Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

Well, now we know where Obama's going to pay for his UAW, GM and Wall Street bailouts - Social Security and Medicare:


No Social Security raises for two years

By Stephen Ohlemacher
Associated Press
WASHINGTON ? Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won?t be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn?t happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

?I will promise you, they count on that COLA,? said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. ?To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal.?

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.

Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

?For many elderly, they don?t feel that inflation is low because their expenses are still going up,? said David Certner, legislative policy director for AARP. ?Anyone who has savings and investments has seen some serious losses.?

About 50 million retired and disabled Americans receive Social Security benefits. The average monthly benefit for retirees is $1,153 this year. All beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent increase in January, the largest since 1982.

More than 32 million people are in the Medicare prescription drug program. Average monthly premiums are set to go from $28 this year to $30 next year, though they vary by plan. About 6 million people in the program have premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security payments, according to the Social Security Administration.

Millions of people with Medicare Part B coverage for doctors? visits also have their premiums deducted from Social Security payments. Part B premiums are expected to rise as well. But under the law, the increase cannot be larger than the increase in Social Security benefits for most recipients.

There is no such hold-harmless provision for drug premiums.

Kennelly?s group wants Congress to increase Social Security benefits next year, even though the formula doesn?t call for it. She would like to see either a 1 percent increase in monthly payments or a one-time payment of $150.

The cost of a one-time payment, a little less than $8 billion, could be covered by increasing the amount of income subjected to Social Security taxes, Kennelly said. Workers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,800 of income, a limit that rises each year with the average national wage.

But the limit only increases if monthly benefits increase.

Critics argue that Social Security recipients shouldn?t get an increase when inflation is negative. They note that recipients got a big increase in January, after energy prices had started to fall. They also note that Social Security recipients received one-time $250 payments in the spring as part of the government?s economic stimulus package.

Consumer prices are down from 2008 levels, giving Social Security recipients more purchasing power, even if their benefits stay the same, said Andrew Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank.

?Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt,? Biggs said. ?Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want.?

So, those on government pensions are to be charged more for health care by the government... yet their pensions will not be increased to compensate. Leaving aside whether or not there should even be a government pension, this just seems wrong.
 
Well, now we know where Obama's going to pay for his UAW, GM and Wall Street bailouts - Social Security and Medicare:




So, those on government pensions are to be charged more for health care by the government... yet their pensions will not be increased to compensate. Leaving aside whether or not there should even be a government pension, this just seems wrong.

I read it as net benefits staying the same with no COLA, not a reduction.
 
I read it as net benefits staying the same with no COLA, not a reduction.

No COLA boost plus increase in Medicare deduction plus stagflation (which we do have, no matter what the administration claims) = effective reduction in benefits.

Even without that in place, the seniors will be getting less money, period, due to an increase in the amount of money taken out for Medicare - so it is a net reduction.
 
Last edited:
Once again, environmentalism getting in the way of common sense (news.com.au):

A MELBOURNE school has banned commercially bottled water in what is believed to be a Victorian first.

Pupils at Eltham North Primary School are being told to drink tap water and use only environmentally friendly re-useable containers.

Principal David Foley said the ban was part of the school's green policy, which includes re-useable containers for lunches.

"We have good water in Melbourne," he said.

"It's a waste of money buying plastic bottled water and most of the bottles end up in our waterways or in landfill.

"We don't want students to come to school using soft drink or bottled water."

It is estimated Australians spend about $500 million each year on bottled water.

A bottled water ban was introduced in the NSW town of Bundanoon last month.

But Mr Foley said his school had been moving towards the policy since installing waste-cutting water fountains last year.

"It's the way to go," he said.

"We're also using it as an education process to see what can happen if water goes off and what can happen if you're using a poor bottle like a soft drink container."

Mr Foley said bags wouldn't be checked for dodgy bottles, but staff would monitor the use of drink containers in class and in the playground.

Brendan Lynch, from water dispenser firm Aquabubbler, said his company had supplied eco-friendly products to hundreds of schools in Victoria.

