Did you accuse us of screaming back then, or were you outraged like every other Democrat, and even some Republicans?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)And, if I think really hard about it, I'd conclude that before is better than after.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)concerned about?
Unless you're telling us that this President doesn't care what the people who elected him think?
neverforget
(9,437 posts)Obama Budget to Include Cuts to Programs in Hopes of Deal
WASHINGTON President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say.
In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Mr. Obama on Wednesday will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on arrival. Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to Speaker John A. Boehner late last year, before Mr. Boehner abandoned negotiations in opposition to the presidents demand for higher taxes from wealthy individuals and some corporations.
....
Besides the tax increases that most Republicans continue to oppose, Mr. Obamas budget will propose a new inflation formula that would have the effect of reducing cost-of-living payments for Social Security benefits, though with financial protections for low-income and very old beneficiaries, administration officials said. The idea, known as chained C.P.I., has infuriated some Democrats and advocacy groups to Mr. Obamas left, and they have already mobilized in opposition.
....
Proposed in his Budget to Congress.....
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)...it will never be approved by the Senate Dems (no cuts to earned benefits), or the House GOPers (no tax increases on the wealthy).
neverforget
(9,437 posts)so be it.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)neverforget
(9,437 posts)SSI has nothing to do with the deficit or debt. It makes no political sense to piss off your base on something as dear to Americans as SSI. What is gained by offering Chained CPI to the Republicans? Nothing but it does give Pete Petersen, Erskin Bowles, Alan Simpsons, Republicans and the 1% who are raping this country blind tingles in their spines.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....and that's just not going to happen.
I don't get why you and others don't see what the President offered as a wedge issue designed to strip voters away from the GOP.
neverforget
(9,437 posts)"See! Democrats want to cut Social Security!" Piss off seniors and feed into the meme that Social Security is contributing to the deficit. Fucking brilliant indeed.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)Just curious, but when you use the word "base" to whom are you referring?
neverforget
(9,437 posts)On the news that President Obamas budget indeed contains a highly unpopular proposal for Social Security cuts known as chained CPI, a new poll by the American Association of Retired Persons shows us exactly how unpopular it is.
The AARP reveals that 70 percent of voters age 50-plus oppose the use of the chained CPI to cut benefits, and two-thirds of them including 60 percent of Republicans say they would be considerably less likely to support a congressional candidate if he or she backed a new way of calculating consumer prices. And 84 percent of voters over 50 say Social Security has no place in budget-deficit discussions, since it is self-financed.
.......
The chained CPI reduction snowballs over time and would increase taxes for most taxpayers at the same time that it cuts benefits for children, veterans, widows, retirees, and people with disabilities, said AARP executive vice president Nancy LeaMond in a statement. As this survey shows, older Americans oppose the chained CPI and theyve historically made their opinions known to their elected officials.
Little attention has focused on the way the chained CPI would also cut benefits for disabled veterans, as well as widows and children whove lost a parent. Using chained CPI to calculate veterans benefits is even less popular than using it to calculate seniors checks: Almost 80 percent of those surveyed opposed it.
........
Glad you're okay with it because that's all that matters. How it affects you.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)Point out where I said I liked the concept of Chained CPI anywhere on this board.
You assumed I'm okay with it because I refuse to run in circles like some folks on DU soiling my underwear shouting "The sky is falling!"
None of you can state categorically that legislation containing cuts to SS (or any other earned benefit), and tax increases for the wealthy will ever be packaged as a bill to be placed on the President's desk for signature. Instead, you keep rating and raving about being betrayed by the President, when nothing of the sort has resulted in any signed law to that effect.
But, please, continue running in circles filling your underwear because that's all that matters, right?
neverforget
(9,437 posts)and that's what is amazing.
Not only that, but linking SSI to the deficit is irrational, stupid and dumb beyond belief politics since it has nothing to do with the deficit. If you can explain that to me, then I might listen as to why this is a great idea. I have yet to hear a rational explanation other than the Republicans won't go for it, therefore it's cool. And depending on Republicans to not accept an offer is boneheaded. What if they call his bluff?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)In fact in one company the tax payers had to pick up the tab of $44m. Workers too less wages in order to negotiate for a pension and then raiders steal the money from the fund. Unless this thieves are made to pay back these finds it is not going to stop. Without pensions and savings accounts ir will be difficult to survive on the present as payments.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)their own 401ks. They buy into indpendendent funds...not held by the employer or the 401k management company. If you buy a Vanguard fund in a 401k, YOU are listed as the owner. Much harder to steal it. But it's the fees in teh 401k plan that'll get you. BUT Obama administration changed the law AND STARTING LAST YEAR 401Ks HAD TO START TELLING YOU OUTRIGHT HOW MUCH THE FEES IN YOUR 401K ARE.
Say thank you to Obama.
Skittles
(153,226 posts)they just have to TELL YOU HOW MUCH THEY STEAL
forestpath
(3,102 posts)SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)They're all set for life. What do they care about the rest of us?
Matariki
(18,775 posts)this phrase needs to be repeated loud and often. I really and truly think this is the main crux of the problem.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)They've stolen enough.
djean111
(14,255 posts)cuts as a toy to dangle in front of the GOP, but that same stupid voting public will be all smart'n'savvy'n'all and ignore the fact that a DEMOCRAT proposed the cuts to Social Security, come election time.
This would include, of course, the people with signs that say "keep your government hands out of my Medicare".
Hey, I have a really nice bridge over San Francisco Bay that I can sell you - you pay for the upkeep, and pay to drive over it, and I'll keep the tolls and raise the tolls and close some lanes or the entire bridge any time I feel like it.
But I will name it after you!!!!!!!!
What is puzzling is the almost vociferous defense of Obama - is he running again for something? Because this is a pretty stupid way to go about it - at this point he is doing the job of that guy who writes campaign slop for the GOP - Frank something.
Is he going to take all the Dems in Congress for rides on Air Force One and explain about his Legacy?
And it is not as if the tide of oh, Obama would never actually cut social security won't recede and be replaced with oh, it is not really a cut or oh, those Boomers have it too easy or some such other blatant fucking lies. Just like watching Freepers turn on a dime.
"He would never do that, ever! Until he does, and then it is a GOOD thing.
He is quite sincere, for once, saying he is going to keep those cuts on the table, until someone eats them.
In my opinion, Obama is going to be responsible for any 2014 losses - because telling people the Democrats want to cut Social Security seems a splendid way to get people to the polls. Cat Food Commission is us.
I have voted Democrat all my life. Obama is no Democrat. Looks like all that's left is whining that Romney would have been worse. Some legacy. Not as bad as Romney. I am ready for a new party, since the one I grew up with has evidently been sold to Wall Street.