Mike Kilburn on Social Security
Mike Kilburn, a Warren County Commissioner who is ready to challenge Jean Schmidt (R-OH) for her seat in Congress, recorded the following video on Social Security:
Mike Kilburn: A much bigger problem than healthcare in this country is the financial stability of our Social Security program. Social Security is the program that needs to change. We need to look at the retirement age. We need to look at how we fund Social Security. You know, you only pay Social Security premiums on the first $100,000. You know, anyone making over $100,000 doesn’t pay any premium on that last end of their salary. So if we would revise that, I’m sure we could put Social Security back on a good footing. But we’ve got to get on top of it or people aren’t going to get those benefits they worked so hard and expected to have when they retire.
2010 Social Security COLA Poll
It’s official: There will be no COLA in 2010, even though costs of living have been going up for most seniors. Should the government pay Social Security recipients a $250 COLA replacement, and if so, how should they pay for it?
Loading ...Is the 2010 COLA just a government bribe for seniors on Social Security?
Next year, for the first time ever, social security recipients will not receive a cost of living adjustment in their payments. Instead, Barack Obama is proposing a one-time $250 payment right before next fall’s midterm elections. Gerald Celente says that the cost of living really hasn’t decreased, the government is basing their measurements on a decreasing standard of living and the payout is just to keep people quiet.
Bill: Joining us for more on this is Dina. So does the government have anything left now to sweeten the pill for those on Social Security?
Dina Gusovsky: Indeed they do. Now millions of Social Security recipients, as you said, will not see an increase in their monthly payments next year, because the cost of living has decreased. But, the federal government says it’s going to give them a onetime payment of $250, which of course will cost the government billions of dollars, considering how many seniors there are. So, is this really warranted, and how much is it going to contribute to the national debt?
Well, joining me is Gerald Celente from the Trends Research Institute. Mr. Celente, thank you so much for speaking to me. So, help me understand this – if the cost of living is decreasing, then why are seniors getting anything at all?
Gerald Celente: Well, first of all, the cost of living isn’t decreasing. What they are doing in Washington is the same thing they do on Wall Street. They cook the book. What they’ve done is they’ve cooked the cost of living. For example, one time it used to be a fixed basket of goods. Now it’s a variable basket of goods. So let’s say that the price of gasoline goes up, they say, “Oh, no no. It really didn’t go up. The quality of air went up, so therefore, the cost of gasoline went down.” They’re doing everything they can to shortchange the people. So it’s going to cost the government 13 billion dollars to give the people a couple of bucks that they will hardly feel at all.
Dina Gusvsky: Well, that’s another thing I wanted to ask you. Where did they come off with this figure? What’s $250 going to do?
Geralnd Celente: Well, they’re just making something up, just like they make up the numbers. These numbers have nothing to do with reality. The reality is that what they’re measuring now is a declining standard of living. So let’s say at one time they measured you going into a retail store and buying some clothes. Now they’re going to measure you going into a discount store, or a dollar store, to buy your goods and services. They didn’t even take into account the rising prices of housing. The way they measure it is, “How much can you rent your house for? Even though, let’s say, you are paying $4,000 a month for that mortgage, you can only rent it for $1,500, so therefore the cost didn’t go up, it went down.” They’re cooking the books just like they do on Wall Street.
Dina Gusvsky: So is this essentially a political move, because these payments are going to be issued just before the mid-term elections. Is this kind of a bribe, would you say, because politicians rely on seniors to vote?
Gerald Celente: Of course it is. The people are seething from the tens of billions of dollars that executives are getting in pay, and the Wall Street bonuses that were given to them, via the people, through the bailout programs. So they’re throwing the people a couple of crumbs to keep them quiet and to say, “Hey, we’re in your corner and we’re doing the best we can to help you”. It’s political jive talk.
Dina Gusvsky: Is this a second stimulus then? Because the government has been very careful about how it words this. What do you think?
Gerald Celente: Well, it’s not a stimulus. But what it is doing is that the effect is the same. Follow the dollar and follow gold prices. Gold prices are hitting historic highs. The dollar is now worth 16% on year, and what it is doing is it is devaluing the dollar and a continuation of very, very irresponsible Federal Reserve policies. It’s just building up more debt, that’s all it’s doing.
