Back to Current Articles
|
|
Social Security Issues
Archives 2004
5
Ways to Win the Privatization Debate (2004)
Small investment accounts are very expensive to administer. With
privatization, broker commissions and fees could easily burn up as much as
15 cents out of every dollar of a worker's annual investment as they do in
some countries with privatized systems. Wall Street brokers and fund
managers would stand to make billions of dollars a year thanks to
privatization, so it's no surprise that they strongly support the
privatization movement! Use these five arguments to win over those who
have fallen for privatization propaganda!
Wall St Could Make a Social Security Killing (December 28, 2004)
Who has the greatest interest in changing US Social Security?... According
to Austan Goolsbee, one of the most prominent critics of the
privatization, it’s very easy to understand why Wall Street “has so
far been silent on the Bush administration's post-election push for social
security reform, including redirection of a share of new contributions to
private retirement accounts.” To his mind, the profit for Wall Street if
there is a reform would be enormous: between $US424 billion and $US1.1
trillion. And it’s not the first time that “the best-connected and
most powerful industry” would bring home the gold from the public
coffers. And the old people of the USA? Dumped!
The Devil is in the Details of the Bush Social
Security Privatization (December 25, 2004)
This
writer lays out the tactics that Bush and privatization advocates will use
to persuade US citizens that Social Security “must” be changed.
Don’t let the wool be pulled over your eyes!
Bush Plans a Media Blitz on Social Security (December
23, 2004)
The Presidential plan on privatization of Social Security is underway.
Now, you have to be watchful and try not to be overwhelmed with the Bush
Administration’s $15 million media campaign. If they try to convince you
that the Social Security is in crisis and that their project is the best
way to solve the problem, just remember that tactics used with the
unproven mass destruction weapons, the need to attack Iraq and the Bush
reelection underwritten by the same financial industry that will benefit
from privatizing Social Security.
Details Cloud Support for Social Security Plan (December 22, 2004)
According to a Washington Post-ABC New Poll, President Bush has some
support for his argument that Social Security needs a “change” to meet
its obligations to future retirees. But there remains considerable
skepticism about the Bush attempt to privatize the system with private
investments in the stock market and the financial risks that will entail.
Wall St. Lobby Quietly Tackles Social Security
(December 21, 2004)
President Bush prepares to disclose the details of his plan to funnel
hundreds of billions of dollars of future Social Security funds into
privately held investment accounts. Behind the scenes, Wall Street has
begun a low key lobbying campaign supporting privatization.
Social Security Slam-Dunk (December 21, 2004)
Richard Cohen of the Washington Post compares the Bush's Social Security
plan to the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq: here is a new lie from
the government, a “false urgency” which is going to be very expensive
for everybody and to destroy the US Social Security system which does not
seem to be really in crisis.
The GOP's Sabotage of Social Security (December 21,
2004)
“Social Security is the key reason seniors are no longer the most
impoverished class in our society or a crushing burden on their
children.”
With privatization, the White House is going to transform and destroy a
system of vital importance for a big part of the population, offering a
“windfall” to Wall Street and imposing a burden on the younger
workers. This situation could create a “a young-versus-old generational
fight.”
Social Security Privatization and Women Report
Women are the face of Social Security, comprising 60 percent of
beneficiaries over 65 and 72 percent of recipients over 85. Women depend
on Social Security's guaranteed, lifetime benefits: 27 percent of women
over 65 rely on Social Security for 90 percent of their retirement income.
The Social Security system is an embodiment of the long-standing American
principle of social insurance.
For women, poverty in old age is often rooted in the realities that shaped
their lives early on: the reality of the wage gap, the reality of
caregiving, and the reality of flexible jobs that offer few benefits,
especially pensions.
With this report, the Older Women’s League wants to show that
privatization plans would divert Social Security payroll taxes into
individually owned private accounts, shifting the system from shared risk
and collective gain among workers to private accounts that would leave
workers to sink or swim on their own.
Bush Plan Will Kill Social Security (December 20, 2004)
“Trusting George Bush to protect your Social Security is like hiring the
wolf to guard the chicken coop.” Here, columnist Dave Fredley explains
how the Bush administration plans for privatizing Social Security affect
him.
Bush Says Social Security Plan Would Reassure
Markets (December 17, 2004)
There are a lot of critics opposing Social Security privatization--
especially the $2 trillion that the government will have to borrow to
finance the transition. While Bush said that his plan would reassure
financial markets, others disagreed. "Their politics are overwhelming
their economic reason," said Gary Gensler, a former top executive at
the Goldman Sachs investment firm and the official in the Clinton
administration.
Buying Into Failure (December 17, 2004)
“We can learn a lot from other countries that have already gone down
that road”: Bush is not the first who wants to privatize Social
Security. So it’s important to examine what’s happened in other
countries. In both England and Chile, the private sector could not provide
cheaper administration of the program than did the governments. (In the
US, the current Social Security system costs only 1% for its
administration.) Second, many elderly become very poor under
privatization. Not wanting to see too many old people die of poverty, both
England and Chile have “rescued” the private system with some
minimalist public payments to the elderly poor. Why not keep the current
program in the US? It does not cost much to administer and keeps most
elderly out of poverty.
