When it was revealed that there would be no cost of living adjustment for Social Security in 2010, people were livid. Just reading the comments on my blog revealed that people were furious there was no adjustment next year, so you can imagine how the broader public felt about it.
It turns out the outrage has yielded results because yesterday, President Obama called on Congress to approve $250 payments to the more than 50 million senior citizens on Social Security. This would make up for the lack of a COLA for next year. Incidentally, since automatic adjustments were implemented for Social Security in 1975, 2010 would’ve been the first year there was no adjustment.
The total cost of the move is estimated at $13 billion.
In addition to the Social Security bonus payment, there was also moves to prevent a reduction in contribution limits for retirement funds like IRAs and 401(k)s.
Obama calls for $250 payments to seniors [Associated Press]
Comments
9 responses to “$250 Social Security Bonus Payment”
[…] 5.8% increase this year (2009). Artificially high is the term used in a NY Times article discussing the $250 Social Security bonus payment President Obama has discussed […]
What a total absurdity to even contemplate spending billions to give us seniors $250 individually. First, not all seniors need it, and the means are already in place to decide which ones, as our Adjusted Gross Income is on file to determine the amount of the Medicare Part B premium we pay. Second, if the cost of living has not gone up, or has gone down, no one should expect a COLA, which means “Cost of Living Adjustment”. I guess if a special interest group complains long enough and loudly enough, the politicians will kow-tow to that group. But where will the money come from? Who will pay the tab?
when they say the cost of living hasn’t gone up, what cost of living are they talking about. these people do not live in the real world! my home owners insurance went up by $250, car insurance by $150, flood insurance by $200. the cost of food is going through the roof. not all people are congressmen or live in the whitehouse.
I am sorry Bill Perkins has had his insurance costs go up, but one cannot generalize from one person’s case. I live in the real world, in a suburb of Los Angeles. My home owner’s insurance has not gone up, nor my car insurance. The cost of food has not gone up here; I shop at the local Ralph’s market (owned by Kroger). As retailers are under enormous pressure, the cost of clothing and other consumer goods has gone down in many cases. The Consumer Price Index has not gone up, but that does not mean that no individual has had some of his costs go up. Some people’s costs are up, some people’s are down, and some people’s are about the same. The average (the Consumer Price Index) is about the same or a little down. Sorry for the pain of those whose costs are up, but public policy has to be made based on the general situation.
This topic has become the largest source of questions that I have been getting as well. It seems that since there has been a Social Security COLA increase every year for years, most people have lost sight of what it was supposed to be. They forget that it was an attempt to compensate the effects of inflation, BUT it is calculated on the basis of AVERAGE WAGES paid nationwide (I don’t pretend to understand the detail calculation method), not actual cost of living. As result, past COLA increases were often well in excess of what inflation would have indicated. Now, because the recession has held average wage increases in check, the calculation indicates no increase is required. There is some talk of changing the method of calculation to mirror inflation. If you think that is a good idea, you should know this was proposed to REDUCE the rate of increase.
In my opinion, we should grin and bear it this year, and see what happens in the next year.
Just a short correction. Apparently I was in error when I stated that the COLA was not based on cost of living data, but wage data. That’s what I get for not checking my sources throughly. I assumed a prominent syndicated columnist would get it right, but I was mistaken. In any case it is based on a narrower bundle of commodites than the CPI that is usually quoted. This caused the 2008 COLA to be higher than it would have been and now the 2009 COLA to be smaller. Again, I say we wait and see, we might not like the alternative any better.
There will be no $250 check–the senate voted on March 3, 2010 against giving any money to Social Security recipients. The money is needed for bombing Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia etc. Remember the Taliban are threatening to take the US over – barefoot and with rockets in their hands – they are the real threat to our system, where you work more hours than in any other country in the world, where health care is not free, where Universities are not free. But who wants Socialism? Socialism means the wealth of a country is evenly spread among its citizens. But Americans don’t want this. So do not complain.
I say let all the senators and congressmen try living on what the government pays people on social security, they don’t even pay into, which I think they should. As far as paying for all the little wars and losing our fine men and women in the military, they should think about the ones here and give us the $250, which is really not a lot, since everything else has gone sky high. Some of us could use that little bit of money. They should raise the earnings at which SS is stopped taken out to $750,000, which would put a lot more into it, and let the fine people in congress pay their fair share. We don’t get to keep our pay after we retire like they do.
A FEW MONTHS AGO MY WIFE BETTY COLEMAN RECEIVED A $250 CHECK FROM SOCIAL SECURITY. WHAT IS IT FOR AND WHY DID I NOT RECEIVED ONE.