Dina Gusvsky: Well, speaking about that, how does Barack Obama plan to finance this? He hasn’t been clear on that, either.
Gerald Celente: Same way they finance everything, by just selling more debt. They’re monetizing debt, and so that’s all we’re seeing, again. The results can be seen on the markets. Current events form future trends. You know, they’re talking about the DOW hitting 10,000. Well, the DOW first hit 10,000 ten years ago. Since that time, the dollar has lost 36% against the Swiss franc and the euro. Ten years ago an ounce of gold was selling at $280/ounce, not $1,050/ounce as it is today. And ten years ago, a barrel of oil was going for under $17, not nearly $77 a barrel. So you can see what they’re doing; devaluing the dollar. The cost of living index is really just chasing America’s lowering standards of living.
Dina Gusvsky: That’s a very interesting point, Mr. Celente. I want to thank you for your analysis, as always. And right now I’m going to throw it back to you in Moscow, Bill. But we will be here in just one hour bringing you another live up-to-date report.
Bill: Thanks very much indeed, Dina. And as Dina says…
Seniors Need a $250 COLA in 2010
The National Committee To Preserve Social Security and Medicare delivered 120,000 petitions to Congress saying “Seniors Need A COLA”.
Senator Bernie Sanders: On October 15th, it is expected that social security administration will announce for the first time in 35 years that seniors will not receive a COLA. Based on the formula, that by law they are obliged to use, they came to the conclusion that there is no inflation this year for seniors, and in fact their understanding is that prices for seniors have declined.
In my view, that is a wrong formulation. And I believe that it simply does not accurately reflect the purchasing habits of seniors. Seniors right now – I know this will come as a great shock – are not rushing out to discount stores to buy laptops, computers or iPods. What seniors now are purchasing, what they need, is health care prescription drugs. And the evidence is overwhelming that seniors spend a disproportionate percentage of their limited incomes on health care and prescription drug needs. And those costs, sadly, are not declining. They are, in fact, going up.
Rep. Peter DeFazio: As Senator Sanders noted earlier, a much more accurate measurement of the poverty level for seniors would show that it’s twice what we measure it at. We don’t have a good measure of what the inflation rate is for seniors. But we do know that pharmaceutical costs continue to escalate, medical care costs continue to escalate. Their rents or mortgages haven’t gone down. Their utilities have likely gone up. You know, nothing else that they have to consume has gone down in price over the last year. So, this modest $250 one-time payment to seniors would be basically equivalent to a 2% cost of living adjustment. It would help them meet some of those bare necessity costs.
Barbara B. Kennelly: And I am here today to deliver a 120,000 petitions saying “Hey, guess what? We need a COLA! Guess what, we’ve got some problems! We are the seniors of the United States. We are the seniors that built this county to be the country it is.” And I’m so delighted that these gentlemen are right behind that.
Let me give you the facts – 43% increase in Part A since 2000, 50% increase in Part B since 2000. Part D – now listen to this – Part D has a 130% increase. Those are prescription drugs.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: In Rhode Island, our seniors have a bigger proportion of their income come from social security than almost any other state. And we have seen, with real impact, what the other speakers have described. Which is – seniors seeing electric utility rates go up, seniors seeing pharmaceutical costs go up, seniors seeing all the real costs of their living go up. And with no real help in sight.
Senator Bob Casey: The least that we should do in the midst of the terrible recession, for older citizens and for families all across the country, is to make sure that we can provide some measure of relief that this legislation provides. That’s why we support it, no matter when it would come up, but especially in the midst of this economic darkness that so many families, so many older citizens have had to endure.
Rep. Maurice Hinchey: A failure to provide a Social Security COLA in 2010 for seniors would be a very critical mistake and have a very negative impact on them. And also, given the economic circumstances our country has faced over the course of this past year – actually, over the course of past two years – this economic downturn has pushed a decline in the standard of living of many seniors. Many have seen their home values drop, their pension funds severely decline, and their savings, in many instances, undermined and disappearing.
