Terminator X
17th June 2011, 18:29
Yep, that's right - instead of an inconsequential tax increase on the rich and having plenty of money for Social Security benefits for years to come, the AARP is now "open" to raising the retirement age (now 66) and basically making people work until they die in order to save money. Fuck this country. (Oh, and apparently $1,100 a month is "too generous" - try living on that in any city in America and see how far it goes - especially amongst the elderly, who have increased medical bills, medications, etc.)
But then Certner acknowledged that AARP believes the program needs to be changed.
"Everybody knows we need to look at a package of different changes to Social Security to make it strong for the long term," he said. "The reality is, we have more people older and who are living longer, so we need to make changes. Everybody recognizes that. And we're certainly willing to talk about a package of changes that will keep Social Security strong."
He suggested raising the age at which retirees can receive full benefits -- currently, 66 years old -- would be on the table even though doing so represents "a massive benefit cut for people."
Yet AARP reassured labor groups that it had not changed its position on Social Security, labor officials told HuffPost.
"The AARP has a history of division between the top folks and their base on these issues. The top folks like to be in the inside game," one union official said. "But they are walking backwards now."
The official said that he and other opponents of benefit cuts had been told that AARP's "longstanding position" hadn't changed, but there was some uncertainty about what that position actually is.
If AARP is open reducing benefits, it would be a major boost for Social Security reformers who say the program is too generous and therefore unaffordable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/17/aarp-social-security_n_878966.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
But then Certner acknowledged that AARP believes the program needs to be changed.
"Everybody knows we need to look at a package of different changes to Social Security to make it strong for the long term," he said. "The reality is, we have more people older and who are living longer, so we need to make changes. Everybody recognizes that. And we're certainly willing to talk about a package of changes that will keep Social Security strong."
He suggested raising the age at which retirees can receive full benefits -- currently, 66 years old -- would be on the table even though doing so represents "a massive benefit cut for people."
Yet AARP reassured labor groups that it had not changed its position on Social Security, labor officials told HuffPost.
"The AARP has a history of division between the top folks and their base on these issues. The top folks like to be in the inside game," one union official said. "But they are walking backwards now."
The official said that he and other opponents of benefit cuts had been told that AARP's "longstanding position" hadn't changed, but there was some uncertainty about what that position actually is.
If AARP is open reducing benefits, it would be a major boost for Social Security reformers who say the program is too generous and therefore unaffordable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/17/aarp-social-security_n_878966.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009