SS COLA's

Discussion in 'Social Security' started by waltky, Oct 17, 2015.

  1. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,073
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Granny still out atta mailbox waitin' fer dat 2nd stimulus check...
    :grandma:
    No Yearly Increase for Social Security Recipients
    Saturday, October 17, 2015 - There is tough economic news Friday for those dependent on Social Security.
     
  2. Alucard

    Alucard New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wish there could have been a yearly increase for 2016 for Social Security.
     
  3. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,239
    Likes Received:
    924
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The last column shows the annual average inflation rate in the US...the average of this column is 2.23%

    2000 2.7 3.2 3.8 3.1 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4
    2001 3.7 3.5 2.9 3.3 3.6 3.2 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.1 1.9 1.6 2.8
    2002 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.6 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.8 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 1.6
    2003 2.6 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.9 2.3
    2004 1.9 1.7 1.7 2.3 3.1 3.3 3.0 2.7 2.5 3.2 3.5 3.3 2.7
    2005 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.5 2.8 2.5 3.2 3.6 4.7 4.3 3.5 3.4 3.4
    2006 4.0 3.6 3.4 3.5 4.2 4.3 4.1 3.8 2.1 1.3 2.0 2.5 3.2
    2007 2.1 2.4 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.0 2.8 3.5 4.3 4.1 2.8
    2008 4.3 4.0 4.0 3.9 4.2 5.0 5.6 5.4 4.9 3.7 1.1 0.1 3.8
    2009 0.0 0.2 -0.4 -0.7 -1.3 -1.4 -2.1 -1.5 -1.3 -0.2 1.8 2.7 -0.4
    2010 2.6 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.6
    2011 1.6 2.1 2.7 3.2 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.0 3.2
    2012 2.9 2.9 2.7 2.3 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.2 1.8 1.7 2.1
    2013 1.6 2.0 1.5 1.1 1.4 1.8 2.0 1.5 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.5
    2014 1.6 1.1 1.5 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.3 0.8 1.6
    2015 -0.1 0.0 -0.1 -0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.1

    These are the COLA's...the average is 2.43%

    January 2000 -- 2.5%
    January 2001 -- 3.5%
    January 2002 -- 2.6%
    January 2003 -- 1.4%
    January 2004 -- 2.1%
    January 2005 -- 2.7%
    January 2006 -- 4.1%
    January 2007 -- 3.3%
    January 2008 -- 2.3%
    January 2009 -- 5.8%
    January 2010 -- 0.0%
    January 2011 -- 0.0%
    January 2012 -- 3.6%
    January 2013 -- 1.7%
    January 2014 -- 1.5%
    January 2015 -- 1.7%


    So, the government has graciously given Americans an extra .20% during the past 16 years! This is 1/5th of 1%! For example, if a person was receiving $1000 per month in 2000, in 2016 the government gave Americans $2 extra dollars per payment (1% of $1000 = $10/5 = $2)! Of course, we can read any number of scholarly articles that propose the government's CPI inflation rates are grossly understated...after all...the government has a great incentive to understate inflation...
     
  4. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,239
    Likes Received:
    924
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For compassionate reasons more than logical and budgetary reasons, I wonder the pros and cons of a one-time process to increase SS benefits 2% plus the CPI rate for five consecutive years? And I'm only talking about SS recipients over retirement age and not including SSI, etc. I have no idea so I'm 100% guessing here, but assuming the average SS payout is $12,000 per year, and that we have 40 million SS recipients over retirement age, this comes to $480 billion, so the mandatory 2% increase per year would amount to $9.6 billion per year. Over five years this would be $48 billion. On average for the next few years the US is spending $4 trillion each year so $9.6 billion extra for SS would amount to about .24%, or 1/4th of 1%, of the annual US budget.
     
  5. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,613
    Likes Received:
    2,038
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US has a bad habit of spending every dollar in new revenue like 4 or 5 times in each budget in case you haven't noticed.
     
  6. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,239
    Likes Received:
    924
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I fully understand our deficit-debt issues and prefer the nation quickly become fiscally responsible. However, giving SS recipients a 2% increase for five years, assuming this group of 40 million Americans deserved the increase, can be accomplished without creating more debt...it all comes down to how we prioritize the spending. As a nation we don't have a problem pissing away $9.6 billion per year on Homeland Security, or Defense spending, or supporting foreign nations so I'm guessing lots more can be accomplished for our citizens and economy simply by better prioritization of spending...
     
  7. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,613
    Likes Received:
    2,038
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sounds more like Baby Boomers want to be burped than anything economically necessary. Now if it were used to up payments for the lowest income recipients like women who stayed at home, may be I would be interested in it.
     
  8. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,239
    Likes Received:
    924
    Trophy Points:
    113
    SS recipients are some of the poorest people in the US...most of them with zero chance of working or earning additional income...yet they remain consumers until the day they die...begrudging this group of people a 2% increase is crazy! People who earned SS worked, supported the nation, paid taxes and deserve the best treatment we can give them. The same might apply to others but my example was only about SS recipients...
     
  9. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,613
    Likes Received:
    2,038
    Trophy Points:
    113
    SS recipients are also some of the wealthiest people in the US. That you do not want to means test to make sure only the poor SS recipients receive a bonus, then I suspect they are not the ones that concern you the most.
     
  10. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,239
    Likes Received:
    924
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Since you just make up stuff, then create your opinions based on your made-up stuff, you might as well write the entire script...
     

Share This Page