Estelle Lenet: My name is Esther Lenette and I am a resident of Montgomery county, Maryland. I’m 91 years old, and blessed to still be living independently. My only source of income is Social Security and I want to say that without Social Security, I don’t know where I’d be today. I really don’t. Getting a COLA next year doesn’t mean I’m going to be able to live extravagantly, but it means that I can keep up with my financial responsibilities and pay for the basics, especially the medical care that helps me stay independent. My thanks to the members of Congress for working to pass a COLA for seniors. Thank you!
Social Security Confirms: No COLA in 2010!
Prompt Passage of Economic Recovery Act Payment for 2010 Needed
Law Does Not Provide for a Social Security Cost-of-Living Adjustment for 2010
With consumer prices down over the past year, monthly Social Security and Supplemental Security Income benefits for more than 57 million Americans will not automatically increase in 2010. This will be the first year without an automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) since they went into effect in 1975.
“Social Security is doing its job helping Americans maintain their standard of living,” Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security said. “Last year when consumer prices spiked, largely as a result of higher gas prices, beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent COLA, the largest increase since 1982. This year, in light of the human need, we need to support President Obama’s call for us to make another $250 recovery payment for 57 million Americans.”
The Social Security Act provides that Social Security and Supplemental Security Income benefits increase automatically each year if there is an increase in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) from the third quarter of the last year to the third quarter of the current year. This year there was no increase in the CPI-W from the third quarter of 2008 to the third quarter of 2009. In addition, because there was no increase in the CPI-W this year, under the law the starting point for determinations regarding a possible 2011 COLA will remain the third quarter of 2008.
Some other changes that would normally take effect in January 2010 based on the increase in average wages also will not take effect, even though average wages did increase. Since there is no COLA, the statute prohibits an increase in the maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security tax as well as the retirement earnings test exempt amounts. These amounts will remain unchanged in 2010. The attached fact sheet provides more information on 2010 Social Security changes.
Information about Medicare changes for 2010, when available, will be found at www.Medicare.gov. The Department of Health and Human Services has not yet announced if there will be any Medicare premium changes for 2010. Should there be an increase in the Medicare Part B premium, the law contains a “hold harmless” provision that protects about 93 percent of Social Security beneficiaries from paying a higher Part B premium, in order to avoid reducing their net Social Security benefit. Those not protected include higher income beneficiaries subject to an income-adjusted Part B premium and beneficiaries newly entitled to Part B in 2010. On September 24th, the House passed legislation by 406-18 that would, on a fully paid-for basis, prevent abnormally large premium increases. The President is calling on the Senate to enact this legislation before it becomes too late for the Social Security Administration to update its computer systems to implement this needed change.
For additional information about the 2010 COLA, go to www.socialsecurity.gov/cola.
Healthcare Reform and Closing The Medicare Doughnut Hole
Capitol Hill News Conference on HealthCare Reform and Medicare September 30, 2009
Nancy Pelosi: Medicare is our solemn pledge, a pledge of stability for our seniors. They paid into the system and we want them to get everything they deserve out of it. What we are promising with our new legislation is the following: better benefits, closing the doughnut hole and lowering drug costs, ensuring free preventive care and better primary care. Number 1 is better benefits. Number 2 is guaranteed access to your doctors for our seniors. Eliminating the 21% pay cut your doctor was facing for Medicare reimbursements, ensuring that these doctors will be able to care for our seniors, especially in rural areas. And third, extended financial stability of Medicare.
Extending the solvency of Medicare trust fund for 5 years. Cutting waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare, and re-investing those savings in benefit improvements. And focusing healthcare dollars on care and benefits, instead of overpayments to private insurance companies.
John Dingell: This is the gavel I used when I presided over the House when we passed Medicare in 1965. I want to reintroduce some of the comments that my Republican colleagues were making when I was sitting up in the chair using this gavel. Here is what Carl Curtis, senator from Nebraska, said about Medicare: “It is not needed, it is socialism. It moves the country in a direction which is not good for anyone, whether they’re young or old. It charts a course from which there will be no turning back. It is not only socialism, it is brazen socialism.” Sounds a little like what they’re saying about the health bill that we’re pushing.
