Entitlement reform in 2012 Budget?

[sunzt]

I was reading this article and one of the points about how Obama was handling entitlement reform was quite interesting...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/03/08/borger.obama.leadership/index.html?iref=allsearch

Over at the White House, it seems to be a matter of obvious assumption that Obama is determined to do something. "This president is very serious about taking this issue (entitlement reform) on," a senior White House adviser tells me. "He's taking a strategic approach to maximize results."

In other words, be patient. I have no reason to doubt this adviser's sincerity, but the problem is that -- from the outside -- the distinction between strategic thinking and avoidance is hard to know. The White House is putting a lot of emphasis on the "trust me" proposition. Trust us, they say, and we will move when it's appropriate. "We want results," this adviser says. And if the White House were to go out on a limb and propose something now "it would be shot out of the sky like a clay pigeon."

Could Obama be putting off entitlement reform until the 2012 budget? And if he does, what is the chance that he would include a certain level of income that reduces or eliminates medicare/ss benefits... Would the GOP or Tea Party go along with that during a presidential election year?? Hmmm......

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

He's waiting for the GOP to make their proposals so he can counter.

 

[bamacre]

The better entitlement reform could have come with the health care reform, i.e., reducing the costs of health care to make Medicare much less of a problem. Well, that didn't happen.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

WTF does taking a "strategic approach to maximize results" mean?

 

[nageov3t]

He's waiting for the GOP to make their proposals so he put all the blame on them.

fixed.

it's a little ludicrous that everyone knows what has to be done and they're all afraid to do it because people are babies who will vote out whoever takes away their bread and circuses.

 

[boomerang]

WTF does taking a "strategic approach to maximize results" mean?

You know what it means. It means nothing. Political doublespeak.

 

[nobodyknows]

The White House is putting a lot of emphasis on the "trust me" proposition.

How'd that whole "trust me" thing work out for the people who trusted Bush? Not so good as I recall. LOL, fool me once, you can't fool me again.

 

[nonlnear]

I would love to see SS and medicare become fully means tested. Converting them into blatant welfare programs would be the beginning of the end for them politically.

 

[sunzt]

I would love to see SS and medicare become fully means tested. Converting them into blatant welfare programs would be the beginning of the end for them politically.

Unless you're talking about making the means test at a very very low income/tax bracket, how is that not any different than a welfare program?

 

[Ronstang]

WTF does taking a "strategic approach to maximize results" mean?

That is in reference to scoring political points or position and has nothing to do with making the average US citizen's life any better.

 

[Moonbeam]

I would love to see SS and medicare become fully means tested. Converting them into blatant welfare programs would be the beginning of the end for them politically.

I guess that's why Jesus made sure to check out by 33.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The better entitlement reform could have come with the health care reform, i.e., reducing the costs of health care to make Medicare much less of a problem. Well, that didn't happen.

But since we know that health care reform wasn't that at all, we can now sell something else that won't happen.

 

[nonlnear]

Unless you're talking about making the means test at a very very low income/tax bracket, how is that not any different than a welfare program?

My second sentence was continuing the thought of the first, not offering a counterpoint. As you say, making them fully means tested would turn them into welfare programs. That would make them harder to defend politically in the long term. Right now they enjoy broad appeal because everybody can get something from them. It allows the fiction to be perpetrated that SS contributions are an "investment". Phase out SS benefits for people above income X, and that line of reasoning becomes way less defensible than it is today.

 

[Jhhnn]

I doubt that anybody will even approach the biggest entitlement of all, the entitlement of America's rich to paying the lowest taxes in the first world...

Other cuts will meet stiff opposition from a variety of quarters if that's not addressed first. Most Americans will accept lower benefits and higher taxes if they see that the wealthy are sharing in the sacrifice. Otherwise, forget it.

 

[wuliheron]

I doubt that anybody will even approach the biggest entitlement of all, the entitlement of America's rich to paying the lowest taxes in the first world...

Other cuts will meet stiff opposition from a variety of quarters if that's not addressed first. Most Americans will accept lower benefits and higher taxes if they see that the wealthy are sharing in the sacrifice. Otherwise, forget it.

Are you nuts? Americans have been accepting the short end of the stick since Ronald Reagan on the premise that the more money the wealthy have the more jobs they can create. Now that we have fewer jobs they elect a bunch of union busting right wing extremists and you say they won't take it anymore?

What planet have you been living on?

