USAToday runs the numbers. If this plan had been adopted in 1991, a 2004 retiree would receive a $1,587 benefit, versus the existing $2,111 benefit.
Sounds like a winner to me.
USAToday runs the numbers. If this plan had been adopted in 1991, a 2004 retiree would receive a $1,587 benefit, versus the existing $2,111 benefit.
Sounds like a winner to me.
“If the wage-based system had been in place since 1991, a HIGH-income worker who retired last year would receive an initial benefit of $1,587. Under the current price-based system, the monthly check would be $2,111.”
But isn’t that what the left wants? Don’t they want the “rich” to pay their fair share? If I read the USA Today article correctly, that’s exactly what will happen under progressive indexing.
I’m not sure who “the left” is, otherwise we could ask him.
At any rate, once you destroy the upper- and middle-classes stake in a government program, it will become like welfare or food stamps and wither on the vine.
OK, Brian… isn’t that what “those with the agenda of confiscating money from one class and redistributing it to another” wants? 🙂
As far as having a stake in the program, I don’t have one as it is. I’ll certainly not see the money that I have put into the system.
Dave,
As Paul Krugman wrote:
“It’s an adage that programs for the poor always turn into poor programs. That is, once a program is defined as welfare, it becomes a target for budget cuts.”
Read the whole thing.