-A friend attended an Ed Hyman ISI confab recently. He showed me a copy of the slides used in the presentation. This stuff is private so I won’t use Mr. Hyman’s graphs. But the handwritten notes from my friend are interesting:
Notice the comments about SS and means testing. Let’s just say that Ed is part of the inner circle. (The Obama/Bernanke thoughts are also interesting)
-Christine Romer did an Op Ed for the NYT on January 15. Her words:
The Deficit Commission proposed thoughtful ways to slow the growth of Social Security.
One of those "thoughtful" ideas was a MT.
The President should ensure that spending cuts not fall on the disadvantaged.
A MT would do that.
The only realistic way to close the gap is by raising revenue. Some of it can and should come from higher taxes on the rich.
A MT would do that too. Ms. Romer is ex Administration. I think she is still talking their book.
- Where would the opposition come from? Republicans? On Jan. 5 influential Republican Governor, Mitch Daniels (Ind.) commented:
I always say, “Why do we send a pension check to Warren Buffett?”…
It comes down to the House on this. So where is Speaker John Boehner on MT?
We shall see if all this apparent support stands. I don't really believe in love fests in D.C.Big changes are needed for Social Security, including reducing or ending benefits for retirees with "substantial" other income.
Speaking of love fests don't assume that this would be a slam dunk. There are many who believe that SS is sacrosanct. Sen. Harry Reid had this to say on Meet the Press last week. Surprised?
MR. GREGORY: Means testing? Raising the retirement age?Politics does make for some very odd bedfellows....
SEN. REID: ...don't--I'm...
MR. GREGORY: Do you agree with either of those?
SEN. REID: I'm not going to go to any of those back-door methods to whack Social Security recipients. I'm not going to do that.
-Zero Hedge had an article a month ago regarding a comment by political blogger Robert Kutter. From the POLITICO.
The second part, now being teed up by the White House and key Senate Democrats, is a scheme for the president to embrace much of the Bowles-Simpson plan — including cuts in Social Security. This is to be unveiled, according to well-placed sources, in the president’s State of the Union address.
Robert craps on the idea of cuts in SS as it would hurt Obama’s base. Not the case at all. A means test hits rich old people. That’s not O’s base. It’s a very small percent of the population. Make what you will of this.
-A SS means test is a legitimate option. I wrote about it back in July. Many others have as well. It will “sell” to a broad spectrum of the population. "Tax the rich" always sounds good. The President will have at his side Bill Gates and Warren Buffet (both getting SS checks). They will say that it’s the “right thing to do”. (they already have)
I am looking forward to see how this shakes out. Possible results?
Shrink the size of government? (Yup). Reduce the rate of growth of expenditures? (What last November was about) Stabilize SS without cutting benefits for most people? (Hard to say no.) A means test could allow for a permanent cut is SS taxes (ala 2011). (Who could say no to that!)
This is a very big step toward socialism. It would also be the first of many steps of unwinding SS. A means tax would undermine long-term support for the program. (Note: this issue could be blunted by giving Gates and Buffett a tax credit on federal estate taxes for what they lose in benefits).
Say this should happen. How do the markets react? Initially, it might be perceived as a positive. If the headline were: US Gets Serious on Debt Reduction then we might see some risk on
trades happening.
But the devil is very much in the details. It is possible this will be one of those things where the deal is: Starting in six years and increasing gradually over the next ten thereafter blah blah blah. (Kick the can down the road) Should that be the case I (and many others) will rain all over it. That outcome would bring a different set of risk on/off results.
IMHO a means tax could be done with near immediate results. It could translate into a permanent reduction of some employment taxes and it would/could help SSA get through the next 15 years (boomers) without forcing a run off of the Intergovernmental account (less debt to public). Something that had both teeth and near term consequence could possibly change sentiment. Who knows?
Nothing addresses all of America’s problems. A means test is an option that should be considered. Depending on how it is done, it could make a difference. I think it will come on the table next week.



I agree means testing could be "tested" in the State of Union address.
ReplyDeleteLess likely for State of Union, but I believe we could see in the future, would be change in tax exempt status for muni bonds and mortgage deductions or limited $ amount of deductions.
SS tax receipts reflect the structural recast of our work force towards lower full time income/increased part time workers,greater unemployment, the bottom line is SS deficits are coming faster then models indicate forcing the government to fund these gaps by borrowing. The government borrowed 76 billion 2010 for the trust in 2010 almost twice what had been projected, this is the trend!
ReplyDeleteYes means testing will be adopted along with other measures to reduce government borrowing due to reduced SS receipts but the ending of SS surplus will impact more then various retirement groups as the Federal Government will be forced to make large reduction in Defense,security,military adventures,general welfare along with increased taxes on whomever the government can squeeze.
