Will GOP Cut Social Security And Medicare Before Or After The 2018 Election?

[ZiprHead]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/2017/12/03/will-gop-cut-social-security-and-medicare-before-or-after-the-2018-election/#4bf30a3835ef

My former blogging partner Bruce Bartlett -- who in a previous life was chief economist for Republican economic icons Representatives Jack Kemp (R-NY) and Ron Paul (R-TX) -- for weeks has been shouting from the mountaintop the extreme likelihood of the GOP training its sights on Social Security and Medicare. To paraphrase Bruce's wisdom (look here, here and here, for example), the Republican deficit hawks that have been in the budget version of the witness protection program during the current mega deficit-increasing tax cut debate will reemerge with a vengeance to demand Social Security and Medicare cuts to reduce the deficit they just created.

 

[poster]

If they do at all, it will proceed as a phase-out. they won't just close the faucet.

 

[untermensche]

The Republicans have been wanting to gut SS and Medicare for decades.

The rich do not like those programs.

They make people more secure.

Worker insecurity increases profits and lowers wages.

That is what the rich, the investing class, the parasites, want.

One day the majority will realize that this minority of the super wealthy are living as huge parasites off their labor.

 

[ZiprHead]

“We have to do two things. We have to generate economic growth which generates revenue, while reducing spending. That will mean instituting structural changes to Social Security and Medicare for the future.”

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-gop-social-security-20171130-story,amp.html?ref=yfp

 

[Ford]

I thought it was obvious. They run up the deficit on purpose via tax cuts, then suddenly pretend not to know how the skyrocketing deficit happened, and set their sights on Social Security and Medicare - which they've been trying to destroy from the moment both were born.

Starve the beast, disaster capitalism, whatever you want to call it, that was the plan all along.

 

[lpetrich]

Sort of like killing one's parents and then whining and moaning and groaning that one is an orphan.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I very much doubt they will cut it. They'll make a lot of noise about fixing it instead, will tinker with the edges, fail to fix the underlying problems, etc. Just like the Democrats, except that Democrats admit they like Social Security while Republicans tell people they don't like it. Then they'll trumpet about how they fixed SS and saved SS.

It doesn't matter. Unless major changes occur across the government as a whole the system will collapse anyway. At this point it doesn't matter who is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I very much doubt they will cut it. They'll make a lot of noise about fixing it instead, will tinker with the edges, fail to fix the underlying problems, etc. Just like the Democrats, except that Democrats admit they like Social Security while Republicans tell people they don't like it. Then they'll trumpet about how they fixed SS and saved SS.

It doesn't matter. Unless major changes occur across the government as a whole the system will collapse anyway. At this point it doesn't matter who is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I'm not so sure. They had big brass cojones to pass the tax bill they did. They didn't just show their disdain for the American public, but their constituents as well. They know better than the American public, and they're not afraid of them.

 

[Copernicus]

The current tax bill may have just started the process by changing the way the government calculates inflation. Republicans have long wanted to redefine inflation as a "chained CPI" rather that a "fixed shopping basket". What that means is that eggs may have been in the shopping basket before, but they may be replaced by other staples if they become too expensive. So the inflation rate should not be a fixed basket, since what we shop for changes over time. Of course, that begs the question of whether the overall standard of living rises or falls. If it falls, the the shopping basket keeps getting filled with less desirable goods in a way that ignores real inflation, because the new shopping basket is considered equivalent to the old one. Hence, the "chained CPI" tactic is a way of making COLAs (Cost of Living Adjustments) go away. So the COLA that is built into Social Security diminishes and maybe disappears, forcing payments into the fund to fall behind inflation.

According to what I've been reading, Republicans snuck the chained CPI metric into the new bill, along with a lot of other "gotchas" that they couldn't pass before under public scrutiny. Whether seniors, who make up a huge portion of the Republican base, catch on to what is being done to their earned income benefits is another matter. Most don't really know what a COLA is and will probably blame the reductions on whichever party is in power when they begin to feel the pain. The bill doesn't kick in until 2019, so the pain may not be being to be felt until after 2020, when there is a good chance that Democrats will regain power.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I very much doubt they will cut it.

Aren't cuts going to happen automatically due to the tax cut and the PAYGO restrictions?

They'll make a lot of noise about fixing it instead, will tinker with the edges, fail to fix the underlying problems, etc.

Right now, the Republican Party appear to be acting on a Manic High, and if they get the tax cut passed, they need to help pay for it.

Just like the Democrats, except that Democrats admit they like Social Security while Republicans tell people they don't like it. Then they'll trumpet about how they fixed SS and saved SS.

The Republicans don't want to save Social Security. They want to eliminate it.

It doesn't matter. Unless major changes occur across the government as a whole the system will collapse anyway. At this point it doesn't matter who is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Well, it does matter as Medicare and Social Security continue to be the largest outlays by a long shot in the US budget, so if there is to be reform, that is where the spending is currently located... well there and the Military.

