No SS COLA? Don’t Blame The Democrats

In fact, don’t blame any politician.

The official announcement will soon be made that there will be no Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) for Social Security recipients next year. The announcement will come just before an election that is generally recognized as one that will be tough on Democrats and this announcement will not make the election any easier for them.

The lack of COLA next year marks the second year that there is no COLA and this year was the first. Why are the politicians picking on Social Security recipients? They aren’t. COLA is based on inflation and about 40 years ago Congress made Social Security increases (the COLAs) automatically index to inflation and automatically go into effect. Since there was no inflation the previous year there was no increase in 2010 and since there was no inflation this year there will be no increase for 2011. When inflation does arrive (and it will whether they intend for it to or not) Social Security recipients will get a COLA increase.

Of course, the fact that Democrats are not to blame does not mean the information should not be used against them for political gain. They are in charge and there will be no increase so beat them over the head with that information. Very few people will understand why there is no COLA and why they did not get the increase. Most people who receive Social Security feel entitled to the increases because they have always been there. They will associate the lack of increase with Democrat policies.

It is not like the Democrats don’t play politics with the issue. They sent out checks for $250 to each Social Security recipient this past year to make up for the fact that there was no COLA. There was no Cost of Living Allowance increase because there was no increase in the cost of living but Democrats ignored the law that governs COLA increases and paid recipients anyway. Not only did this cost us millions of dollars that we do not have but it also resulted in over 20 million dollars being sent to dead people and to those serving time in jail.

Government efficiency at its best.

Democrats played politics with Social Security because they know that seniors will be upset and vote against them (seniors are the most reliable voters). They will attempt to do the same this time around. Watch for some statement on the subject just prior to election day.

I personally feel that there should be no increase. The law provides increases when the cost of living goes up and is indexed to inflation. If inflation goes up the recipients get an increase and this has been happening for decades. The law also provides that if there is no inflation then there is no increase. Since we have been in a deflationary cycle, there should be NO increase.

What sense does it make to have a law if they are just going to ignore it?

This issue brings to light a much larger problem and that is letting the government run retirement in the first place.

People on Social Security are at the mercy of the politicians in DC. The government confiscates money in the name of Social Security and then spends that money on its pet projects. It leaves a worthless piece of paper (an IOU) for Social Security. This paper is worthless because the government does not have the money to pay back the debt. When Social Security takes in less than it needs and requires money to be paid on one of those IOUs the federal government must BORROW the money to make the payment. This is all because government looks at Social Security taxes as another pot of money to spend on its pet projects. If the money had been put away and dedicated for Social Security the system would be solvent and there would be no issue but we can never trust government to do this.

This is why each individual should be in charge of his own retirement. People should invest their own money in their own programs based upon what they think they will need for retirement. If you are in charge of your own money then YOU get to decide if you need an increase one year over the next. You get to invest and you are not limited to what some government bureaucrat says you deserve.

And you are not being paid with the money taken from today’s generation or money borrowed from the Chinese.

Social Security should never have been instituted. It is one more way for government to control a segment of the population and it is a Socialist scheme.

What we need is to be able to invest OUR money (it is OURS) and we need to be able to do so without government interference. If a system must be in place to assist those who do not have the ability to save for retirement or those who wish to abrogate that responsibility then it needs to be one that the people themselves control. People need to be able to say where their money gets invested and they need to maintain ownership of it so they can pass it to their heirs when they die. It is not right to work all your life and to pay into SS and then lose it all should you die before drawing any of the money. IT IS YOURS.

A market based system (much like the TSP retirement system federal workers enjoy) would allow people to control their money and they could pass it on when they die.

I know the arguments from the fear mongers who say that the market crash would have wiped out the savings of the elderly. The reforms proposed would not have applied to them and how much worse off could they have been?

The government has no money and it will not be long before something has to be done and no matter what it is it will only be a bandage.

Personal responsibility extends to planning for retirement.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

9 Responses to “No SS COLA? Don’t Blame The Democrats”

  1. Barbara says:

    Well, I have news for you. I am a social security recipient and I sure didn’t receive any $250 check. Also, they say there is no inflation, then why are groceries going up so bad in the stores. I went to get a sick friend some blueberries, but they were $5 for a very small container. How are seniors supposed to afford it?

  2. Mr. Ogre says:

    There’s no inflation, Barbara, because government says so. If inflation were accurately reported, the government-propped up banking system would collapse, and we can’t have that. Oh yes, groceries have increased in price dramatically, and look for that to continue massively as crop failures this year show up in the supermarket. But don’t look for government to admit it, because then they’d be on the hook for a lot of money they can’t print. Sadly, its likely to get worse before it gets better.

    Social Security was a good idea that was destroyed by government. When it was started, it was a system to help those in society that were physically incapable of helping themselves, NOT as a retirement system. In fact, if we want to fix it, I can fix it in one day — simply index the age you received SS benefits to average lifespan when it was created. Just to let you know how it was designed, if we did that, SS benefits would kick in at age EIGHTY-ONE. Yes, that’s who it’s supposed to help — those who are physically infirm at that age. And yes, everyone is not supposed to get it!

    But that’s how it was designed and passed, not how it exists today, as an entitlement making people more dependent on a corrupt and bankrupt government.

  3. Oooh, you said responsibility! That word is taboo! I expect Adam here at any instant to rant about the abuse of the helpless elderly cohort that will have to live on cat food because of your heartlessness.

    • Adam says:

      Don’t you have dissenting opinions to find and delete from your own site? However do you find the time to comment here?

      Sometimes I wonder why you write the things you do here but then I remember how frustrating it is for an intellectual coward such as yourself to see adults debating topics here at Big Dog’s blog.

  4. Mr. Ogre says:

    Wow, Mike. To read what that article and vote mean:

    According to the government, there was no increase in the cost of living last year. Government claims that everything costs the same as last year. Therefore, there is no cost-of-living increase.

    At the same time, government also says that they NEED to give $250 to those on social security because if these people don’t get that $250, THEY WILL DIE because things are getting more expensive. And it’s somehow “fiscally responsible” to give this cash out at a time when the government is completely bankrupt, but won’t admit it.

    Only government can be so completely out of touch that they don’t even see they are arguing with themselves. Wouldn’t it be neat if they were just honest:

    “Today, House leader Pelosi announced that she wanted to give $250 to each senior in the hopes that the small cash payout would be enough to buy a few extra votes in November.”