SPONSORED BY:

Scaring Seniors

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

The ad implies that Bush's plan bets the whole lot of Social Security funds on unstable stocks. In fact, it would have "privatized" only a small portion of Social Security taxes that Americans could have invested in private accounts, if they chose to do so.

"Cutting Benefits"
The ad goes on to claim that the Bush (and McCain) plan would cut "benefits in half." This is a rank misrepresentation. Nobody now getting benefits, or even close to retirement, would have seen any reduction in benefits or cost-of-living adjustments under the plan Bush proposed in April, 2005. What Bush proposed—in addition to creating private Social Security accounts—was to hold down the growth of benefits received by those retiring in the future. He embraced a proposal for "progressive price indexing" of future benefits. This would have been a "cut" only in relation to what the current formula would produce for future retirees, assuming that taxes are increased sufficiently to keep the system going.

The "price indexing" would have tied the growth to the rate of price inflation, rather than to the growth of wages, as is the case now. Wages have historically risen faster than prices, so the current wage-indexed system pushes benefits for future retirees up faster than the rate of inflation. The "progressive" part would have held down the growth only for higher-income and middle-income workers, while allowing benefits for lower-income workers to rise in line with the current wage-based formula.

The Obama-Biden campaign attempts to document their "cutting benefits in half" claim by citing a report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities written by Jason Furman, who is currently one of Obama's top economic advisers. This won't do. What Furman's study actually says is quite different from what the ad claims.

Furman's report says that the "progressive price indexing" plan Bush supported would result in benefits for the average worker who retires in 2075 that are 28 percent lower than under the current formula. Obviously 28 percent is not "half."

The Obama-Biden campaign notes that Furman's paper also says that full price indexing of benefits—even for low-income workers—would result in benefits 49 percent lower than the current formula in 2075. But that's not the plan Bush supported, and we find no evidence that McCain ever supported it either. We asked the Obama campaign to show us where McCain has ever supported full price indexing of benefits, but so far they have not done so.

What McCain Says
For the record, McCain has said that he would seek a bipartisan deal with Congress to fix Social Security's financial problems.

During a Republican candidate debate last year in Orlando, Florida, he said:

McCain, Oct. 21, 2007: Look, what Americans need is some straight talk. They need to know—every man, woman and child in America needs to know that both of these are going broke. They're going broke and we've got to do the hard things. We've got to fix it for the future generations of Americans. Don't we owe that to young Americans today? I say we do. ... It's got to be bipartisan. ... And you have to got to the American people and say we don't—we won't raise your taxes. We need personal savings accounts, but we got to fix this system.

The system isn't exactly "going broke." But the latest official projection is that the trust fund will be exhausted by the year 2041, after which current tax rates will finance only 78 percent of currently scheduled benefits. We agree that "straight talk" is needed and that finding solutions will be hard. Ads like this, however, misinform the public and make the job of fixing the system more difficult.

Reprinted with permission from Factcheck.org.

Sources
Furman, Jason "An Analysis of Using 'Progressive Price Indexing' to Set Social Security Benefits," Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, May 2005.

"Fact Sheet: Strengthening Social Security For Those In Need," White House Fact Sheet, 28 April 2005.

"A Summary of the 2008 Annual Report," Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustee, 3 April 2008.

Davis, Bob, "Campaign '08: McCain Interview: 'I'm Always for Less Regulation'." Wall Street Journal, 3 March 2008.

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Solving the Palin Puzzle
Solving the Palin Puzzle

See how well you can see Sarah from your house, by taking our trivia quiz.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Dial 'A' for Accessory
Dial 'A' for Accessory

This season's top i-Phone add-ons.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Jim Johnson @ 10/18/2008 2:10:20 PM

    I am 68 years old and I wish I had had my social security money to invest. I have done extremely well in the stock market. Who are you to tell seniors what is best for them. Go to hell!

  • Posted By: Jim Johnson @ 10/18/2008 2:07:41 PM

    Obama's view of the future of America - Socialism which is the next step to Communism!! He admitted to Joe the Plumber than he wanted to spread the wealth! He said that he wanted to make everyone equal! Is America ready for Socialism? The Iranian president, Ahmadinejad, said today that he is glad to see the end to capitalism in America!! Are you glad?????
    ====================================================================================================


    Under socialism a ruling class of intellectuals, bureaucrats and social planners decide what people want or what is good for society and then use the coercive power of the State to regulate, tax, and redistribute the wealth of those who work for a living. In other words, socialism is a form of legalized theft.

    The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another's wealth but also the desire to see another's wealth lowered to the level of one's own. Socialism's teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: "Common good comes before private good." Fascism, said
    Mussolini, is "a life in which the individual, through the sacrifice of his own private interests??realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies."

    Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.

    Despite the intellectuals' psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

    Capitalism is the only moral system because it requires human beings to deal with one another as traders--that is, as free moral agents trading and selling goods and services on the basis of mutual consent.

    Capitalism is the only just system because the sole criterion that determines the value of thing exchanged is the free, voluntary, universal judgement of the consumer. Coercion and fraud are anathema to the free-market system.

    It is both moral and just because the degree to which man rises or falls in society is determined by the degree to which he uses his mind. Capitalism is the only social system that rewards merit, ability and achievement, regardless of one's birth or station in life.

    Yes, there are winners and losers in capitalism. The winners are those who are honest, industrious, thoughtful, prudent, frugal, responsible, disciplined, and efficient. The losers are those who are shiftless, lazy, imprudent, extravagant, negligent, impractical, and inefficient. [What about the role of luck­ being in the right place at the right time or the wrong place at the wrong time? R. R. Pope}

  • Posted By: Jim Johnson @ 10/18/2008 2:07:13 PM

    Everyone of voting age should read these two books written by Obama, 'Dreams of My Father' and 'Audacity of Hope'. Don't buy them, get them from the library before they are removed from the shelves.

    From 'Dreams of My Father', "I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites."

    From 'Dreams of My Father', "'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race."

    From 'Dreams of My Father', "There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white."

    From 'Dreams of My Father', "It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

    From 'Dreams of My Father', "I never emulate WHITE men and BROWN men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela."

    And FINALLY the Most Damning one of ALL of them!!!

    From 'Audacity of Hope', "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now
 

A new ad goes too far when it says Medicare will be "bankrupt" in eight years.