What Cuts In Social Security or Medicare Would You Make?

[Madeline]

A new version of the plan, obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, makes mostly minor changes to a draft that whipped up enormous controversy when unveiled earlier this month. Some domestic spending cuts are modestly higher than previously proposed, and health care savings from overhauling the medical malpractice system would reap less than proposed earlier this month.

Unlike their original proposal, Bowles and Simpson stop short of calling for caps on medical malpractice awards. Instead they recommend changes in how awards are made.
But other proposals remain the same. Among them are a gradual increase in the Social Security retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075, using a less generous cost-of-living adjustment for the programs and increasing the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

The plan also retains a 15-cent-a-gallon increase on gasoline, a three-year freeze on federal worker pay and the elimination of 200,000 workers from the federal payroll through attrition.

The proposal obtained by the AP was a draft that was still undergoing changes Tuesday evening.

Other recommendations:

-- Eliminate congressional pet spending projects known as "earmarks."

-- Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent and stop taxing the overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations.

-- Overhaul individual income taxes and corporate taxes, giving Congress the choice of reducing the top rate to as low as 23 percent and no higher than 29 percent. The lower the rate, the fewer the tax credits and deductions that would be available to taxpayers.
Under one scenario proposed by Bowles and Simpson, taxpayers would face three tax brackets of 12 percent, 21 percent and 28 percent. Taxpayers would still be able to claim an earned income tax credit and child tax credit as well as all standard deductions and exemptions. Capital gains and dividends would be taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Taxpayers could claim a mortgage interest deduction up to $500,000, but only on their primary residence.

If Congress does not undertake a comprehensive overhaul of the tax system by 2013, the plan calls for a "fail-safe" provision that would trigger across-the-board reductions in tax breaks, designed to raise revenue by $80 billion in 2015 and $180 billion in 2020.

Social Security cuts are part of deficit plan | cleveland.com

I am not a huge fan of increasing the retirement age under Social Security. I would rather tax all income for Social Security purposes (at present, we do not tax income above a certain level, more or less $108,000.) I would also be more interested in eliminating Social Security benefits for wealthier taxpayers than in increasing the retirement age.

What say you?

 

[The Infidel]

Raise the age of retirement, and cut SSI for those over a certain income level.

But then that raises another issue.... why should wealthy people pay into a system they dont use?

I think SSI should be eliminated all together IMO, or at least be able to opt out.

Let me take MY money and invest it how I want to... I think I can do a better job than they do.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A new version of the plan, obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, makes mostly minor changes to a draft that whipped up enormous controversy when unveiled earlier this month. Some domestic spending cuts are modestly higher than previously proposed, and health care savings from overhauling the medical malpractice system would reap less than proposed earlier this month.

Unlike their original proposal, Bowles and Simpson stop short of calling for caps on medical malpractice awards. Instead they recommend changes in how awards are made.
But other proposals remain the same. Among them are a gradual increase in the Social Security retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075, using a less generous cost-of-living adjustment for the programs and increasing the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

The plan also retains a 15-cent-a-gallon increase on gasoline, a three-year freeze on federal worker pay and the elimination of 200,000 workers from the federal payroll through attrition.

The proposal obtained by the AP was a draft that was still undergoing changes Tuesday evening.

Other recommendations:

-- Eliminate congressional pet spending projects known as "earmarks."

-- Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent and stop taxing the overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations.

-- Overhaul individual income taxes and corporate taxes, giving Congress the choice of reducing the top rate to as low as 23 percent and no higher than 29 percent. The lower the rate, the fewer the tax credits and deductions that would be available to taxpayers.
Under one scenario proposed by Bowles and Simpson, taxpayers would face three tax brackets of 12 percent, 21 percent and 28 percent. Taxpayers would still be able to claim an earned income tax credit and child tax credit as well as all standard deductions and exemptions. Capital gains and dividends would be taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Taxpayers could claim a mortgage interest deduction up to $500,000, but only on their primary residence.