"Kids are a lot more discerning about where they drink from these days," he said. "A lot of water troughs at schools are unhygienic."

Mr Lynch said it was crazy that people were buying so much bottled water during the economic crisis.

"A lot of those bottles can't be recycled and end up as landfill, it's a no-win situation," he said.

Opposition education spokesman Martin Dixon said he had no problem with the bottle ban.

"It's something that they have weighed up carefully," he said. "It's good to allow schools to do something innovative and environmentally friendly."

Now I'm sorry, but I don't think school should be allowed to dictate what type of water the students drink.

a) are they going to let the kids still bring water from home in those long-term reusable bottles (the ones htat have the neoprene/durable cooler sleeve around them). And if not, how are they going to regulate the coutless drinks breaks kids are going to be taking, especially in the middle of summer? Or are they going to tell them when they are allowed to drink water too, by making them have timed drink breaks?

b) Now, i have nothing against fluoridated tap water except for its taste. But I also drink bottled water. Mainly because at primary school, we had a contamination scare with out bubblers (drinking fountains), where bacteria from the soil got into the pipes and contaminated the drinking supply. I got sick from it, as did my sister. The first sign something was wrong was the actual sickness- the school didn't know. Also, my high school's bubbler are currently full of paint from vandals, so I don't go near them either. And god knows what people have done to bubblers, and when they get cleaned (if at all)

I see it as contradictory to the old adage at school of "don't share stuff to drink out of". I babysit this little girl, she is lovely. But she constantly drinks out of other people's water bottles and lets other kids drink out of hers, especially during sports. Her mother is a germophobe, so I tell her to not do it. Her response? "Well, we share bubblers, so it's the same thing!" My only retort is that people are putting their mouths directly onto the drink bottle, but kids do that to bubblers too.

Honestly, if my school ever went that way too I would most likely go and fill the quad with empty water bottles. We've done it before with other stuff in protest :p
 
I see it as contradictory to the old adage at school of "don't share stuff to drink out of". I babysit this little girl, she is lovely. But she constantly drinks out of other people's water bottles and lets other kids drink out of hers, especially during sports.

Eh, frankly I think that stance is a bit silly. I admit, it's a verly logical rationale, fair enough.
But I've given mates something to drink from my bottle or vice versa countless times, and none of us has died yet, so experience tells me it's not that big an issue. Obviously you don't share with someone who's apparently ill, but that's just common sense.

And I also agree with this statement:
It's a waste of money buying plastic bottled water
I never quite got the point of buying non carbonated water, nevermind buying it in non reusable plastic bottles.
But maybe that's because overe here it is by far most common to buy carbonated water in reusable glass bottles, and plastic bottled water has only really appeared relatively recently.

Whether they should dictate this upon their students is another issue though...
 
Last edited:
a) are they going to let the kids still bring water from home in those long-term reusable bottles (the ones htat have the neoprene/durable cooler sleeve around them). And if not, how are they going to regulate the coutless drinks breaks kids are going to be taking, especially in the middle of summer? Or are they going to tell them when they are allowed to drink water too, by making them have timed drink breaks?

Well that's sure as heck what my school did from the time I started until I graduated. We were allowed water at lunch, between classes, and after PE (if you had the nicest coach you might be allowed a sip during PE but that was rare). It's very nearly as hot here in summer as it is in Melbourne. I think the idea that you HAVE to have water on your person being consumed at a constant trickle is utter BS.

I'm actually all for getting rid of this silly obsession we have with bottled water. Banning it from schools is dumb, but this idea that bottled water is somehow cleaner or better than tap water is ludicrous. Most bottled water is nothing more than city water anyway. I dunno, I just don't get this obsession with water right now. When you're thirsty, get a glass, and fill it up from the faucet. When did this all get so complicated?
 
Whether they should dictate this upon their students is another issue though...

If an entire town can do it, I don't see why a school shouldn't.

The school is effectively telling the pupils to save money - by not buying bottled water - and by offering free chilled tap water instead. I think it's a great idea.
 
