No COLA for You!

We already know that Social Security is in serious trouble but when the Social Security Trustees begin releasing news that there will be NO Cost of Living Adjustments in 2010, you have to wonder if the end is closer than we realize.

Indicators like that are akin to employers saying no more overtime or pay raises are frozen. It’s usually what happens right before the employer informs everyone of mass layoffs. You simply don’t come out with major bad news at one moment in time.

This will be the first time that the SSA has not provided a cost of living adjustment in 35 years. The Associated Press reports that the COLA will not occur because it is pegged to inflation and inflation was negative due to a reduction in energy costs in 2008.

But the AP report makes no mention of the anticipated dramatic increase of inflation due to the US Treasury printing up and flooding the market with greenbacks.

Watch for this to be a major issue in the 2010 mid-term elections. You can bet this will not sit well with seniors who have paid into the system all their life.

A final note. This is a great example of why individuals should plan for their own future and not rely on the federal government to be there to bail them out. I solidly endorse the growing movement to “Opt Out” of dependency on the government. It’s no longer a matter of “if” but “when.”


  1. Bruce from Flagstaff says

    I’m as libertarian as anyone on this board, but this post is nonsense. The lack of a SS cola this year has NOTHING to do with the problems SS faces. It is purely a matter of law. The COLA is based on CPI inflation and there was DEFLATION as measured by the CPI over the past 12 months. Now we can debate whether the CPI is a good measure of actual inflation, but it is the official measure. The law tying SS colas to the CPI has been in effect for a long time. There is nothing in this action that speaks to the solvancy of SS. While SS is going broke, this is NOT an indicator of that.

  2. Dang those evil Republicans in Congress! If the Democrats had the majority, this attack on Social Security would… uh, never mind.

  3. Basil St. John says

    If Republicans were in control of Congress, Shane would be praising this as fiscal responsibility, if he were to mention it at all.

  4. No, actually if I were King, I would be making good on the government’s promise to pay back everyone who were forced to “invest” in the system. But I would also advocate that the current and upcoming workforce phase themselves out of the system. They would still get what they paid into the system but it would be time to end this giant Ponzi scheme and allow those who want out to get out.

  5. LOL @ DSW. You sound like you were a Ron Paul supporter.

  6. I wonder how much more money would be available if Bush hadn’t succeeded in taking us from an $800 billion surplus to a $1.2 trillion deficit.

  7. Basil St. John says

    John, you know all the spending started after Democrats came into office in 2006. Or at least that’s how some folks ’round here remember it.

  8. Tucson Vice says

    Basil is right.

    This is exactly the kind of “hand-out” that you people claim to hate. Coming from SA, this particular post seems a little bit ridiculous.

  9. Why not entrust S.S. to a man who knows these systems inside and out!

    Why waste a genius’s talents behind bars!

    Free Bernie and name him “Social Security Czar”!

    No better fit for a man and a program!

Leave a Reply