The Washington Post editorial board likes President Bush’s proposal to adjust how Social Security benefits are indexed:
IS PRESIDENT BUSH advocating cruel cuts in Social Security? Consider these calculations by the Urban Institute’s C. Eugene Steuerle: Government-provided retirement benefits for the average couple retiring in 1960 amounted to $195,000. Today, that amount has grown to $710,000 ($439,000 in Social Security and $271,000 in Medicare, which didn’t exist in 1960). For a couple retiring 25 years from now, lifetime benefits are scheduled to exceed $1 million. Mr. Steuerle’s numbers are adjusted for inflation, so this is real growth.
Is this sensible, given other pressing demands? Is it sustainable, given the impending retirement of the baby boomers? The answer to both questions is no, which is why Mr. Bush’s proposal to adjust the way that increases in Social Security benefits are calculated — a method known as progressive indexing — merits serious consideration.
Bush unveiled the propsosal more than a month ago. The WaPo’s comments are welcome, albeit belated.blog comments powered by Disqus
LA Times: Trump’s so emotionally traumatizing that even therapists are in need of therapy, or something
February 24, 2017 01:18 PM by Doug Powers
New York Times, Washington Post in heated battle over which paper woke up fastest from 8-year hibernation
February 23, 2017 07:23 PM by Doug Powers
February 16, 2017 08:34 PM by Doug Powers
February 15, 2017 04:22 PM by Doug Powers
February 14, 2017 10:59 AM by Doug Powers