I guess you already know that 2010 will be the first year without an automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustment since they went into effect in 1975.

Blame it on inflation. Or, to be more precise, the lack of inflation.

Consumer prices as a whole were down the past year. Social Security and Supplemental Security Income benefits increase automatically each year if there is an increase in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) from the third quarter of the past year to the third quarter of the current year. The CPI-W actually decreased from the third quarter of 2008 to the third quarter of 2009. So there is no COLA for 2010.

Because there was no increase in the CPI-W this year, the starting point for determining a possible 2011 COLA will remain the third quarter of 2008.

Since there is no COLA, the law prohibits an increase in the maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security tax. And the amount a beneficiary under full retirement age can work and earn without affecting the benefit also won't increase for 2010.

Ok, so there is no COLA, but what about Medicare?

Medicare premiums and deductibles are separate from the Social Security COLA. And according the Department of Health and Human Services, those rates are going up.

The Medicare Part B premium is increasing from $96.40 to $110.50. However, and this is an important "however," the law contains a "hold harmless" provision that protects most Social Security beneficiaries from paying the higher Part B premium so that their net Social Security benefit won't be reduced.

Those not protected by this hold harmless provision include higher income beneficiaries subject to an income-adjusted Part B premium, beneficiaries newly entitled to Part B in 2010 and those do not have their Part B premiums withheld from their Social Security payments.

By law, the standard Medicare Part B premium is set to cover approximately one-fourth of the average cost of Part B services for beneficiaries age 65 and older. The remaining Part B costs are financed by federal general revenue.

Also, the Part B deductible is going up to $155 for the year and the Part A in-patient hospital deductible paid by the beneficiary when admitted as a hospital in-patient is going up to $1,100.

Please don't shoot the messenger.


Kinda sad when those that have worked their whole lives and looked towards their retirement now are pawns. Wonder what other goodies are instored for me when I retire.

yeah, well if it keeps up we may not ever get to retire...

but last years was the biggest increase ever and Obama is talking about a one time payment of $250 to make up for it

why the complaining now? the law has been around for decades. does it not make sense? if you answer no, why haven't you folks doing the complaining done anything about it when you could have made a difference? i happen to think the law makes sense. entitlements for medicare and ss are the largest line item in the budged including the military. if the cost of living does not rise why should ss income rise? just where do we draw the line? my mother's monthly income exceeds four thousand dollars a month. ss makes up about eight hundred dollars of that. she has less than a thousand dollars in expenses each month. she would not even be able to spend a ss increase. sure, everybody is not as fortunate to have married a man like my father who provided so well for her before he died. some have no controle over their retirement. but at the same time, cannot my father's having exibited personal responsibility be taken as the example of what americans can do to insure a retirement that is comfortable? my father never made more than forty thousand bucks a year. but he knew how to save. so why complain about something that we have no money to do anything about? why not spend the energy promoting personal responsibility?

we simply cannot support everybody who thinks they are entitled without limit. i'm tired of tax, tax, tax.

it doesnt really bother me

the increase would have been like $8 a month

I DO feel entitled to my Social Security payments however because it says right on the form "based on what I have paid in it" I receive $1200 a month

not "based on what YOU paid into" but what *I* have paid in to it

of course you're entitled to ss as am i. the law says we're entitled and the law tells us how much we are entitled as the law tells us how what we are entitled will encrease or decrease. the law is there for everybody to read. i just think it pathetic that so many americans rely on the media to bring their attention to what our laws say. so i ask anybody who cares to venture. in this economic crisis, where will the money come from to give seniors a raise when the costs of living are down and the people who fund ss are losing jobs and income. ss is a pay as we go plan. it's not a savings plan for retirement. what i pay into ss is being spent as i pay it. when i retire in a couple years my kids will pay my ss each month as long as the law allows and the treasury has the money.

mehh I paid somebody else's social security for thirty years and now its my turn

when social security was implemented there were thirty people paying in for every recepient. Now there is like four

but once the baby boomers all die off it'll equal out again. Its just the "bulge in the snake" passing through this point in time

not really sure how to read your response, as I posted thread, didnt complain shared a news article and my comment. WTG to your mom and dad for thinking ahead. What does that have to do with SS/MED and health insurance???

I contribute towards SS/MED and have for a long time, someone is living off my contribution, no? Should I not be worried or care about when it will be my turn?

worry all you want. just sayin, if you're that worried why'd ya wait till now to be concerned? you could have worked to change the law decades ago. and if entitlement increases happen whether they are needed or not, zero inflation for instance, would it not worry you that there'd be enough money to pay you when it's your turn? your op sounds to me like you don't like it much that recipients today are not getting an increase this one year. if i'm wrong and you're with me in cheering congress for obeying a sensible law then great, i appologize. but if as i think, you are complaining that there is no increase this year, then how does that bode for the treasury balance when it is your turn? where will the money come from? today there are three workers paying into ss for every senior drawing from it. ten years from now there will be one worker for each recipient. do the math and tell me how that is going to work if we don't pinch a penny or two now.

yes they say inflation is none

but they made this decision on the (no) increase in july?

so it is fair to figure they made last years increase in or about july


ok what was the inflation rate from july till december

was it nothing

or should that be considered in

and if there is no inflation on that time frame ---then bush should be credited with a piece of the economy improvement right

no the no increase is wrong they (congress) vote raises for the next term electee which makes inflation increases (for s s recipients {which most paid their whole life for] look like nothing

maybe congress should vote themselves a pay decrease!!!!!!!

Now I know you really didn't read but jumped right into a defensive/antagonistic mode (if it works for you great, yayyyy) But please don't assume and dont take things to a personal level. This is for discussion, it's really not personal.

I posted an article for discussion only, I gave an excerpt of my opinion and asked a question that was all.

and i answered it

and raised another budget saving idea

why do you think it is personal

it is what it is just a thought

who care

one reason i am not here so much anymore

you say something and it get taken out of context and misinterpreted

i guess my part of the discussion is over?????

Who are you responding to Robin???

disregard

i just jumped right into a defensive/antagonistic mode