If Congress does not undertake a comprehensive overhaul of the tax system by 2013, the plan calls for a "fail-safe" provision that would trigger across-the-board reductions in tax breaks, designed to raise revenue by $80 billion in 2015 and $180 billion in 2020.

Social Security cuts are part of deficit plan | cleveland.com

I am not a huge fan of increasing the retirement age under Social Security. I would rather tax all income for Social Security purposes (at present, we do not tax income above a certain level, more or less $108,000.) I would also be more interested in eliminating Social Security benefits for wealthier taxpayers than in increasing the retirement age.

What say you?

The Government can not tax people for a benefit and then deny that benefit to them when they qualify.

The easiest way to save Social Security is for the Fed to pay back all the IOU's, to cease using the tax money each year as General funds and to invest it for those that will need it. Raising the age limit is a reasonable solution if it is medically correct that the person can still work and that laws prevent companies from firing people for being a certain age.

 

[Gadawg73]

A new version of the plan, obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, makes mostly minor changes to a draft that whipped up enormous controversy when unveiled earlier this month. Some domestic spending cuts are modestly higher than previously proposed, and health care savings from overhauling the medical malpractice system would reap less than proposed earlier this month.

Unlike their original proposal, Bowles and Simpson stop short of calling for caps on medical malpractice awards. Instead they recommend changes in how awards are made.
But other proposals remain the same. Among them are a gradual increase in the Social Security retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075, using a less generous cost-of-living adjustment for the programs and increasing the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

The plan also retains a 15-cent-a-gallon increase on gasoline, a three-year freeze on federal worker pay and the elimination of 200,000 workers from the federal payroll through attrition.

The proposal obtained by the AP was a draft that was still undergoing changes Tuesday evening.

Other recommendations:

-- Eliminate congressional pet spending projects known as "earmarks."

-- Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent and stop taxing the overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations.

-- Overhaul individual income taxes and corporate taxes, giving Congress the choice of reducing the top rate to as low as 23 percent and no higher than 29 percent. The lower the rate, the fewer the tax credits and deductions that would be available to taxpayers.
Under one scenario proposed by Bowles and Simpson, taxpayers would face three tax brackets of 12 percent, 21 percent and 28 percent. Taxpayers would still be able to claim an earned income tax credit and child tax credit as well as all standard deductions and exemptions. Capital gains and dividends would be taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Taxpayers could claim a mortgage interest deduction up to $500,000, but only on their primary residence.

If Congress does not undertake a comprehensive overhaul of the tax system by 2013, the plan calls for a "fail-safe" provision that would trigger across-the-board reductions in tax breaks, designed to raise revenue by $80 billion in 2015 and $180 billion in 2020.

Social Security cuts are part of deficit plan | cleveland.com

I am not a huge fan of increasing the retirement age under Social Security. I would rather tax all income for Social Security purposes (at present, we do not tax income above a certain level, more or less $108,000.) I would also be more interested in eliminating Social Security benefits for wealthier taxpayers than in increasing the retirement age.

What say you?

The Government can not tax people for a benefit and then deny that benefit to them when they qualify.

The easiest way to save Social Security is for the Fed to pay back all the IOU's, to cease using the tax money each year as General funds and to invest it for those that will need it. Raising the age limit is a reasonable solution if it is medically correct that the person can still work and that laws prevent companies from firing people for being a certain age.

Uh, how do we pay back IOUs with NO $$.
We are broke. In 1960 the US government, not the FED wrote those IOUs.
And you and I and everyone stood around and SAID NOTHING for 50 years.
The government is broke so how do you plan on paying those benefits with:
NO MONEY.
The government damn well better start denying benefits to some people as changes and extensions only.
Guess what the avg. age was when this thing started? 60
Guess when they could draw it when it started? 62.
Do the math.Social security was never intended to be a retirement program benefit.
It was an insurance benefit IF you lived past the average.
Raise the age to 70 for those under 40, 67 for those under 50 and 65 for everyone else.
Means test for Medicare. You do know that the premiums and $$ you are paying in may cover 5% of your Medicare bill don't you.
The party is over. Did you have fun? I sure did but now we MUST do this for the kids and grandkids.
No cry babies. Suck in that gut and get to work.
We are running 40% of the entire budget as deficits.
And social security and Medicare comprise FIFTY % of the damn budget.