 

[piasabird]

O'bammah has no economic plan. He is clue-less. Just shut down the government now and quit paying the president, his cabinet, all the Czars, and everyone paid by congress! When they come up with a ballanced budget, then they can be paid!

 

[bfdd]

All able bodied and capable people should have to do mandatory 10-20 hrs of community service a week in order to receive their gov't assistance.

 

[Genx87]

WTF does taking a "strategic approach to maximize results" mean?

Maximize relection chances in 2012 vs actually fixing the problem.

 

[Jaskalas]

I think we know where it's going.

Welfare State: Handouts Make Up One-Third of U.S. Wages

Even as the economy has recovered, social welfare benefits make up 35 percent of wages and salaries this year, up from 21 percent in 2000 and 10 percent in 1960, according to TrimTabs Investment Research using Bureau of Economic Analysis data.

As you can see, voters continue to vote themselves increasing portions of the treasury. This will not stop, their appetite only continues to grow. The nation will have a revolution and the people in power are, ironically, powerless. This is inevitable.

You cannot sustain a mentality that your rights are to have others pay for you. Eventually you run out of 'others' and the Bernard Madoff ponzi scheme comes crashing down.

Reform? You'd first have to reform the minds of your people. Any serious action to avoid collapse will result in riots and protests. The people do not allow reform. Would you like the power over them to say otherwise?

 

[wuliheron]

O'bammah has no economic plan. He is clue-less. Just shut down the government now and quit paying the president, his cabinet, all the Czars, and everyone paid by congress! When they come up with a ballanced budget, then they can be paid!

Who's we white man? Go ahead, you shut down the government. You refuse to pay the bums. I could use a laugh.

 

[Patranus]

He's waiting for the GOP to make their proposals so he can counter.

Like the Democrats did with the last round of budget cuts?

GOP: Lets cut 60 billion
Democrats: No, lets cut 6 billion

The Democrats are not serious about cutting anything.
The fact that this months deficit is equal to the entire 2007 budget deficit should tell you something.

 

[child of wonder]

Entitlement programs need to be morphed into "Improvement programs."

You aren't entitled to any money simply because you exist. If you've paid into the system and are doing something to better yourself (school, work training, etc.) then the government will help out.

However, you are not entitled to money because you made babbiez or decided you're too good for a near minimum wage job.

On top of that, the government should give away birth control, condoms, tubal ligations, and vasectomies like candy to prevent the dead weight from breeding out of control.

 

[Elias824]

Entitlement programs need to be morphed into "Improvement programs."

You aren't entitled to any money simply because you exist. If you've paid into the system and are doing something to better yourself (school, work training, etc.) then the government will help out.

However, you are not entitled to money because you made babbiez or decided you're too good for a near minimum wage job.

On top of that, the government should give away birth control, condoms, tubal ligations, and vasectomies like candy to prevent the dead weight from breeding out of control.

Yes this exactly this, lets encourage people to add to society rather then encourage people to sit on their ass because if they get a job welfare wont pay them out anything anymore. The only exception to this is people who are disabled, I think that's more of a moral issue.

 

[child of wonder]

Yes this exactly this, lets encourage people to add to society rather then encourage people to sit on their ass because if they get a job welfare wont pay them out anything anymore. The only exception to this is people who are disabled, I think that's more of a moral issue.

We also need to change SS disability.

If you are disabled and apply for SS disability, first you have to prove you're disabled and to what extent via a doctor's order. Then you are offered a bare minimum benefit that is determined to be adequate for your area (someone in NY would need more than NE, for example). If you would like to earn more, you are free to apply for a simple government job like data entry, pushing papers, etc. and increase your benefit.

In the case of someone that is 100% disabled and can't do anything, if they can prove that, they'll get enough to cover their living expenses because they're basically screwed. Family members can provide money and write it off on their taxes.

 

[Jhhnn]

Are you nuts? Americans have been accepting the short end of the stick since Ronald Reagan on the premise that the more money the wealthy have the more jobs they can create. Now that we have fewer jobs they elect a bunch of union busting right wing extremists and you say they won't take it anymore?

What planet have you been living on?

That was all dependent on the illusion of increasing debt at every level, an increasing number of govt jobs, cheap foreign goods, and cheap energy. As those illusions are stripped away, denial will become more difficult, but not impossible for some of our contributors, I'm sure. It's like alcoholism- some can recover, some never will.