General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSocial Security Benefits Cuts Are Now an Estimated 7 Years Away, and Trump's "Big, Booty Full Bill" Is Partly to Blame
In May, the average monthly Social Security retired-worker benefit made history by topping $2,000 for the first time in the program's storied history. Though this isn't a payment that's going to make aging workers rich, it has proved vital to helping them make ends meet.
Based on an analysis from the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the poverty rate for retirees aged 62 and over would jump from 10.1% (as of 2023) to an estimated 37.3% if Social Security didn't exist. Separate annual surveys from Gallup covering almost a quarter of a century have shown that 80% to 90% of retirees rely on their monthly Social Security income, in some capacity, to cover their expenses.
Maintaining the financial health of Social Security should be of the utmost importance for our nation's elected officials. Unfortunately, the foundation of America's leading social program is crumbling. While it's in no danger of disappearing or going bankrupt, the existing payout schedule, including near-annual cost-of-living adjustments, is very much at risk.
There are a lot of reasons for the program's projected shortfall, which has the potential for sweeping benefit cuts of up to 23% for retired workers and the survivors of deceased workers just seven years from now. One of those puzzle pieces of blame is President Donald Trump's flagship tax and spending law, the "Big, Beautiful Bill."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/social-security-benefits-cuts-are-now-an-estimated-7-years-away-and-president-donald-trump-s-big-beautiful-bill-is-partly-to-blame/ar-AA1NpdrF
You old farts need to get off your dead asses and get to work. - The GOP

Silent Type
(11,261 posts)He was bashed mercilessly by Democrats even when his committee suggested increasing benefits for those on lowest end of Social Security benefits.
So here we are, maybe faced with GOPers deciding if anything would be done before the automatic cuts.
MichMan
(16,001 posts)Igel
(37,124 posts)ImNotGod
(1,146 posts)Recipients need a raise, not cuts. Fascism needs to be destroyed by any means possible.
gulliver
(13,520 posts)At least I hope that's what they're doing. We haven't heard a lot about the fact that the BBB moved the threat of social security cuts a year closer.
But, let's say it's 2032, and the Republicans just decide they're going to let Social Security benefits be cut by 20%. What do you think would happen to them in the election?
wishstar
(5,781 posts)while all the other programs are allowed to pay out millions or billions running up the deficit without taking in any dedicated revenue.