Bush Seeks Bipartisan Backing
For His Social Security Plan (December 17, 2004)
Major US citizen groups-- AFL-CIO, AARP, the NAACP, the National
Organization of Women—lined up to oppose the Bush plan to privatize
Social Security. They said that the Social Security system must be
defended and criticized the Bush plan to require the federal government to
borrow trillions to support the transition to a privatized system. Others
criticized the financial risk to small investors who might make poor
investment choices in their accounts—while the brokerages would profit
from every transaction. It appears to be a Republican vs. Democrat battle;
however, many Democrat representatives have flirted with privatization at
the urging of their rich campaign contributors.
Not Just Your Mom's Retirement (December 16, 2004)
“The income that Social Security provides to the elderly benefits
multiple generations.”
Children, disabled workers and families of prematurely deceased workers
all collect Social Security benefits. The program truly serves the role of
government safety net as it was intended—lending a hand to Americans in
their time of need. The personal investment accounts idea being floated by
the White House and its surrogates would effectively shred that safety
net. Nancy Duff Campbell and Joan Entmacher of the National Women's Law
Center show how.
America’s Seniors Will Fight to Save And
Strengthen Social Security - Alliance for Retired Americans Says
Privatization Threatens All (December 16, 2004)
Despite President Bush’s claims that Social Security benefits for
current retirees won’t be cut as a result of privatization, America’s
seniors don’t believe the President. They will mobilize forces
nationwide to fight against plans to privatize Social Security, said
George J. Kourpias, president of the 3 million-member Alliance for Retired
Americans.
Groups Line Up to Oppose Bush Social Security Plan (December 16, 2004)
As President Bush begins a big campaign to restructure Social Security,
Democrats and a host of interest groups are mobilizing to fight his
private account plan and protect the traditional retirement system.
The $2 Trillion Question (December 16, 2004)
The reliance on payroll tax is already too high and further reducing
workers won't help when millions of baby boomers are ready to leave the
workforce. So here's an idea from Get America Working. Instead of taxing
payrolls even more to cover Social Security and Medicare, tax energy and
natural resources, which we desperately need to use more efficiently? Get
America Working president, Robert Walker, explains. Why doesn’t he also
suggest that Congress stop efforts to make Bush tax cuts for the richest
citizens permanent?
Letter to President Bush from Leadership Council of
Aging Organizations (LCAO) (December 15, 2004)
Here is a letter from the Leadership Council of Aging Organizations to
President Bush protesting against his Social Security privatization plan.
They “urge a full accounting of the costs of partial privatization and
how those costs would be met.”
Bush's Big Ambitions
Breed Big Opposition (December 15, 2004)
The White House economic conference that kicks off today is aimed at
building a foundation for the ambitions of President Bush's second term to
privatize Social Security and other items, such as tort reform. Opposition
generated by its headline goals suggests that a storm of protest will come
on this fundamental Social Security change.
Twelve Reasons Why
Privatizing Social Security is a Bad Idea (December 14, 2004)
Addressing Social Security’s potential long-term financing challenges by
taking the dramatic step of diverting its payroll taxes to create new
personal accounts will have drastic consequences for federal finances,
future retirees, and those who rely on the system the most. Learn more
about twelve major reasons why less costly and less painful reforms should
be considered instead.
Gambling away Social Security (December
13, 2004)
Bush's comments suggest America will borrow big and bet it on the market,
putting individuals and the economy at risk. Though President Bush never
mentions it, the essence of Social Security privatization seems to be the
introduction of individual risk and reduction of income security. Safer,
saner options exist.
Anti-Social Security (December 9, 2004)
The battle for Social Security's survival is underway. In this article
that refutes a number of the Bush key points, Dean Baker calls attention
to a recent key maneuver. N. Gregory Mankiw, George W. Bush's chief
economic adviser, explicitly floated the idea of cutting benefits, a
necessary but unmentioned part of the White House's privatization plan.
More details will be presented to the public in the weeks ahead, but the
outlines of the Bush plan are already clear, having been laid out by his
2001 Social Security Commission.
Social Security Numbers Game
GOP Ponders 30-year Scoring Rather Than 10 (December 8, 2004)
Here is how Republicans will push to rewrite budget rules in an attempt to
remove financial obstacles that threaten the GOP’s effort to reform
Social Security: They intend to move to craft budget language that would
direct the Congressional Budget Office to score Social Security reform
legislation over 30 or more years would likely increase the chances that
the bill would pass in the 109th Congress. Republicans could also write
budget provisions that would remove the program entirely from the budget
process.
Inventing a Crisis (December 7, 2004)
Privatizing Social Security - replacing the current system, in whole or in
part, with personal investment accounts - won't do anything to strengthen
the system's finances. If anything, it will make things worse.
