Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just knew someone would post that propaganda article.
Preliminary figures suggest a benefit increase of roughly 1.5 percent, which would be among the smallest since automatic increases were adopted in 1975, according to an analysis by The Associated Press.
For 2009 and 2010 the COLA increase was exactly ZERO.
According to The Associated Press, 1.5% is less than ZERO.
Not the way I (or anyone with a basic level of reading comprehension) would read it.
The AP article said that it would be among the smallest, not the smallest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVcook
Funny...that's exactly what hubby and I were discussing last night. Looks like "someone" (who shall remain nameless, article author) didn't do so well in basic math.
Is it a math issue or is it a reading comprehension issue?
The AP was not incorrect.
The statement made does not say it's the smallest increase, it says.....
"1.5 percent, which would be among the smallest since automatic increases"
Even if it had been reported as the smallest increase, it still would have been literally correct since no increase is not an increase so can't be used for comparison.
I am willing to be corrected if I've read it wrong, which gets more and more likely, these days.
Not sure if that should be accompanied by a or an or an
I try to face this sort of thing with a
Not the way I (or anyone with a basic level of reading comprehension) would read it.
The AP article said that it would be among the smallest, not the smallest.
Is it a math issue or is it a reading comprehension issue?
I vote for the latter.
I really do understand the difference between 'among' and 'the'. However, our discussion was more relevant to the drama being presented when compared to the 0% COLAS we received. Thank you for your comment, but your attack on my comprehension skill was truly uncalled for and certainly not appreciated.
Well I did not realize posting an AP article was "propaganda." Silly me! Maybe this thread needs to go under Politics and other Controversies. Too much drama over this one.
I agree with Mad Man. It said among the smallest, not the smallest so I don't understand people attacking the article.
Anyway checking out of this thread. Was trying to provide information. Not start arguments.
Well I did not realize posting an AP article was "propaganda." Silly me! Maybe this thread needs to go under Politics and other Controversies. Too much drama over this one.
I agree with Mad Man. It said among the smallest, not the smallest so I don't understand people attacking the article.
Anyway checking out of this thread. Was trying to provide information. Not start arguments.
I have a hunch that part of the problem is the AP story has been linked and related across the web and media outlets with different headlines. Folks may be reacting to those leads to the story and not the OP. Some of the stories have added woe is the senior and woe is the vet etc etc etc.
I really do understand the difference between 'among' and 'the'. However, our discussion was more relevant to the drama being presented when compared to the 0% COLAS we received. Thank you for your comment, but your attack on my comprehension skill was truly uncalled for and certainly not appreciated.
I'm sure it wasn't appreciated. Just as I'm sure that the author of the AP article wouldn't appreciate your snide comment that it looks like "someone" (who shall remain nameless, article author) didn't do so well in basic math. Especially, given the fact that no math error was made.
BTW, to what drama are you referring? It was a simple factual statement that 1.5% is among the lowest COLA increases. Any "drama" would be manufactured by an individual reading something into that statement, such as the poster who originally commented on the AP's "error" and you when you agreed with that poster.
Once again, it comes down to reading comprehension.
Remember earlier this year when Obama wanted to change the index used to measure COLA? Congress, Democrats and Republicans, wouldn't go along with that - at least not yet.
Obama wanted to move to CPI-U and Social Security uses CPI-W. You can get the details from the horse's mouth at Consumer Price Index (CPI)
If Obama had been successful, the COLA would be less than 1%.
Remember earlier this year when Obama wanted to change the index used to measure COLA? Congress, Democrats and Republicans, wouldn't go along with that - at least not yet.
Obama wanted to move to CPI-U and Social Security uses CPI-W. You can get the details from the horse's mouth at Consumer Price Index (CPI)
If Obama had been successful, the COLA would be less than 1%.
You do realize conservatives want it along with Obama as part of SS reform and Progressives fought it. It is on the table again as part of the budget debacle so expect the Chained CPI soon. You do realize who wants to cap Medicare and Privatize SS. Think Deficit reduction advocates as in demanding reduction advocates.
In 2009 and 2010, there was zero COLA; and although I'd definitely prefer higher than the proposed 1.5% for 2014, it is better than zilch. However, as I previously mentioned, the actual increase for 2014 could very well be offset by whatever the increase in the Part B premium will be for next year, and that info is usually published in Nov or Dec.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
or an 
or an 
