Just tweak the catfood a little bit and it tastes like fresh Mahi-Mahi
by digby
God I wish I understood the twisted psychology that makes people with plenty of income and future security insist that those who don’t should suffer even more.
The Washington Post once again confounded its critics who insisted that it couldn’t get any worse. Yesterday the paper ran an editorial that criticized Vice President Joe Biden for his lack of courage when he committed the administration to a policy of not cutting Social Security. Biden repeatedly told an audience in Southern Virginia that he guaranteed there would be no cuts to Social Security in a second Obama administration.
The paper then laid out its case for cuts to the program and outlined its plan:
“Tweak the inflation calculator and moderately raise the income limit for applying the payroll tax, and you can shore up Social Security with no harm to the safety net.”
Did you catch the cuts in that sentence? If not, that is what “tweak the inflation adjustment” means. It means reducing the size of the benefit by 0.3 percent annually. This cut accumulates over time to roughly 3 percent after 10 years, 6 percent after 20 years, and for those who collect benefits long enough, 9 percent after 30 years. Certainly many people might think that a 9 percent cut in benefits for 10 percent of retirees who rely solely on Social Security for their income, or the 30 percent of retirees who rely on it for more than 90 percent of their income, does some harm to the safety net.
Just tweak it a little. After all, if you’re a 95 year old woman with no other income, will you really miss that 9%? I don’t think they eat much at that age anyway. They’ll never miss it!
Besides, they should have thought ahead a little bit and worked a little bit harder, don’t you think?
.