 

[Greenbeard]

Reinhardt nailed it the other day.

Any attempt to reduce Medicare reimbursements immediately triggers the outcry that the government shifts costs to the private sector – a No No.

Any attempt to reduce utilization in the public programs immediately triggers outcries over “rationing,” “killing Granny” and “death panels.” Another No No. The Washington Times carried a lead editorial entitled “Efficiency in health care can be deadly.” To underscore its thesis that cost-effectiveness analysis is a Nazi tool, it had a picture of Adolf Hitler right next to its editorial.

Finally, any attempt by government to control prices or utilization in the private sector would trigger immediate outcries over a “government takeover of medicine.”

Literally the only thing acceptable to the critics seems to be ever more rationing by income class through very high deductibles and coinsurance.

 

[Revere]

20% across the board. Everything. Or watch it all crash.

 

[Gadawg73]

Reinhardt nailed it the other day.

Any attempt to reduce Medicare reimbursements immediately triggers the outcry that the government shifts costs to the private sector – a No No.

Any attempt to reduce utilization in the public programs immediately triggers outcries over “rationing,” “killing Granny” and “death panels.” Another No No. The Washington Times carried a lead editorial entitled “Efficiency in health care can be deadly.” To underscore its thesis that cost-effectiveness analysis is a Nazi tool, it had a picture of Adolf Hitler right next to its editorial.

Finally, any attempt by government to control prices or utilization in the private sector would trigger immediate outcries over a “government takeover of medicine.”

Literally the only thing acceptable to the critics seems to be ever more rationing by income class through very high deductibles and coinsurance.

Like I said, his ass is GONE.
Wannahbe conservatives. Want to tell others how to run their life and worry about gay marriage all the while claiming to be "conservative".
They want their damn $$ and to hell with their kids that have to pay for it, the $$ that was borrowed to pay for it, the interest paid to borrow the $$ all as they watched the programs fail. And left them nothing.
This generation is the stingiest and greediest generation ever.
Dumb asses.
Makes me want to puke.

 

[uscitizen]

Remove the upper withholding limit.
Cut off benefits for those making over 75k, and forbid the government from spending the surplus.

 

[Gadawg73]

Remove the upper withholding limit.
Cut off benefits for those making over 75k, and forbid the government from spending the surplus.

I would go to seniors with incomes over 100K they get a decreased %, 150K a little less and so on.
We now have Medicare paying benefits COVERED by a pension plan of a senior.
That is just crazy.

 

[Madeline]

I'm surprised there is so much willingness to feel the pain.....but it is necessary. All good ideas, folks.

 

[Revere]

Remove the upper withholding limit.
Cut off benefits for those making over 75k, and forbid the government from spending the surplus.

Would not do squat.

 

[uscitizen]

Remove the upper withholding limit.
Cut off benefits for those making over 75k, and forbid the government from spending the surplus.

I would go to seniors with incomes over 100K they get a decreased %, 150K a little less and so on.
We now have Medicare paying benefits COVERED by a pension plan of a senior.
That is just crazy.

Most pensioners that are lucky enough to have retirement medical coverage are forced on medicare when they become eligable by the pension plan and after that at best the pension plan pays for the medicare supplemental plan.

 

[KissMy]

Here is the New York Times "Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget" Tool.

I can easily balance the budget by cutting deficit spending by 60% & covering the remaining 40% by eliminating some tax loopholes & deductions.