Barbara B. Kennelly: I stand here as a senior, absolutely appalled at what I’ve heard all summer. Absolutely appalled. Max Richmond, my vice-president is somewhere here. We have gone around the country and done townhall meetings with members of Congress. And I hear things that are absolutely wrong, and all that din and all that noise doesn’t tell what Speaker Pelosi’s bill does. And so that’s why I am here today, to make sure that seniors understand what is going on right now. And you know, here is the big problem. Seniors think, and they’ve been told, if we don’t have healthcare reform that they can have the status quo. Well, they can’t. Because healthcare costs are increasing. We all know about how much all healthcare costs are increasing.
Martin Heinrich: We know, as you’ve heard before today, that the status quo is unsustainable. American seniors included simply can’t afford to keep paying the rising costs of health insurance, and our seniors shouldn’t have to choose between necessary prescription drugs and paying their utility bills. The house bill does a great deal for seniors. It weighs deductibles and co-pays for preventative care. It improves quality and lowers costs, extending the solvency of the Medicare program, and cracks down on unscrupulous companies who would take advantage of our seniors. Significantly, the bill will reduce and eventually eliminate the prescription drug doughnut hole. There is no issue that I hear more about from my seniors than closing the doughnut hole in Medicare Part D.
Gerry Johnston: I’m Gerry Johnston, and I’m a causality of a medicare doughnut hole. Last year, as I was refilling a prescription, I was told that I owed a hundred dollars. I thought, “They must be mistaken”, since I had been asked to pay that much before. But no, I was told I was in the doughnut hole and if I wanted to get my pain relief for my back, I would have to pay the $100. It was a terrible surprise because I didn’t have room in my budget to pay for the medicine that allows me to manage my chronic back pain. I was torn between going without the prescription and coping with the pain of putting the charge on my credit card, and hoping I could work out something later. I’m glad to be here today to speak for the millions of seniors who understand that we can’t reform Medicare and solve the doughnut hole problem unless we address the healthcare reform bill overall. Most seniors are on fixed incomes, as myself, and don’t have a lot of options when it comes to paying their rising health costs bills. We need reform now. Thank you so much.
Social Security Hearings Backlog Down for First Time in Decade
Productivity and Processing Times Also Improve
Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, today announced that for the first time since 1999, the agency has ended the year with fewer disability hearings pending than in the prior year. Social Security ended fiscal year (FY) 2009 with 722,822 hearings pending compared to 760,813 hearings pending at the start of the year, a reduction of more than 37,000 cases. Over the same period, the average processing time for these cases improved from 514 days in FY 2008 to 491 in FY 2009.
“Our backlog reduction plan is working, and progress is accelerating,” Commissioner Astrue said. “Even in the face of a significant increase in our workloads as a result of the worst recession since the Great Depression, we have reduced the hearings backlog for nine consecutive months. Thanks to the efforts of thousands of hardworking Social Security employees and the additional funding we received from President Obama and the Congress, we have exceeded our backlog reduction goal for this year.”
To achieve its backlog reduction goals, the agency has embarked on the largest expansion in decades of its capacity to hear disability appeals. This year, the agency hired 147 new Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) and 850 support staff and plans to hire 226 additional ALJs plus support staff in FY 2010. To provide flexibility to assist the most backlogged hearing offices, the agency opened three new National Hearing Centers (NHCs) in Albuquerque, New Mexico; Baltimore, Maryland; and Chicago, Illinois. The agency also has aggressive plans to open 14 new hearing offices and 4 satellite offices by the end of next year with the first of those new offices opening in Anchorage, Alaska in the next few months.
In addition to reducing the number of cases awaiting a hearing decision, the agency again targeted the oldest and most difficult cases for processing. Beginning in FY 2007 with 65,000 cases that were 1,000 days old or older, the agency has continually attacked its “aged” cases. This year, the agency targeted 166,838 cases that were 850 days or older and virtually eliminated this entire universe of cases. The goal in FY 2010 has been reset again to eliminate cases over 825 days old.
