there's always been an upper limit on salaries from which FICA (social security taxes) were deducted. If you removed that limit and taxed all income, you would immediately save the fund for future retirees.

Social Security is a forced savings plan with entitlements, as well as a piggy bank for politicians. Globe: "Analysts noted, however, that lower-income people would probably die earlier, meaning they would get fewer benefits in their lifetimes". Note, lower income people would also contribute less during their lifetimes. Does that not make sense? Social Security was not intended as a welfare plan, no?

Save for your retirement!  People aren't saving enough for retirement!   We were told that was the right thing to do. Some people spend away, fancy homes, furniture, vacations, cars,  expensive cell and cable plans.  The grasshoppers who don't believe winter is coming.  Others lived a more frugal life, small homes, hand me down furniture, maybe a weekend getaway to Maine, bought the used car and got 10 more years out of it, skipped the cell phone and cable route.  They are now the ants who must save the grasshoppers (how many people even recognize this from Aesop?).  I don't know what will be considered wealthy in means testing, but many who did the right thing, piled up $200,000 or more will be the losers in this.  those who spent away, expecting the government to step in to save them, will be the winners.  We have a system that will encourage even less retirement saving, and more dependance on the government.  This will not end well.

so it means if you saved and sacrificed to have some money for retirement and not depend on government..will have to pay more for being frugal...medicaid you cannot have more then $2000.00 in cash assets.. (that was when my father was on it) will that be medicare also?   watch out....if that is the case...spend everything...and let big daddy support you and become the 47% Mitt Romney talks about...I have too much pride...if possible will take care of myself...some can not and we need to take care of them...but medicare was something we paid into and also pay $100.00 per month for plan B. plus a supplement insurance.  I can see if someone has a high retirement income  pay a higher co-pay. 

"Glenn Hubbard, one of Romney’s chief economic advisers, said in an interview that Romney wants both Medicare and Social Security to be 'more progressive’." Oh, the delicious irony! Romney now presents himself as a "progressive"?!! Hah! Yeah, next we'll hear he has changed his party affiliation to Democrat, all to present himself as a kinder, gentler Layer-Off-in-Chief. Mr. Etch-a-Sketch is right.

So, Globe, let's see data on people's contributions over time and the amount they get back assuming a fixed return on funds paid in. In other words, will people get back what they contribute, given that the government has had the money for decades and, in a private investment situation, it would have reliably appreciated.

Mean's testing for Medicare sounds like a good option - but why should it only affect those under 50 ? If it's the right thing to do then it should affect everyone right away

The only rational used by government is to use. O.P.M  (Other Peoples Money) for anything they attempt to reform or change. The problem is once they get OPM they mis- handle the money or overspend on any endeavor they manage (create useless jobs). Its all about creating jobs and lifetime benefits for elected officials and their friends by giving OPM to the voters who elect them.

If I park my investments offshore, will that mean I can still qualify for high Social Security and

Medicare benefits?

If the Reform Health Care Act is going to be offering health care insurance plans to meet the needs of every person in the U.S. - WHY DO YOU think you NEED MEDICARE OR MEDICAID programs? Why do the elderly or the poor need any different insurance plans than what will be available for you or me? Especially - why should people who can afford to pay for their health insurance receive 'free' health insurance? That includes persons who are elected to political office: They too should be paying for their health insurance plans.

Mitt is a masterdebator and Mitt is also remarkably physically fit. And his running mate is a model of physical prfection, but pay close attention to what these supermodels are saying. Mitt still wants to upgrade our already bloated military to the tune of two trillion. Ever google to find out how many aircraft carriers, subs with nukes and all else we have? We have military installarions all over the world. Come to think of it, only Ron Paul wants to close them down and use the money to help our own back here.  Mitt talks tough, insinuating Obama ain't. Is a diplomatic approach not more beneficial in the long run or is this being "soft"? Mitt wants a strong military but we already are strong and, by the way, we are supposed to be pulling out of Afghanistan in 2014. So,Mitt, who will be our enemy then? So we need to spend two trillion to be strong for what?

to make America strong, against what, master debator.

What's wrong with means testing?  We would never know from reading this article on proposals to introduce means testing to Social Security and Medicare.

Means testing may save some money in the short run, but once higher income people are no longer entitled to the same Social Security and Medicare benefits, the programs will be labeled as "welfare" and political support for these programs will quickly erode.  

Presidents Roosevelt and Johnson knew that by making these programs universal, they built enduring political support from a broad majority of our country.  Means testing will undermine it to the detriment of all.