- - - Updated - - -

The current tax bill may have just started the process by changing the way the government calculates inflation. Republicans have long wanted to redefine inflation as a "chained CPI" rather that a "fixed shopping basket". What that means is that eggs may have been in the shopping basket before, but they may be replaced by other staples if they become too expensive. So the inflation rate should not be a fixed basket, since what we shop for changes over time. Of course, that begs the question of whether the overall standard of living rises or falls. If it falls, the the shopping basket keeps getting filled with less desirable goods in a way that ignores real inflation, because the new shopping basket is considered equivalent to the old one. Hence, the "chained CPI" tactic is a way of making COLAs (Cost of Living Adjustments) go away. So the COLA that is built into Social Security diminishes and maybe disappears, forcing payments into the fund to fall behind inflation.

According to what I've been reading, Republicans snuck the chained CPI metric into the new bill, along with a lot of other "gotchas" that they couldn't pass before under public scrutiny. Whether seniors, who make up a huge portion of the Republican base, catch on to what is being done to their earned income benefits is another matter. Most don't really know what a COLA is and will probably blame the reductions on whichever party is in power when they begin to feel the pain. The bill doesn't kick in until 2019, so the pain may not be being to be felt until after 2020, when there is a good chance that Democrats will regain power.

The Republicans have used every trick in the book and invented something new with dynamic smoothing. This is the largest scam being tried by the Republicans ever.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

They don't want to eliminate it. They want to cater to one group of voters by saying they want to eliminate it, and cater to another group by saying they want to fix it. And the Democrats want to cater to their voters by talking about how the boogeymen want to eliminate it, and scare voters like you with their horror stories. Both sides are too scared of the senior vote to do much to Social Security.

Still, given that it a few years the Titanic will have finished sinking, it really doesn't matter how the deck chairs are arranged.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

They don't want to eliminate it.

Yes they do. It'd be a 12.4% tax cut!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The Republicans have been wanting to gut SS and Medicare for decades.

The rich do not like those programs.

They make people more secure.

Worker insecurity increases profits and lowers wages.

That is what the rich, the investing class, the parasites, want.

One day the majority will realize that this minority of the super wealthy are living as huge parasites off their labor.

The rich don't like them because they cost money. It's not about security.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The Republicans have been wanting to gut SS and Medicare for decades.

The rich do not like those programs.

They make people more secure.

Worker insecurity increases profits and lowers wages.

That is what the rich, the investing class, the parasites, want.

One day the majority will realize that this minority of the super wealthy are living as huge parasites off their labor.

The rich don't like them because they cost money. It's not about security.

Yeah, no FICA or FDIC and I'm certain all would have been well for the elderly in 2008 and 2009. Whining about Social Security not being about security is much like whining about vaccines. The policies are working so well, people have forgotten there was ever a problem!

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I very much doubt they will cut it.

They will cut it. Ryan and others have had their eye on it for years.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Here is my guess:
they will dip into funds prior to 2018.

After 2018, they will make cuts and privatize SS.

 

[Elixir]

Wishful thinking:
Trump gets impeached, then convicted of all kinds of crimes, ends up in jail. 2018 sends Rethuglicans home and Dems win both houses. A resolution is passed to vacate every piece of legislation he signed while fraudulently in office...

Oh well... never mind. I'll just go without healthcare, and deduct every penny I've ever paid into SS from my 2019 taxes.
We're fucked. Again.

 

[Horatio Parker]

The biggest aid to the SS "reformers" is the pervasive false idea that we've run out or are running out of money.

The mainstream and even the left have bought into this. Obama offered to cut SS, but by then the Repugs were reflexively opposing him on every issue.

 

[coloradoatheist]

The biggest aid to the SS "reformers" is the pervasive false idea that we've run out or are running out of money.

The mainstream and even the left have bought into this. Obama offered to cut SS, but by then the Repugs were reflexively opposing him on every issue.

Isn't that an issue that each side only complains about when the other side is doing it? Do the deficits matter under this new Trump proposal?

 

[Horatio Parker]

The biggest aid to the SS "reformers" is the pervasive false idea that we've run out or are running out of money.

The mainstream and even the left have bought into this. Obama offered to cut SS, but by then the Repugs were reflexively opposing him on every issue.

Isn't that an issue that each side only complains about when the other side is doing it? Do the deficits matter under this new Trump proposal?

To an extent, yes. Under Obama, Krugman was saying expand the deficit because rates are low. When Trump came in, he turned into a deficit hawk. Krugman is clearly a political animal.

Roughly, Trumps tax cuts increase the deficit by $150B/yr. I don't think that in itself is a big deal. The problem is the savings largely aren't going to people who'll spend it. If the purpose is to stimulate the economy, you'll get more bang for your buck if it's all spent. The fewer leakages, the larger the multiplier I believe is how it's expressed in economese.