Posted by Jesse Benton on 10/15/09 2:26 PM   [Newer: Dr. Paul in Politico: "The Fed Should Be More Transparent"] [Older: Two important Dr. Paul TV Interviews today!]

It's official - there will be no Social Security COLA through 2012- and I don't mean an unsatisfying beveage to wash down your government cheese.

The cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, is based on the consumer-price index for workers, urban wage earners and clerical workers. Seniors will not receive a cost-of-living increase for the first time since 1975.

 

The highly manipulated, poorly calculated and politically motivated CPI is a horrible metric to judge the real cost of living. This news means that our parents and grandparents, forced into dependency on the state run ponzy scheme, will be further squeezed as they try to pay for medicine, food, ect.

Social Security is going broke, and fast. Meanwhile, Congress and the Obama Administration continue to raid the trust fund to mask just how horrific our real deficit is. We need to come to our senses, stop treating the trust like a slush fund and let young people opt of social security before this mountain of irresponsibility crushes us for good.

Read more here.

Posted 10/15/09 2:49 PM Gardentoolnumber5 San Diego, CA

Obama is losing votes from the old folk. Pass out 250 dollar checks costing 13 billion instead of the COLA, it looks more personal. Perception is everything. schedule the bunk stimulus package to be progressive so more is spent the closer Obama gets to re-election.

Posted 10/15/09 7:21 PM sequoiahugger Fairview, OR

"This news means that our parents and grandparents, forced into dependency on the state run ponzy [sic] scheme, will be further squeezed as they try to pay for medicine, food, ect. [sic]" I like this phrasing quite a bit. While Social Security is a giant Ponzi scheme, let's not forget Ron Paul's and Peter Schiff's stance on ending it: these people, our parents and grandparents, paid into it for years and didn't have the opportunity to save that money or invest in gold or other commodities. Ending it abruptly would be a tragedy of epic proportions for those dependent on it for their survival. Hopefully, though, some kind of realistic, compassionate "exit strategy" can be found to ween us all off the government teat.

Posted 10/15/09 9:55 PM BruceKoerber Cedar Rapids, IA

Money and Ethics Thursday, October 15, 2009 Three Easy Steps To Solve The Social Security Problem! Step One is disconnecting Social Security from 'Cost Of Living' adjustments by fabricating zero inflation data to justify no COL adjustment. Step Two is to throw the dog a bone! Tell Social Security recipients that they will be receiving $250 from their lords. Step Three is to kill off the older population by forcing them into a socialized medicine program that will not respond to their health issues simply because of plethora of mandates from the health czars!

Posted 10/15/09 10:25 PM Anthony Gregory Berkeley, CA

"While Social Security is a giant Ponzi scheme, let's not forget Ron Paul's and Peter Schiff's stance on ending it: these people, our parents and grandparents, paid into it for years and didn't have the opportunity to save that money or invest in gold or other commodities. Ending it abruptly would be a tragedy of epic proportions for those dependent on it for their survival." Many of the oldest paid much less into it than SS victims have to now. You can say they are owed for having to pay into the system, but many people have been victimized by the state who cannot ever be repaid. But I agree -- it is not the first thing to cut.

Posted 10/15/09 11:30 PM BillNM Carlsbad, NM

Yes, for us old guys our rates were much lower. I started paying in 1949, but remember that the money went much further then. Since I have been collecting SS I have also been paying taxes on the SS income. Not to mention the premiums for medicare etc. Socialism is the exploitation of one class by another with the criminals in Washington taking their cut as the money passes through. For SS the old exploit the young; for medicare the unhealthy exploit the healthy; and for some of the redistribution the rich exploit the poor; and for other redistribution the welfare folks exploit the working man; etc. Washington has succeeded in breaking down the family. We used to hang together and had no need of government. They are now the parent and the family is diffused. At this point I don't think a soft landing is possible. Cutting government spending on all fronts is going to cause severe dislocations; probably just what we need to come back to our senses. Then returning to sound money and eliminating legal tender laws will restrain government and begin a much needed reorganization. Got carried away; sorry.

Posted 10/16/09 01:54 AM xxmikiandmikoxx San Ramon, CA

Accourding to the Supreme Court, Social Security is not guaranteed. "The Court decided, in Flemming v. Nestor (1960), that "entitlement to Social Security benefits is not a contractual right"." AKA, it is not guaranteed because it is not a contract like insurance where you pay it, and you are owed something. IT IS JUST A TAX! Just another scheme to add more money to the general fund. From there the Health and Human Services Secretary gets a budget for Social Security, but it is NOT GUARANTEED BY LAW. Also as a correction, Ron Paul said he would have a transition for the "promises" made to those who paid into it while allowing for the younger generation to opt out.

Posted 10/16/09 07:22 AM MichaelBarry Sebring, FL

No reason to worry the $250 handouts will be coming from obama's stash. (Sarcasm)