Nonetheless, the politics of privatization depend crucially on convincing
the public that the system is in imminent danger of collapse, that we must
destroy Social Security in order to save it.
A False Start on Social Security (December 3, 2004)
White House and Congressional budget leaders have been floating the idea
that the Bush plan to create private retirement accounts within Social
Security won't require a major increase in the federal budget deficit.
This is dangerously misguided. Unwilling to raise taxes, Congress and the
administration will have to borrow well over $1 trillion to turn the
president's wish into reality. A very poor idea!
Social Security -The 2 Trillion Dollar Travesty
(November 24, 2004)
“President Bush and his cronies in Congress are working a Social
Security privatization scheme that would add trillions to the national
debt, cut retirement benefits and raise taxes.” The plan is actually to
cut guaranteed Social Security benefits and replace them by privatized
accounts: this is really risky and will be very expensive. Read the
financial details to privatize US Social Security.
Social Security is a Women's Issue (November 23, 2004)
“Nothing is more important to women and families than Social
Security.” It’s why the Social Security system has to be “carefully
strengthened”, and not by privatizing it. If Bush applies his plans,
women will be the first affected persons.
Don't Let Bush Rob Social Security (November 23, 2004)
Social Security isn’t broken, but Washington is full of reformers
looking to fix it. Many, especially those who favor privatization, claim
that the retirement of baby boomers and budget problems will bankrupt the
Social Security Trust Fund anywhere from the next decade to the next 40
years. Ideologically driven claims rather than facts, however, lie at the
heart of the pro-privatization arguments. This article sums up the point
of view of those who support a universal public social insurance program
in the USA.
A Warning For Social Security "Reformers"
(November 17, 2004)
While the Bush Administration drives toward replacing part of Social
Security with private investment accounts, a government agency is planning
to go to Congress to ask for a bail-out. The Pension Benefit Guarantee
Corporation (PBGC), which guarantees private pension plans, just announced
that its net liabilities are double earlier estimates, more than $23
billion. Bernard Wasow details how risky private accounts will be—and
warns US citizens against buying the sales talk for privatization. Caveat
emptor!
Raiders Of The Lock Box (November 17, 2004)
Robert Reich argues that the basic concept of Social Security is one based
on trust—which is why the spectre of future generations placing money
into private accounts breaks that trust. It also raises the question of
where the money will come from for the next retiring generation. Bush's
guarantees that he won't change Social Security benefits for current
retirees is highly unlikely under a privatization plan. Refer to the
Institute for America's Future campaign to protect Social Security for
more information on Social Security privatization and ways to fight it.
AARP Opposes Bush Plan to Replace Social Security With
Private Accounts (November 12, 2004)
Gearing up for battle over the future of Social Security, AARP, the
influential lobby group, said Thursday that it opposed President Bush's
plan to divert some payroll taxes into private retirement accounts. But
given the AARP’s deceptive record of promoting the Medicare
Modernization Act, many members will be skeptical of its so-called
opposition to privatization. Who does AARP speak for? Many wonder if
AARP’s substantial interests in pharmaceutical and financial services
overrides what Ethel
Andrus, the retired California schoolteacher, set out to do when she
founded the organization.
Dual for the White House: The Pensions Threatened by
Georges Bush (October 25, 2004)
(Article in French)
Social Security change dominated the US presidential campaign. The two
candidates diverged on this question. Indeed, whereas George Bush would
like privatization, John Kerry is totally against this idea and says that
it would be a disaster. The economist James Galbraith agrees with the
Democrat candidate’s theory. According to him, the actual situation of
the American public pension doesn’t need this kind of change. It will
only be in 2018 that the funds won’t be in surplus anymore. The solution
lies, he says in well paid jobs, “because it’s on those jobs that the
most important amounts of taxes are deducted,” he explains. On the
contrary, privatizing would be a catastrophe.
Looming Pension Woes Trouble Experts (October 24,
2004)
Under-funded pensions remain a painful issue for the U.S. taxpayers, with
the possibility of a multibillion-dollar public bailout on the horizon.
While lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans, struggle to find
solutions for the U.S. pension crisis, opinions among the experts are
split into two dimensions: Few, like the conservative Cato Institute, say
defined benefits plans are on the way out. Others say that traditional
plans represent deferred wages to workers—who have done the labor during
their employed years. Now the company must come up with the pension;
otherwise it violates the trust—and in some cases—the collective
bargaining agreement that companies made when they hired the workers.
Bush, Kerry Clash Over Social Security Reform
(October 14, 2004)
US President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry clashed Wednesday night
over how to reform the Social Security system, in their third and final
presidential debate. Bush wants to let young people put some of the money
collected to pay benefits into private savings accounts. He said the
reform of Social Security would be "a vital issue" in his second
term, if he got re-elected. According to Kerry, this way of changing the
Social Security is "an invitation to disaster." He wants to
protect Social Security: "I will not privatize it. I will not cut the
benefits. And we're going to be fiscally responsible, and we will take
care of Social Security," he said.
