Comments on: $250 Social Security Bonus Payment

By: Marie

Marie — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 13:55:26 +0000

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.

By: Burt Widener

Burt Widener — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 02:48:07 +0000

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.

By: Burt Widener

Burt Widener — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:11:15 +0000

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.

By: Ray Joiner

Ray Joiner — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:38:22 +0000

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.

By: bill perkins

bill perkins — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:00:40 +0000

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.

By: Ray Joiner

Ray Joiner — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 06:47:37 +0000

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?

By: No COLA in 2010, Artificially High COLA in 2009 :: My Retirement Blog

No COLA in 2010, Artificially High COLA in 2009 :: My Retirement Blog — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:46:33 +0000

[...] 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 [...]