Our politicians and federal
apparatchiks say they care concerning the poor and despise the wealthy. 

However, I discover
that our authorities offers out quite a lot of dough to wealthy individuals who don’t want
federal handouts. For instance, the Cato
Institute reported yesterday that high-income married {couples} obtain as a lot as $117,000 a 12 months in Social Safety advantages.
Quoting Forbes author Andrew Biggs, the Cato report factors out:

[America’s Social Security program] produces . . . unnecessarily
beneficiant advantages for the best earners, who simply might save extra for
retirement on their very own, whereas shortchanging the Individuals most prone to
poverty in previous age as a result of they acquired low pay throughout their working years.

That is outrageous
after we contemplate that the common
Social Safety examine is lower than $ 1,800 and that 40
% of older Individuals rely virtually solely on their Social Safety
checks to fund their retirement.

Put one other manner, Mitt
Romney and Nancy Pelosi will get greater Social Safety checks than
a Mississippi faculty instructor or some man who labored all his life as an attendant
in a nursing house.

Cato recommends that
the U.S. observe Nice Britain’s instance and pay a flat-rate profit to everybody—inflicting
advantages to rise for low-income earners and shrink for the wealthy.

Britons obtain
about $34,000 in retirement advantages—no matter lifetime earnings. If the U.S. switched to the British mannequin,
tens of millions of low-income Individuals would have a extra comfy retirement, and our Social Safety program prices would lower.

There’s only one
downside: the British mannequin for presidency retirement pensions would piss off  American wealthy individuals. And that is one thing
Congress would by no means do.

Does Nancy want an enormous Social Safety examine?