Soaring Costs of Senior Care( October 4, 2004)
The USA faces large costs for Social Security and medical care in the next
70 years. (Of course, citizens and policy makers knew that US citizens
were getting older for the last 60 years---so it should not be a surprise.
) But if you think this nation's health care and pension problems are
huge, look abroad. The population in many developed countries is aging
faster than the U.S. population. That means fewer young people to support
a rapidly growing number of senior citizens. All the countries who have to
meet the costs of an aging population (Japan, Spain, Australia, Singapore,
Estonia, Italy, United Kingdom, Germany…) use different weapons. It’s
a lesson for the USA: Paying for a graying society isn't easy. It's not
cheap. But it's better to start now. Lobby for measures such as taxing the
rich, not the poorest; creating public jobs, stopping ageism in hiring
practices and pay levels.
Retiring around Social Security (October 7, 2004)
“The fundamental problem of saving for retirement is making your money
last longer than you do” --- John Waggoner from USA Today lists various
facts regarding the issue of income security for older persons. According
to the estimates provided by the American Academy of Actuaries, more than
a quarter of those now aged 65 will live to 90, which means their savings
have to last more than 30 years. What should American workers know in
order to save wisely for their retirement?
How Not To Save Social Security (September 23, 2004)
Social Security protects everyone because it includes everyone. According
to the New York Times, a partial privatization of Social Security that
President Bush has been pushing would “weaken Social Security, hurt the
economy and endanger many workers’ retirements by pushing them into
unreasonable risks in the stock market.” Because of huge deficits caused
by the transition and the higher risk in investing money in the stock
market, reductions in government services or higher tax will most likely
occur. Those who will retire with a personal account will end up getting
smaller benefits. In addition, those who are unemployed and the poor will
be driven out of the system because they would not be able to come up with
the money to invest in personal accounts. Privatization of Social Security
will, therefore, not produce positive outcomes for future retirees.
Social Security COLA Reductions Would Weaken Financial
Security for the Oldest and Poorest Retirees (September 20, 2004)
Cutting retirement benefits by making Cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs)
is one way for the government to save Social Security money. This is
exactly what Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan proposed earlier this
year. However, COLAs, according to Urban Institute, could produce some
problems for those who are relatively old and/or poor. If Social Security
reform is conducted using COLAs, since the pension payment will be based
on the cost of living, many older Americans who spend a lot of money on
health care will end up receiving smaller benefits because the price for
health care usually increases faster than the cost of living. Also, it
would “substantially reduce family incomes for the oldest and most
vulnerable retirees.” Urban Institute examines the pros and cons
regarding the use of COLAs for a possible pension reform.
Bush Calls Kerry’s Social Security Warning ‘Tired,
Pathetic’ (September 14, 2004)
According to Michigan pollster Ed Sarpolus, many voters who are not 100
percent committed to either candidate are elderly women, and therefore,
issues such as Social Security and health insurance remain pivotal in the
presidential election. While President Bush criticized Kerry’s strategy
for Social Security reform calling it “the most tired, pathetic way to
campaign for the presidency,” Kerry is proud of his proposal to expand
the health insurance system through tax credits and subsidies. During the
Bush presidency, Medicare costs have increased rapidly along with the
number of Americans without health insurance. Ron Fournier, AP reporter,
closely follows the debate over Social Security reform between the two
candidates.
Ambitions to Fix Social Security- Present Big
Hurdles for Bush (September 2, 2004)
Jackie Calmes from the Wall Street Journal carefully points out the
weakness of Bush’s proposal for Social Security reform--- to create
private accounts alongside the government benefits. Adding private
accounts would not fix the finances and it would even increase the
system’s financial burden, Calmes insists. Other proponents of the
accounts claim that workers would come out ahead on retirement with their
combination of Social Security benefits and returns on their investment
accounts. Critics of privatization point to the difficult task of covering
transition costs to a private program—paying current retirees and adding
to “individual accounts.” GAA will follow the debate on our website in
the months ahead.
Pension Payment ‘Fix’ Is
Costly For Some Localities (September 1, 2004)
As a part of the pension system reform, NY Governor George Pataki approved
legislation earlier this year to move back the deadline for making the
next pension fund payment from Dec. 15, 2004 to Feb. 1, 2005. Localities
will benefit from this change, the Legislature says, because it will allow
them to move the payments onto their next fiscal year’s books since most
localities start their fiscal year on April 1. However, Saratoga County
Treasurer J. Christopher Callaghan points out the unfairness of the
change. Because local governments routinely get a “discount” due to
the fact that the pension system holds their funds and makes money off
them through investment for the period of Dec.15 to April 1, a county like
Saratoga, which has a pension payment due of $6.2 million, will end up
losing $60,000. Edward Farrell, executive director of the state Conference
of Mayors, has commented “I have not heard anyone else complaining.