Social Security’s ALJs also continue to increase their productivity. The agency averaged 570 dispositions (2.28 per day) per available ALJ in FY 2009, an upward trend that has continued for the last three years.
For more information about Social Security’s hearings process and backlog reduction initiatives, go to www.socialsecurity.gov/appeals.
Social Security Establishes Financial Literacy Research Consortium
Research Centers Will Develop Innovative Ways to Help Americans Plan for a Secure Retirement
Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, today announced the establishment of a new Financial Literacy Research Consortium (FLRC), made up of research centers at Boston College, the RAND Corporation, and the University of Wisconsin. The FLRC, supported through five-year cooperative agreements, will develop innovative materials and programs to help Americans plan for a secure retirement.
“We have a responsibility to help the public understand the role of Social Security benefits and the need for them to save as they plan for their future,” said Commissioner Astrue. “Consequently, we have launched a research initiative to better inform the public about retirement saving options.”
The FLRC will tailor materials for Americans at different stages of their working lives – new workers, mid-career professionals, near-retirees, and those who have already left the workforce – to address the different challenges these individuals face. The FLRC also will help traditionally underserved populations better understand the path toward a secure retirement.
“The consortium constitutes an impressive collection of expertise and resources with a deep understanding of issues related to financial literacy,” Commissioner Astrue said. “We look forward to building a strong partnership with the FLRC as well as with other federal agencies with similar missions. In these challenging economic times, this partnership will help Americans to solidify their financial future.”
No COLA for SS Beneficiaries = Lower Benefits?
There will be no COLA this year because officially there is no inflation. But in reality, many prices — above all healthcare costs — continue to rise.
What is your experience? Are your costs of living going up? Should COLA be redefined so that it is more consistent with reality?
Mr. Shepard Smith: For many, many years, some would argue when it’s politically expedient to do so, critics on both sides of the aisle have claimed that Social Security was going to go completely bankrupt. I mean, bankrupt, it’s over, unless the entire system is drastically overhauled. We’ve all heard it.
Well, today, there’s a preview of things to come again. For the first time since the 1970s, the Federal government will not be giving seniors a cost of living increase (COLA). The amount on the checks will instead stay the same, but as healthcare costs rise, what this basically amounts to is a smaller Social Security check for seniors. I mean, if you look at it, that’s what it is.
Complicating matters, millions of babyboomers are now preparing to become senior citizens and it’s the babyboomers that we’ve known all about for decades and all of a sudden, it’s a crisis. With us now is financial consultant and money manager, Rodney Anderson. Rodney, it’s great to see you. Thank you.
Mr. Rodney Anderson: Thanks, Shep.
Mr. Shepard Smith: It’s not as if we didn’t know that babyboomers were about to get older, they are. We’ve known it for decades that it was coming. I mean, please don’t tell me this is the end of Social Security because we all know better. Every time they say it, they just find more money for it and make it work. Otherwise, they’d get voted out of office, right?
Mr. Rodney Anderson: Well, the decision to freeze Social Security is like putting a band aid on a compound fracture. We’re seeing where seniors are having their benefits cut and their cost of healthcare go up. We’re seeing them where they’re having their investments, which are the 401ks or IRAs just plummet down but not only that, we’re seeing their investments such as their CDs and their savings rates go down and this is where they lived off of. But many of these seniors through healthcare are having to finance their debt, debt that they’ve never had to finance before and that is being taken on by credit cards and then we have the banks raising everybody’s credit card rates and it’s killing the seniors and that’s why more and more are going into bankruptcy right now.
Mr. Shepard Smith: Well, it’s killing everybody to bankruptcy. And quite frankly it’s killing the seniors, but I don’t know… I don’t know how that leads us to say that this is the beginning of the end of Social Security because I’m not going to listen to it for a long time anyway because I’ve been hearing it for so many decades and it never happens. I mean, why would it happen this time?
Mr. Rodney Anderson: Well, in 2016, we don’t have enough money going into Social Security to fund it. But in the year 2037…
Mr. Shepard Smith: Yeah, well, in the previous administration, it was a different year, then in the administration before that, it was different year. It doesn’t matter if you have an R or a D after your name. They say this every few years, here it comes, and then we fund it. I mean, what’s different? Help me.
