Chris Christie Makes Epochal Proposal To Limit Social Security Benefits

Senate Committee: Small "Tweaks" Will Guarantee Social Security's Future Finances

http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/07/senate-committee-small-tweaks-will.html

Alan: I don't like Christie.

He's a bully who publicly humiliates teachers.

 

However, the limitation of Social Security benefits for wealthy people is a very good idea that has often been bandied about but finally "center stage." 

At least for a news cycle.

Christie’s explosive proposal to limit Social Security benefits

Chris Christie, the Republican governor of New Jersey, has never been one to shy away from a controversy. The governor proposed less generous Social Security benefits for a broad swathe of affluent American retirees on Tuesday, placing a firm hand on the proverbial "third rail of politics" and waiting to be electrocuted. Nothing much has happened to him yet. Luciana Lopez and Scott Malone explain the plan for Reuters: The governor, despite his own stalled efforts at reforming the New Jersey pension system, proposed Social Security 'means-testing' that would reduce the size of benefits for people earning more than $80,000 annually and phase them out entirely for those earning $200,000 or more. "Do we really believe that the wealthiest Americans need to take from younger, hard working Americans to receive what, for most of them, is a modest monthly Social Security check?" Christie asked.

If well-off Americans are upset by the prospect that they'd receive less at retirement from the government after paying into the system through decades of hard work, that anger hasn't materialized yet. Maybe Christie can convince them to part with their benefits. He does make a persuasive pitch. Or maybe the politics around federal entitlements have changed. Also on Tuesday, in a rare moment of bipartisan cooperation, Congress overwhelmingly passed a bill to reform Medicare. Just as Christie's proposal would mean that the rich get less out of Social Security, the Medicare legislation would raise premiums for the wealthiest beneficiaries. President Obama is expected to sign it. Conservative commentators make compelling arguments for reforms along these lines. They direct federal dollars to the people who need them most, creating programs that offer more generous benefits but are cheaper on the whole. At the same time, there are a couple of reasons to be skeptical of means testing in federal entitlement programs. A means test can discourage people from working harder and saving, since if they're taking in more every month, they'll receive less in federal benefits. Also, as Eduardo Porter recently argued in The New York Times, these programs risk losing their broad political support if they aren't universal, but are seen instead as giveaways to the poor at taxpayers' expense.