In societies across the globe, men demonstrate their manhood in different ways. There are many wonderful tracts on the topic. However, in the culture of Washington DC, the best way to demonstrate your manhood is to express your willingness to cut Medicare and Social Security. There is no better way to be admitted into the club of the Very Serious People.
This is the reason that we saw White House spokesman Jay Carney tell a press conference. He told the reporters that President Obama is still willing to cut Social Security benefits by using the chained CPI as the basis for the annual cost of living adjustment (COLA). This willingness to cut the benefits of retirees establishes President Obama as a serious person in elite Washington circles.
While most of the DC insiders probably don’t understand the chained CPI, everyone else should recognize that this technical fix amounts to a serious cut in benefits. It reduces benefits compared to the current schedule by 0.3 percent annually. This adds up through time. After someone has been getting benefits for 10 years, the cut in annual benefits is 3 percent. After 20 years, people would be seeing a benefit that is 6 percent lower, and after 30 years their benefit would be reduced by 9 percent. (AARP has a nice calculator which shows how much retirees can expect to lose from the chained CPI.)
We can debate whether the chained CPI benefit cut should be viewed as “large,” but there is no debate that chained CPI cut is a bigger hit to the typical retiree than the ending of the Bush tax cuts were to the typical high-end earner. Social Security provides more than half of the income for almost 70 percent of retirees. This means that the 3 percent cut in Social Security benefits amounts to a reduction in their income of more than 1.5 percent.
By contrast, if a wealthy couple has an income of $500,000 a year, as a result of President Obama’s tax hikes, they would be paying an addition three percentage points in taxes, or $3,000, on the income above $400,000. That comes to just 0.6 percent of their income.
If the proponents of using the chained CPI to cut Social Security want to claim that this cut is not a big deal, then they must also believe that the tax increases on the wealthy were not a big deal. That’s what the arithmetic says, and there is no way around it.
The other fact that there is no way around is that they cannot claim that the cut is based on a desire to have a more accurate COLA. There are reasons for claiming that the chained CPI provides a better measure of inflation for the population as a whole. But we know that the elderly have different consumption patterns from the overall population.
Specifically, they consume more health care and housing and fewer new cars and computers.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has an experimental elderly index that shows the current CPI actually understates the inflation rate experienced by the elderly. BLS also has done research that shows that the impact of substitution -the key issue with the chained CPI in which consumers substitute less expensive products and services during periods of inflation – varies for different demographic groups. This could mean, for example, that many people may have large opportunities to substitute to goods whose prices are rising more slowly.
However, the elderly with a consumption basket that disproportionately consists of housing and medical expenses may have fewer opportunities for such substitutions.
While this research, as well as the experimental elderly index, is far from conclusive, there is an obvious solution to anyone genuinely concerned about accuracy: have BLS construct a full elderly index. But talk of a full elderly CPI is strictly verboten among the macho men in Washington DC. They want to cut Social Security and they don’t have time for no stinkin’ research.
So there we have it: a Democratic president in the White House, along with many of the top Democrats in Congress, who is willing to give seniors a larger hit to their income than he is to the income of the wealthy. It sure makes you admire their toughness.
Plus, then we don’t have to speculate on whether the CPI or the chained CPI is a more accurate measure of their inflation rate.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today during our fundraiser. We have 7 days to add 432 new monthly donors. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.