[Localities] are thankful that they could go through the fiscal year
without making a payment.”
OASDI
Beneficiaries by State and County, 2003 (August 2004)
"OASDI Beneficiaries by State and County, 2003," is an
annual publication which focuses on the Social Security beneficiary
population at the local level. It presents basic program data on the
number and type of beneficiaries and the amount of benefits paid in each
state and county. It also shows the numbers of men and women aged 65 or
older receiving benefits. This report is a useful planning aid for Social
Security Administration field offices and for those providing information
to federal, state, and local government agencies. The data tables are
available by state or by region. This table specifically focuses on the
beneficiaries as a percentage of the total resident population and of the
population aged 65 or older, by state.
How Migrants Help Fund U.S.
Citizens’ Pensions (August 31, 2004)
Author Mark Stevenson describes how millions of undocumented migrants help
fund U.S. citizens’ pensions. Most migrant workers who work under false
Social Security numbers, or even with false names, do not receive any
benefits back, though they pay contributions from their paychecks just
like U.S. workers. The so-called “earnings suspense file,” a Social
Security account in which contribution payments collected by those
undocumented workers are saved, grows at a rate of about $6 billion a year
and now stands at $376 bullion. Dan Griswold from a Washington-based
research institution, calls the earnings suspense file “gravy for Social
Security” because the money in the account is used to fund American
citizens’ retirement.
The Elderly are Against America ( August 30,
2004)
(Article in Russian)
Due to the improvement in health care, American citizens are getting older
much quicker in comparison to the other countries. This situation
challenges the economic and social financing of the country. Allen
Greenspan, the economic guru and Chair of the Federal Reserve, believes
that raising the pension age from 65 to 67 would help solve the situation.
Greenspan Warns of Shortfall as U.S. Ages (August
30, 2004)
Concerning the future of the U.S. social insurance system, Fed Chairman
Alan Greenspan warned that the U.S. may have promised workers more in
Social Security and Medicare benefits than it can deliver. In order to
avoid “abrupt and painful” pension reforms in the future, he
suggested, Social Security and Medicare benefits should be made less
generous, for example through later qualifying ages and by discouraging
early retirement. However, some, including Harvard University President
Lawrence Summers, seem to want to push out older professors. The content
of work itself makes a difference. “It’s easy to be a professor at
75… it’s not so easy to lift heavy objects,” said Princeton
University economist Alan Blinder who also criticized the proposal to push
back the retirement age. Increased immigration to the U.S. could help out;
requiring Social Security payments on all incomes instead of limiting
taxation to workers with $87,000 in wages or less could also help. Ending
age discrimination against those who want to work would be positive. With
an increasing aged population, other possibilities are available.
The Folly of Social Security Privatization (August 12,
2004)
Author Bradford Plumer, overseeing the upcoming presidential election,
criticizes President Bush's proposal for privatizing Social Security.
Though Bush has argued that workers can get a higher rate of money return
by keeping a portion of their payroll taxes and invest them in stocks via
government-sponsored accounts, Plumer, like many other analysts, sees a
big problem with this proposal: If young workers were allowed to divert
their savings into a private account, he insists, then the government
would have to come up with "additional" money to pay for this
generation of retirees. The transition could cost at least $1 trillion,
according to the estimates provided by economists. With these negative
effects already foreseen, what advantages can Social Security
privatization bring about to American workers as a whole?
SSN Problem Leads To Nash Woman's Fight For Life
(August, 2004)
E.J. Webb, an elderly lady who lives in Nash County, NC, received a letter
saying she was dead, due to a mistake made by the Social Security
Administration. Because of the mistake, she now lost Medicare and
prescription drug card benefits, though she needs 13 different kinds of
medicine daily. The Social Security Administration sent her a letter
acknowledging its mistake, but in order to fix it and have all of her
previous benefits back, she has to bring her birth certificate and five
other documents to the local Social Security office, in order to prove she
is alive. "I think it can be corrected without the procedures and
problems that I've had to go through to get it straight," Webb
expressed her frustration.
Kerry Stresses Social Security, Drug Costs In Appeal
To Seniors (August 12, 2004)
John Kerry, Democratic presidential candidate for the upcoming election,
pointed out that President Bush's prescription-drug policies could bring
about some negative effects to American seniors. By refusing to allow
prescription imports from Canada, Kerry insisted, Bush is preventing
seniors from obtaining cheaper drugs in order to protect the benefits of
domestic companies. Bush's campaign officials, on the other hand, have
accused Kerry of making false statements, saying that "Bush opposes
importation from Canada because of safety concerns."
Social Security Checks Missing (August 4, 2004)
Where did the checks go? The U.S. Postal Service and the Social Security
Administration have reported respectively that approximately 200 checks
that should have been sent to the pensioners of Williamston, South
Carolina, are missing. Though anyone in immediate need of his or her check
may call the Social Security Administration, help is available only on a
case-by-case basis. "People who receive Social Security need their
money. this shouldn't be happening" --- Williamston pensioners showed
their frustrations towards the mystery of lost checks.
