Most Arizona seniors rely heavily on Social Security for their income, an AARP report found.
David Mitchell, AARP Arizona state director, said that reliance among seniors not just here but around the country is a reason why Congress shouldn’t tinker with Social Security while addressing the budget deficit.
“Everything’s on the table, and when they say everything is on the table, there’s a vulnerability there for both Social Security and Medicare,” he said.
In a recent study, the organization’s Public Policy Institute found that more than 19 million seniors relied on Social Security for at least 50 percent of their family income.
In Arizona, the study found, Social Security accounts for at least half of the family income for 47 percent of those over 65 and 90 percent of income for nearly 20 percent.
“It’s really the backbone of financial security for people when they retire, and it’s something they can count on,” Mitchell said.
More than 750,000 people over 65 in Arizona were receiving Social Security benefits by end of 2010, according to the U.S. Social Security Administration.
Mitchell said this generation of retirees is very dependent on Social Security because many are from an era in which the wife relied on the husband’s income. Also, many companies that once offered pensions have either canceled them or gone bankrupt, he said.
“So Social Security is really their only safety net,” Mitchell said.
Tom Jenney, Arizona director of Americans for Prosperity, an organization that advocates for limited government and free markets, said depending on Social Security could be unreliable and the country needs to get into a system of mandatory private retirement savings accounts.
“The problem for individuals is that the government giveth and the government taketh away,” Jenney said. “Unless we have thorough reform on Social Security, the options are not good.”
Price Fishback, a professor of economics at University of Arizona’s Eller College of Management, said there is no immediate threat to Social Security, although it is becoming harder to sustain.
He said cuts would make the situation worse for seniors relying on it, but if the country is to maintain the system there has to be a way to pay for it. He noted that the program will become increasingly expensive with baby boomers approaching retirement.
“That’s what’s going to create the problem,” Fishback said. “That’s going to force higher tax rates or force lower benefits or force a higher rate of eligibility.”
Having many people so reliant on Social Security is a sign that individuals need to start saving more ahead of retirement, he said.
But Mitchell said Social Security is well and if untouched would take care of all eligible retirees until 2037, with only minor adjustments needed to make it sustainable beyond that year.
He said tampering with Social Security would lead to a slew of problems.
“What do you do when you don’t have income?” Mitchell said. “Either people don’t buy as much food as they need or don’t buy the medications that they need or don’t pay the rent and there’s implications in all those cases.”
Diogenes Lantern posted at 10:52 pm on Mon, Oct 10, 2011.
Obamanomics has successfully "redistributed the wealth". Over 65% of Seniors now have only 1-2 months of savings. And even if they did have savings, Obama's Treasury and Fed Res have interest rates so low that seniors can not live on .4% a year. Try $500,000 savings times 0.4%=$2000 a year income. Just so Obama can pay back his donors-the Big Banksters-paying out 0.4% and getting 2.5% at the treasury window. Why would banks consider loaning money? The stock market is too volatile for retirement money.
Currently, revenue into Social Security is less than Social Security payouts and we have just started the Baby Boomers cycle. Staggering! As Republicans/Paul Ryan propose, do not change payouts to Seniors or the current baby Boomers 55 and older. Under 55, the participating age must be increased. We can not continue this Ponzi scheme started by the Libs. Cehcik out US Congressman's David Schweikert's graphs and charts for the honest picture.
WylieDog posted at 7:00 am on Tue, Oct 11, 2011.
Actually it was Bushonomics that implemented the wealth redistribution program, which is still in effect today. And Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme, it's a retirement fund. The government needs to trim its own fat, instead it desperately seeks to trim from everyone else. The government has gotten too big for it's britches, literally. The ridiculous salaries they pay themselves - and I'm talking about all agencies and depts, top to bottom, not just the house and senate.
During the worst of our economic times government employees like Ken Salazar are up for a $20,000 raise. At a time when everyone on Social Security haven't even been given their annual standard cost of living raise for a few years now (which would've been just a few dollars), because the government claims there's been no inflation - no rise in the cost of living. And Salazar has only been on his job for 2.5 years. Talk about redistribution of wealth.
And the decades of corporate loopholes in the tax system needs to be fixed, no more loopholes, fix em. Otherwise it's really nothing more than tax evasion and costs everyone.
beefrits posted at 7:03 am on Tue, Oct 11, 2011.
Diogenes Lantern is right. The current system is unsustainable, but for AARP, the representative organization for the greediest generation (I am one of them), to spread fear among seniors is beyond contempt. To my knowledge, no one, NO ONE, has threatened to reduce benefits for those already retired or approaching retirement.
AARP is in the pocket of the insurance companies and the drug manufacturers. Any one of us who continues to support this cynical organization in its campaign to fundamentally change our social system should reconsider their membership and look into AMAC as an alternative.
TruthSeeker posted at 2:04 pm on Tue, Oct 11, 2011.
Who was one of Obamacare's biggest supporters? AARP! I feel their concern about Social Security is a bit disingenuous. Obamacare will reduce the rolls of Social Security through attrition as seniors age. Seniors will be denied the medical care that they desperately need to live a decent life. Seniors will die a slow death thanks to AARP.
dustbowl11 posted at 4:55 pm on Tue, Oct 11, 2011.
Isn't it every senior's dream to die a slow death? If it wasn't they should have supported death panels.
wdgnas posted at 5:11 am on Wed, Oct 12, 2011.
i prefer to die like my parents, in their sleep. unlike the other passengers of the car that died kicking and screaming...