- Cut foreign aid in half
- Eliminate earmarks
- Cut pay of civilian federal workers by 5 percent
- Reduce noncombat military compensation and overhead
- Reduce the number of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to 60,000 by 2015
- Cap Medicare growth starting in 2013
- Reduce Social Security benefits for those with high incomes
- Eliminate loopholes, but keep taxes slightly higher
- Reduce mortgage deduction and others for high-income households
- Bank Tax

 

[Madeline]

Here is the New York Times "Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget" Tool.

I can easily balance the budget by cutting deficit spending by 55% & covering the remaining 45% by eliminating some tax deductions.

That's fairly drastic, KissMy. Where are you making the budget cuts?

 

[Madeline]

Oh, cool. I did one.....

Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

 

[KissMy]

Here is the New York Times "Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget" Tool.

I can easily balance the budget by cutting deficit spending by 60% & covering the remaining 40% by eliminating some tax loopholes & deductions.

That's fairly drastic, KissMy. Where are you making the budget cuts?

To balance the budget by cutting deficit spending by 60% & covering the remaining 40% by eliminating some tax loopholes & deductions.
These were the choices I made

- Cut foreign aid in half
- Eliminate earmarks
- Cut pay of civilian federal workers by 5 percent
- Reduce noncombat military compensation and overhead
- Reduce the number of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to 60,000 by 2015
- Cap Medicare growth starting in 2013
- Reduce Social Security benefits for those with high incomes
- Eliminate loopholes, but keep taxes slightly higher
- Reduce mortgage deduction and others for high-income households
- Bank Tax

 

[Gadawg73]

People with $$ will find ways to avoid taxes such as no tax munis and other investments that are shielded.
Raising taxes on the wealthy never raises revenue.
Spending is the problem and social security and Medicare are the biggest budget items.
You could shut down all ear marks, foreign aid and other welfare and that would not make 10% of the entire budget.

 

[Granny]

I'm on Social Security and I think it should be phased out altogether. I've made several references in the past as to people being able to have retirement funds - and they will work.

As to Gadaway's comments on the US being broke so how do we repay the "loans" Congress has taken from SS over the years - cut the budgets (better yet, do away with) programs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They do not need to be making, and/or forcing other entities to make, loans for mortgages for people who are not financially able to meet the mortgage obligations. *Gasp!* What will those people do for housing? Where would they go? Out on the streets, cold and homeless? Well, no. There's a thing called rental property - apartments, condos, single family homes and the rental rates cover a very broad spectrum. I realize the American Dream is to own a home - but it is not a Constitutional right that we actually do own said house.

Cut back on student loans. There is no Constitutional right to higher education at the expense of others. People who can't add 2+2 or read above a 3rd grade level should not have any expectation that they are entitled to higher education. Those who have busted ass to maintain A/B levels of education should be qualified to receive loans for education - with several expectations - like maintaining those high grades - or lose further loans.

Cut the damned earmarks altogether. That one act should save millions of tax dollars on an ongoing basis.

Make welfare a very temporary source of income and have strict guidelines as to who, when, where and what would qualify someone to receive welfare. It should NOT be a generational permanent source of income. On the other hand, someone may have had some event occur where a temporary helping hand should be offered with the expectation that while that helping hand is being offered the recipient should be doing something to reverse and/or cure the setback.

I think Maddie referred to COLA raises being cut. COLA raises to the best of my knowledge and experience are $100 a year (or just over $8 per month). For 2010 and 2011 there were no COLA raises period. Congress declared in 2009 that there would be no increases in America's living costs therefore no COLA increases were necessary. Of course, costs of food, utilities, housing, and everything else did keep on getting higher and higher and our usable dollars kept shrinking and shrinking. Go figure.

 

[syrenn]

For one cap the age of immigrants at 30. I am SICK of seeing grandma and grandpa being brought over and getting SS and Medicare because they are old. I don't give a shit.

 

[uscitizen]

A pure flat tax on ALL personal income with no minimum and no deductions.