Gallagher Calls Social Security, Not Gay Marriage, the Most Important
Issue in the Republican Primary (July 13, 2004)
Doug Gallagher, candidate for the U.S. Senate in Florida is using his
platform to discuss less "social" issues like Social Security
and avoiding topics like the ban on gay marriages. The republican
candidate argues that, "Social Security must be saved; otherwise, in
the next few decades, Congress will have to put this wonderful benefits
program on life support." He does not deny the importance of other
issues but insists that few affect the nation's seniors in a similar way.
His recommendations for the system include changes to facilitate: a
totally tax free scheme, removing work penalties, voluntary investments,
optional contributions and prescription drugs.
The New Cosby Kids (July 8, 2004)
Bill Cosby is making headlines once again. And, like before, his attack on
the nation's poor blacks has provoked responses from persons throughout
the country. One example is that of Barbara Ehrenreich, Guest Columnist at
the New York Times. Ehrenreich approaches Cosby's latest accusations with
a mixture of irony and witty innuendos and recommends that he "start
picking on a more up-to-date pariah group" such as elderly whites.
She cites examples such as "grandpa bandits" who rob banks and
the increasing debt being experienced by the group as evidence of the
"menace" they pose. In the end, Ehrenreich identifies that like
young, poor blacks the nation's elderly remain at the receiving end of a
system that offers few rewards and minimal solutions.
Social Security Recipients Warned About Scams (July 6,
2004)
There has been a recent surge in the number of social security scams in
the U.S. Commenting on the report, the Commissioner of Social Security, Jo
Anne Barnhart asserts, "it is very troubling that our most vulnerable
citizens are being targeted by these unscrupulous people." Among the
techniques used to con victim's into releasing personal information are,
(1) claims by the perpetrator of a power outage and the subsequent need to
verify previously recorded information, (2) claims of the need to confirm
direct deposit information and, (3) pretense of the cancellation of social
security benefits due to newly acquired property or assets. To help
authenticate the scam, the caller often places the recipient on hold and
plays the same on-hold recordings used by the Social Security Department.
Mexicans In U.S. May Get Social Security (July 4,
2004)
The more than 9 million Mexican immigrants residing in the US may soon be
eligible for both Mexican and U.S. retirement benefits. If U.S. lawmakers
accept the recently proposed bilateral Social Security agreement, Mexican
immigrants with U.S. work experience of 18 months or more will qualify for
dual Social Security benefits. Many are in opposition to the bill, stating
that it could allow the thousands of undocumented Mexican workers open
access to the nation's Social Security system. Dan Stein, executive
director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform comments, until
the U.S. addresses existing problems within the nation's immigration and
Social Security system the decision to allow Mexican immigrants access to
U.S. social security is both "premature and fiscally
irresponsible."
Social Security Claims Process Going Paperless (June 28, 2004)
US Social Security Administrators have embarked on what many are calling,
a very "ambitious" plan to automate the country's Social
Security System. The new, "paperless" system is scheduled to be
in effect by 2005 and will boast electronic folders to document
information for millions of people who file social security disability
claims each year. Less than a decade ago, a similar project costing an
estimated $71 million was started and later abandoned. Many fear that a
similar fate awaits the new system. Brett MacIntyre, IBM Vice President,
describes the endeavor as "one of [the] biggest content-management
systems in the world." The Social Security Administration has
calculated that the online project will save the government an estimated
$1.3 billion dollars over the next seven years. Though some 18 states have
already been privy to aspects of the new scheme, it still waits to be seen
if the Administration will be able to "deliver on their
promise."
Social Security's Big Little Secret (June 24, 2004)
"Social Security is not just a retirement program.it is, as President
Reagan used to say, our safety net," quotes contributing writer
Arvonne Fraser. Only 63 percent of the 47 million Americans who receive
Social Security are retirees. The rest are the children of workers who
have died or whose parents are disabled. Social Security exists as one of
the country's largest life and disability insurance programs. As many
Americans remain oblivious to the nature and purpose of Social Security,
it remains to be seen whether the retirement of baby boomers will see an
end to the "current surplus" in Social Security.
Return of the Fortune Tellers (June 16, 2004)
The new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the future of Social
Security shows Social Security revenues and outlays projected ahead to
year 2100. These projections are more optimistic than the 75-year
projections coming out of the Social Security Administration. However, for
Bernard Wasow, these projections are "nonsense," since you
cannot plan ahead what is going to happen in 100 years. What you can do
easily though is keep Social Security working for the average American.
The issue is not money but the will to make such a reform.
Golden Years Tarnished: Haitian Elders Ponder
Retirement Away from Motherland (April 27, 2004)
Are elder Haitians in New York concerned about their homeland? The lack of
security in Haiti makes it difficult for Haitians abroad to return home
upon retirement. St-Fleur, 50 said, “I’m really discouraged by the way
I hear things,” Confessing fear, she said, “… I’d be better off
looking for another place, maybe Florida.” If the country were stable,
many said they would have moved back. St Fleur, 50 said. “… I need the
security first. There should be order for people not to be afraid of
others.”