The fiction of the SS trust fund generated by Presidents Reagan through Obama is finally coming to an end which may have a profound impact on our political process.
Bruce, what is developing is not really pure socialism.
ReplyDeleteSome Chinese wag once winked at the U.S. and called today's system "Socialism with American Characteristics", after the Chinese expression "you zhongguo tese shehuizhuyi lilun" (~the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics).
But more than just socialism is in the offing.
We have a weak presidency working with both parties to maintain miniml bread-and-circus programs for the middle- and lower-class masses. At the same time we see an administration determined to maintain the privileged position of the military/export/financial/governmental elite.
This is done through foreign policy, militarism, Fed printing, debt issuance and a weak dollar policy. Just today, Obama's remarks at the Hu Jintao state dinner were focused on pushing export sales by major corporations.
The extension of the Bush tax cuts, TARP, etc., and a hands-off approach to the financial industry for is strangely juxtaposed with programs such as HAMP, 999-week unemployment benefits and now possibly a SS means test...
On the home front we have a burgeoning surveillance state which is being built up without concern for either civil liberties or cost. The mania for "security" both at home and abroad seems to be being pursued with the support of the public.
Sometimes life does resemble art. This is looking like "V for Vendetta"...we're heading, faster and faster, toward fascism or "national socialism" or perhaps "authoritarian corporatism"...
But, very sadly, I don't think anyone will care.
Hi Bruce. Thanks for the article. My mother (over 85) became an Australian citizen 20+ yrs ago along with my father. He passed away not long after that. She gets his pension but her medical/social security equivalent was means tested every couple of years until she was declared legally blind. She still has to pay some for medical care. My point is that 'means testing' is alive and well in several countries that tend "progressive". I fully expect it to happen here now that the subject has been put in the public dicourse.
ReplyDeleteSS is an insurance program that everyone pays into and everyone gets back from in some proportion to what they paid in.
ReplyDeleteBoth benefits and payments both are restricted.
Not only is this fair, it ensures that everyone is fairly willing to pay into it, and that it is not viewed as a "welfare program" that soaks the hard-working and capable to support the undeserving.
Making it means-tested will destroy the proportionality of benefits and payments and lead swiftly and surely to those who contribute the most becoming intensely opposed to it. And exactly because benefits are capped, the savings will be of no significance.
Means testing will drive a lethal wedge into the body politic and doom the only investment that most Americans can count on getting some reasonable return on.
I am sorry but SS is not fair because "everyone gets back from in [sic] some proportion" changes as politician confiscate surpluses to spend.
ReplyDeleteSingapore's system is a far better solution.
Just another way of saying that if you were prudent and saved for your retirement, you don't need the government to give you money. I always thought that they would figure out a way to get at the IRA's (even the Roth's).
ReplyDeleteFortunately, with CD rates being what they are (h/t Ben Bernancke) the old folks' income isn't what it could be :>)
Hey Bruce when are we gonna come up and see ya -Conor R.
ReplyDeleteMeans testing is probably inevitable but the devil will be where is the line drawn? Its the old Ant vs Grasshopper problem isn't it. Two people could have made identical amounts of money over their working lives. Mr Ant was frugal and saved. He paid his mortgage off and built a nice IRA/401k and was looking forward to a comfortable retirement. Maybe he would now
ReplyDeleteuse his SS check to buy a boat. Mr. Grasshopper however, was a spendthrift. He Heloced his home and it was foreclosed on. He always drove expensive cars and saved nothing. Now at 65 he wants Mr. Ant to give him his Social Security benefits because has nothing saved for retirement. This is not going to fly.
So, where does Bruce Krasting draw the line? $50,000/year outside income? Net worth over $500,000? Do you include value of house? other pension benefits?
SSA's estimate for 2011 income is $855 billion
ReplyDeleteSocial Security Receipts 2010: $631.7 billion
2010 outlays: $707 billion -
2011 outlays: $725 billion- 3.5% greater then 2010
now does anybody in the room think that SS receipts will increase in 2011? or decline?
my guess will be the government will borrow in 2011 close to 100 billion to cover the shortfall! What was the Republican chatter about saving 100 billion in government costs over 5 years the other day!
Yes! Let us cut the things that hold society together, an old age income stream and health coverage for when our citizens can no longer work.
ReplyDeleteBut we absolutely must not dare to mention reigning in the money-sucking, elite-enriching welfare programs, i.e., the military-pharma-banking-offshoring-industrial complex.
f**k this country. i'm moving somewhere warm and cheap after i've saved my retirement monies.
ReplyDeleteConor:
ReplyDeleteAnytime!