Mr. Rodney Anderson: Well, what’s different this time is truly because this healthcare crisis is going out of control that they have two major crises in front of them; one of them is healthcare. We’re hearing about it every day every minute of the day. The next one is Social Security. They keep wanting to print money, but pretty soon, Shep, the money is not going to be printed anymore.
Mr. Shepard Smith: And so because we’re not printing anymore money, Social Security is going to go away?
Mr. Rodney Anderson: No, Social Security will not go away, but what seniors will see is they’ll see no cost of living adjustment and what they’ll see is those paychecks, those monthly checks go down.
Mr. Shepard Smith: So…
Mr. Rodney Anderson: It may not go away, but it’s just going to be like Medicare where the benefits are cut every year.
Mr. Shepard Smith: So are you saying that an overhaul of the healthcare system is urgent and must happen to keep Social Security from falling apart? We’ve got the cost down?
Mr. Rodney Anderson: I think it’s a must happen… yeah, it’s a must happen. We have to get the costs down because seniors are being hurt from every side right now.
Mr. Shepard Smith: Well, it sounds like the President agrees with you on this, right? He’s the one who said we got to get the costs down. We’ve got to overhaul. We’ve got to overhaul the whole healthcare system and we’ve got to have a government option in there, that is what he used to say. Is that your sense that that would help save Social Security?
Mr. Rodney Anderson: Well, yeah, I think it will help Social Security in a lot of ways, Shep. But here’s what’s going to happen. I talked to my mom on my way here and mom knows best and mom says, “People can’t even or buying food right now, instead of buying medicine. It is a problem and right in my own family, because the fact of the matter is none of us or we’re all living older and that’s going to bankrupt Social Security.”
Mr. Shepard Smith: Well, I’m not well. We’ve known this was coming. This is not brand new information. We’ve known babyboomers were going to get older. We’ve known it forever. Now, all of a sudden, it’s a crisis. Well, yeah, it is. Babyboomers, they’re getting older. We got to do something about it. The President says he has a plan and the Republican say it’s a bad plan and we’ll see what happens. Rodney Anderson, let’s hope something happens. It’s good to see you. Thank you.
Social Security Scare Tactics?
One commentator in this video describes Social Security as a “multi-generational Ponzi scheme that has no end”.
Even if the SS trust fund runs out of money, the government can always print more money to send out Social Security checks.
The only question is, will the money still be worth something? The more money they put out there, the faster its value goes down. And once other countries (like China) recognize that the dollar is losing its value, they will stop buying the US government’s debt.
But even then Social Security doesn’t have to fail. A Ponzi scheme can last for a very long time if it’s supported by a government that can print new money as it sees fit.
The result might well be hyperinflation. In such a scenario, Social Security checks won’t increase every year, but every month. They just won’t buy a whole lot.
If we are to be angry, who should be the target of our wrath?
Mr. Neil Cavuto: Senior citizens are already upset about the direction of healthcare reform and just when you thought they couldn’t get angry, now millions of elderly face shrinking Social Security checks. Trustees who oversee the programs say that the payments will not rise for the first time in a generation. So do seniors have a right to be riled up? Tom, what do you think?
Tom: Absolutely, Neil. They definitely should be angry. There’s a couple of things to look at here. The cost of living adjustment (COLA) is pegged to inflation, which is negative this year. However, the basket that is used to calculate that adjustment is actually calculating things such as the price of DVDs, movie tickets, BluRay machines. They’re now looking at spending patterns that seniors are actually using and that is… there should be a separate basket that is used to calculate that adjustment. That just not there yet.
Mr. Neil Cavuto: But Jonathan, I mean, many of these little rules are going in, right? This is how we’re going to calculate. Now, the two-year thing might be a new deal, but by and large, we always knew we’re going to keep this attached pretty much to the CPI and with very little variation, it’s been working just fine, so what changes things now?
Jonathan: Well, I don’t know, if it’s been working so fine. I mean, Social Security accounts are 20 percent of federal budget. All the entitlements, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security account for 75 percent of all federal spending. I think what’s….