A New Minimum Benefit for Social Security (April 2004)
Since its creation, Social Security helped reduce poverty among the
elderly population. However, some people still face great difficulties in
old age. The Century Foundation proposed, in a report, the creation of a
new minimum benefit. This extra money would increase payments to
households heavily dependent on Social Security yet have an income below
the poverty line. The proposal would lift them out of old age poverty.
Give Retirees More Financial Security (April
14, 2004)
To live a long life in the US is more and more challenging for people
since the three forms of retirement benefits (Social Security, Medicare
and private pension plans) are under attack. Older Americans face rising
health and housing costs but see their benefits skink making it hard for
them to meet their basic needs. According to Nomi Prins, simple solutions
exist. Tax cuts for the rich could be redirected into Social Security.
Also, a new Medicare bill could be passed using pharmaceutical profits to
pay for consumer drugs. In the end, more financially secure seniors become
consumers instead of debtors and the whole economy would gain from it.
Tough Issues, Awaiting Their Turn (April 13, 2004)
One of the most explosive divisions between George W. Bush and John F.
Kerry is over the future of retirement. So far it has not made the
headlines, but it should come into the presidential campaign discussions
soon since trillions of dollars are at stake. The question between the two
parties is whether Americans should save for old age collectively as a
nation, or as individuals through private savings and investments.
President Bush and his partisans are supporting the idea of replacing
Social Security with a new system of private accounts. However, Democrats
accuse them of wanting to cut the social safety net and impoverish the
elderly. Interest groups like MoveOn.org are ready to put pressure against
any initiative hurting the elderly population.
The Progressivity of Social Security (February 2000)
Admirers and detractors of US Social Security often claim that it is a
progressive program that redistributes income to the poorest. However,
this paper disputes that claim-- looking at a number of sophisticated
indicators and conclusing that US Social Security is skewed toward helping
the well-off even more. This research paper tries to capture and quantify
all of the individual characteristics that are relevant to determine the
progressivity of a life-cycle program like Social Security. Julia Lynn
Coronado, Don Fullerton and Thomas Glass published their findings for the
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) in a study called the "Progressivity
of Social Security."
Teachers Seek End to Social Security Penalty (March 25, 2004)
Texas teachers and other public employees angry to see their Social
Security benefits cut, are urging Congress to do something about it. Since
the Texas teachers' retirement system is separate from Social Security and
to prevent "double dipping," the federal government decided
twenty years ago to cut benefits of employees receiving income from the
Teacher Retirement System of Texas. In 2002, nearly 50,000 workers had
their Social Security benefits cut. This situation discourages people from
choosing a career in education and causes many employees in the field to
resign or retire prematurely.
Social Security Rehires its Retirees (March 21,
2004)
The Social Security Administration underestimated the number of its own
workers retiring and had to rehire 308 of them with both a salary and a
pension. The Bush administration approved this new policy and encouraged
rehirings in government agencies to allow more flexibility. However, three
Democrat Senators argue that this operation cost more than $37 million in
combined pay and pension and they urge Congress' General Accounting Office
to investigate.
A Brighter Outlook for Social Security (March 8, 2004)
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said last week that
"structural adjustments in the major retirement programs" were
inevitable. In other words, Social Security and Medicare benefits will be
cut to support future retired baby boomers and to cover the federal
deficit. However, many economists suggest that Social Security is not
broken and just needs minor adjustments. With their reforms, they believe
that workers will be able to support the elderly population and still
enjoy a rise in their living standards.
The Times Loses Its Balance (March 2, 2004)
The Century Foundation responded to the New York Times' article entitled
"Medicare and Social Challenge" of March 2, 2004. Greg Anrig Jr.
argues the article just focuses on "gargantuan numbers" giving
the impression government programs are on an "inexorable path towards
meltdown." This editorial sees both tax increases and Social Security
cuts as absolutely necessary. However, tax cuts supported by the Bush
administration would cost three times as much as the projected Social
Security deficit over the next 75 years. So if we can afford tax cuts,
then-alternatively-the US can afford the smaller steps to overcome the
long-term financing gap of Social Security.
For your reference, here is the New York Times article:
http://www.globalaging.org/pension/us/socialsec/2004/challenge.htm
Baby Boomers Face Retirement Squeeze (February 27,
2004)
US Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan called upon Congress to cut
Social Security benefits to help cover the federal deficit. Greenspan
argues that benefits are getting harder to sustain since the senior
population is growing faster than the number of young workers. Greenspan's
proposal made each presidential candidate take position due to the
importance of gray votes. Both the Republican and Democrat candidates
distanced themselves from the plan. However, even those who criticized
Greenspan's comments concede that changes in Social Security cannot be
done at the expense of retirees or future retirees.
