Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (95611)	1/17/2005 11:05:03 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793896

It makes a lot of sense. Bill, I swear. Reading is becoming a lost art. <g> That entire article is about the computation of initial benefits. Look at the title. Look at the first sentence. Look at how many times "initial benefits" appears in the article. The entire article is about initial benefits, which means that the second sentence is about initial benefits. If that's not enough for you, try this. You're talking about changing the cola formula from inflation-plus-1% to inflation. That is price indexing. That is not a change from a wage index to a price index, just a jiggering of the price index. So the business about changing from wage to price index must be about something else. As for your assertion about the computation of your cola, I thought that they reduced that from cpi plus one to cpi about ten or fifteen years ago. That's when they changed it for us fed retirees. I found this on the SS web site just now. <<How the COLA is calculated The Social Security Act specifies a formula for determining the COLA. In general, the COLA is equal to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) from the third quarter of one year to the third quarter of the next.>>