Mr. Neil Cavuto: No, really, my point is that we knew this math was there and now when it turns up that it’s not generous enough, we want to change it.
Jonathan: Right, well, what it does is it pits one generation against the next, right? So those who paid into the system, of course, feel that they’re entitled to get what they deserve out of it. So we have this multi-generational Ponzi schemes essentially that have no end and if you’re frustrated about your Social Security being cut, just wait until the government gets ahold of your healthcare.
Mr. Neil Cavuto: Liz.
Liz: Yeah, I agree. Jonathan is absolutely right. You know, I feel like that people who really should be riled up are the babyboomers. Boomers should be having their own town halls. They’re not going to see this Social Security benefits like the seniors are getting and you know, Social Security, when it was built in the 30s, the life expectancy was 65, and that meant you’re like, you know, you wouldn’t get any pension benefit from Social Security. Now, you know, babyboomers are expected to work until they drop dead and they’ll take a load off of Social Security and won’t get their benefits and you know, what the seniors are expecting, I get it.
But Medicare too was built in the 60s when we didn’t have MRIs, PET scans, CAT scans, all sorts of cancer treatments. Now, the taxpayer is paying for all sorts of those kinds of treatments and also all sorts of advances in stem cell research and neurology and the like. I think the reality check has bounced a long time ago with this.
Mr. Neil Cavuto: Mike, what do you think?
Mike: You know, I bet Jonathan is one of those people that wanted to give Social Security to Wall Street geniuses, so they can lose 50 percent of the money within two years as soon as they got it. I can just hear it. Government doesn’t have a place, but here’s the point, all of this is about, it’s about the fact that the drug…
Mr. Neil Cavuto: By the way… by the way, Mike, you might be surprised to learn that Jonathan was against all the bailouts in the last administration’s rescue.
Mike: Well…
Mr. Neil Cavuto: He wouldn’t rescue his own grandmother. So I’m telling you. I’m telling you he’s been very consistent on this.
Mike: I’m not saying this…
Mr. Neil Cavuto: So that’s an unfair shot, but continue.
Mike: All right. All right. Well, the AAR people better be pleased that government is still in control of Social Security. Here’s the problem. Here’s what happened. The drug industry can charge people whatever they want and because of that, you have something called the Medicare Prescription Drug program. That’s the only thing that has been affected here because the drug industry is able to charge…
Liz: Mike, Mike. Let me ask you. Before…
Mike: Is able to charge the elderly $50 for two…
Liz: Yeah.
Mike: Wait, let me finish what I’m saying. They were able to charge the elderly $50 for a $2 pill and what that does is raise his premiums.
Liz: Right.
Mr. Neil Cavuto: It’s okay. Jonathan, let me ask you.
Jonathan: Right. Right, well, I mean, you want to blend the drug industry and this industry in this business.
Mike: Give it to Wall Street. Orchestrate it. Give it to Wall Street.
Jonathan: And give it to Wall Street. But let me ask you, Mike.
Mike: Yeah.
Jonathan: Are there any of these big entitlement programs that you love so much that aren’t broke? I mean, this isn’t me. This is CBL. This is an estimate all of those that or eat Medicare. Are there any that are not broke?
Mike: Yeah, I would say. What do you think of the VA? What do you think of the VA? What do you think… what do you think of VA? Do you think VA works?
Jonathan: Social Security, Medicare, Mediaid.
Liz: Mike, you know, Mike…
Mike: You know, maybe Social Security is broke is because your GOP took $1.6 trillion out of Social Security while you were saying give the program to Wall Street. Let the elderly invest the money with Wall Street.
Mr. Neil Cavuto: Right, okay.
Jonathan: I’m saying… all I’m saying is…
Liz: You know, Mike, you know, again, the history lesson, the Democrats let the Congress to get their needs on Social Security for the first time in the 60s.
Mr. Neil Cavuto: All right. All right. All right. I wish we have more time. Thank you for talking over one another. Let’s save a hell of a lot of time; otherwise, we’ll have moments of proverbial break.