AARP Critical of Social Security Cuts (February 27,
2004)
AARP reacted strongly against Alan Greenspan's proposal to trim Social
Security benefits for future retirees, in order to reduce the mounting
federal deficit. William Novelli, AARP's chief executive officer,
qualified the plan as "irresponsible". AARP officials also
condemned President Bush's privatization plan of Social Security. They
argued that Social Security is the best system providing guaranteed
benefits to retirees as well as to their survivors. Privatizing the system
could cut by half or more the income of two-thirds of the people now 65 or
older.
Bush Misleading On Social Security Begins
(February 26, 2004)
President Bush responded to Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan's
proposal by saying "those benefits should not be changed for people
at or near retirement." However, he refused to say specifically that
he opposed cutting future guaranteed benefits for younger and middle-aged
workers. The President's reaction differs from what he pledged during the
2000 presidential campaign. At that time he opposed any cuts of Social
Security benefits for anyone - young or old.
Alan Greenspan Appelle à Agir face au
Creusement du Déficit Budgétaire aux Etats-Unis (February 25, 2004)
(Article in French)
Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, asked Congress to cut Social
Security and Medicare benefits. Greenspan wants to use Social Security to
reduce the federal deficit and be able to cover the costs of the retiring
baby boomers. Mr. Greenspan argues that the US should be more careful on
what it is spending rather than increasing taxes to cover the extra costs.
To Trim Deficit, Greenspan Urges Social
Security and Medicare Cuts (February 26, 2004)
Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, asked Congress to cut Social
Security and Medicare benefits. Greenspan wants to use Social Security to
reduce the federal deficit rather than by increasing taxes. He claims more
tax will not cover the costs of the retiring baby boom generation. He also
explicitly recommended to raise the retirement age above 67. Both
Democrats and Republicans oppose Mr. Greenspan's arguments. But none of
them have yet made serious counter-proposals on this politically explosive
topic.
Federal Program Helps Tennessee Retirees Return
To The Work Force (February 16, 2004)
US seniors cannot live on Social Security alone, and many find themselves
going back to work to make ends meet. In Tennessee, the state-funded
Senior Community Service Employment Program trains a growing number of
older people who want to return to the workforce. With help from this and
other services, many seniors find part-time work they enjoy because it
keeps them active and interested.
Pension in Peril for State Workers (January 30, 2004)
The State of Maine passed a bill in 2001 allowing state workers who
retire early to return to work while still collecting their pensions. The
State hoped to encourage teachers and other experienced workers to return
to State service. However, new federal rules forbid this practice, and the
Maine State Retirement System Board of Directors is considering changing
the rules to comply with Internal Revenue Service codes. In the meantime,
returning workers could lose their retirement benefits if they choose to
remain on the job.
Future Pensions at Risk (January 27, 2004)
Today's pensioners are worried about proposed measures to privatize Social
Security, but today's college students will be left to suffer the
consequences. Young people tend to dismiss worries about Social Security,
even while they often assume it will collapse.
Women Must Plan for Retirement (January 26, 2004)
Women take the same steps to plan for a financially secure retirement that
men do, but many societal factors put women at a disadvantage. Women live
longer than men, but their wages are generally only 76% of men's for doing
identical jobs. Furthermore, women who jump in and out of the workforce to
take care of children don't sustain the "pension clock" long
enough to accumulate much. As a result, women need to start saving earlier
and smarter in order to remain financially independent in old age.
Beware of Groups Bearing Reforms for Social Security
(January 26, 2004)
During his State of the Union speech, George W. Bush explained that his
vision of Social Security "reform" is to give younger workers
the "opportunity" to take money out of Social Security and bet
it on Wall Street. This "partial privatization" plan is risky
for middle- and working-class Americans who stand to lose their entire
retirement savings. Privatization supporters insist that the plan would
not eliminate traditional Social Security. However, if money drains into
individually-owned accounts, nothing will be left to pay benefits for
those still in the program.
Americans too dependent on Social Security
for retirement (January 12, 2004)
A report by pension fund TIAA-CREF's lead researcher, Douglas Fore, says
Americans are saving less and depending more on Social Security for most
of their retirement income. Fore speculates that a decline in pension
plans and personal savings, an aging population, tax cuts and increasing
government spending in other areas like defense could lead to a pension
crisis. For the time being, Americans need to make saving a priority, but
even more importantly, workers should learn how to spread risk among a
variety of savings and investment plans.
Propondrá Bush pensiones de retiro a
indocumentados (January 4, 2004)
(Article in Spanish)
In early January 2004, President George Bush proposed a plan to Congress
that would undocumented immigrants to receive pensions upon retirement.
Immigrants who would qualify must have worked in the United States for at
least ten years and have paid Social Security taxes. Through this proposed
plan, they would have the same rights as US citizens.
Retirement push will certainly come to shove (January
2, 2004)
The main source of income for today's seniors is Social Security. Without
this moderate and often meager income, almost half of all retirees would
immediately fall into official poverty status.
|