(Disclaimer- I'm not against drinking tap water- I jus don't think this is the way to ban disposable ones, given that it souds like they want to ban re-usable bottles too)

@teeb Oh yeah, my legal studies teacher showed us that report. That was hilarious.

And the water is not chilled, it is just regular tap water in a bubbler over a metal trough. The water also tends to get fairly warm in the pipes during summer, which is really gross to drink, especially if you have been exercising.

@flydiscovery- wow, if they did that around here the school would most likely get sued... We are nowhere as bad as Queensland's constant 45 degree days down here, but it does get quite hot in summer. We are actually encouraged at my school to bring water bottles- re-useable ones, though.

And I have a Super Pump bottle nest to me at the moment, but I'm using that for exams- we have to use clear bottles, becasue you can apprently cheat by writing on the inside of a water bottle nowadays. I give them to my dad when i finish with htem (go through 2-3 a year, dependng on how many exam periods I have), and he uses them for crab trap floats. So they get put to good use, if not recycled.

@ shad_68- I've personally shared water bottles countless times too, so I'm probably not one to talk. But things like the Hepatitis strains and meningococcal (sp?) can be spread via saliva, so it's not always a good idea. I knew this guy who contracted hep A a few years back, and his food technology class and football team all had to be re-vaccinated and tested, becasue they had shared utensils/water bottles with him. I don't want to be responsible for a child that isn't mine getting some nasty bug.

And i agree that bottled water is the biggest rort of the 21st century- like I said, i only buy the damn things when I have to and recycle them properly after use. But I still drink it. My parents get those big 10L water bottles delivered, and I fill a glass/reusable water bottle from that. Our tap water is fluoridated, and I hate the taste of it (picky, i know! :p). So it ncourages me (and the rest of my family, of that matter) to drink more water.
 
Bry, I'm going to respond to ya, but I'm in a seriously foul mood today so I'll wait until tomorrow where hopefully I can convey my thoughts much better. Right now I kind of feel like chewing people out for no reason other than that they're there. :blush:
 
my brother in law made some jokes yesturday on how he?ll stop his wife from going voting today (local elections), because she?ll vote for the wrong party (in his opinion) and stopping her will make his vote count double. Then he went on about stopping me from voting today because he?s rather sure I?ll vote "wrong" too ... so that would make his "good" vote count triple ...

We all laughed about it ... but I could tell he?s actually wishing for that scenario to happen ... :lol:
 
What's his impression of "wrong"? :)
 
No COLA boost plus increase in Medicare deduction plus stagflation (which we do have, no matter what the administration claims) = effective reduction in benefits.

Even without that in place, the seniors will be getting less money, period, due to an increase in the amount of money taken out for Medicare - so it is a net reduction.

You're right in a numerical sense, but as far as purchasing power goes, they're better off. Furthermore, they *really* shouldn't be relying on social security for their retirement needs.
 
my brother in law made some jokes yesturday on how he?ll stop his wife from going voting today (local elections), because she?ll vote for the wrong party (in his opinion) and stopping her will make his vote count double. Then he went on about stopping me from voting today because he?s rather sure I?ll vote "wrong" too ... so that would make his "good" vote count triple ...

We all laughed about it ... but I could tell he?s actually wishing for that scenario to happen ... :lol:

It's an offence to not vote in Australia :eek:

Also a Victorian minister has gone missing after bushwalking.
 
Ugh, fuck these people can be stupid. I have no problem with people who hold legit qualms with the US president, but sadly all I see in most of the republican party is crazies. To quote Bill Maher: "...and the other party has no ideology anymore. That's not true conservatism- it's made up mainly of religious lunatics, paranoid McCarthyists, and civil war reenactors".
 
From what I understand, the more level-headed complaints are about the lesson plans that are being sent to all the schools, that actually do strike me as a little slanted towards being pro-Obama.

Those who are just complaining because he's actually addressing students at all are just being ridiculous. Bush Jr.Sr. and Reagan both did the exact same thing.
 
Last edited:
Top