Op-ed: 

A 2.8% COLA Is Simply Not Enough 

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor

The article posted here is the authors opinion alone, and does not necessarily represent the views of blogspot.com or Google     

Last month on Facebook I posted about one of my senior friends who receives both Social Security and Medicare, and how disappointed he is regarding the new 2.8% COLA increase he will soon be receiving, because said increase is now being countered by a $30 dollar increase in his Medicare Part B monthly premium. And when he figured out the actual numbers involved based upon his current monthly Social Security check, my friend's monthly COLA increase comes out to an extra $43 per month before taking into account his $30 increase in Medicare insurance each month, which actually reduced his total increased income to a mere $13 per month.

Guess my friend can now buy an additional carton of eggs and a gallon of milk each month...if even that.

What a sad commentary indeed for a man who has worked and paid into the Social Security system for years. And my friend is not alone in his feelings for Social Security COLAS (Cost of Living Adjustments) have always tended not to be enough to meet the growing needs of older Americans on what is now a lower level “fixed income.”

And when the joke of his having an extra $13 per month really sunk in, I decided to look into this because a 2.8% COLA increase did seem to be both an insult and quite unfair to me.

And so I asked others that I know who are on both Social Security and Medicare to see if their COLA increases were any better than my friend's $13 per month, and it's sad to say but the highest number I got was from someone who after taking the Medicare increase into account will see an increase of about $40 more per month in 2026. And while this is better then my friend's laughable $13 per month increase, even their $40 increase can barely keep up with their monthly raise in Medicare Part B's premium, let alone make a substantial difference in their weekly grocery bill or price at the pump.

Simply, and it's really no surprise here, but thanks to the actions of the Obama and Biden administrations, illegals do seem to be treated better, monetarily wise, than are many American senior citizens and retirees. How so...because Social Security monthly benefits are based upon one's earnings and work history whether the individual paid taxes or not. And this becomes an issue because earnings are held by Social Security in what is called an “Earnings Suspense file,” which does mean that illegals can actually gain access to benefits based on illegal earnings, thus taking away much needed monies from senior Americans...Americans with a legitimate work history,

Also, remember that COLA's are based on set rates of inflation, with inflation being measured by the “Consumer Price Index” (CPI). And it's here where the U.S. Department of Labor calculates any change to be made based specifically on what's called the “Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers” (CPI-W) which extends from the third quarter average of the previous year to the third quarter average for the current year. And while these calculations should work to help benefits keep pace with rising prices of goods and services, at least on the surface that is, it now seems not to work for many on a “fixed” Social Security income.

Why so? First, because being forgotten by those who actually set COLA's finalized rates is the fact that the dollar today does not buy what it once did, which does directly affect both seniors and retirees more so than it does working class or younger people. And second, because the CPI only reflects prices paid for goods and services purchased by an average household, and not by any specific individual, or by the average person in a certain age or income group. In fact, reality itself now shows that most people are affected by price changes that are either higher or lower than is being reported in the CPI, with those on Social Security being more negatively affected than are most others.

Now add in the fact that the value of the U.S. dollar against major foreign currencies dropped about 11% in the first half of this year...the biggest decline in more than 50 years...which now has some economists saying that the U.S. dollar could well lose, despite this past July's recovery of 3.2%, yet another 10% by the end of 2026. And if that be the case, the 2.8% COLA increase Social Security beneficiaries will soon be receiving will basically be negated as it does little to nothing to address the still rising grocery prices or the previous stated fact that Medicare has raised its Part B monthly premiums across the board, and they can do so again next year.

And here is where a major portion of the problem arises because Medicare can and does raise its premiums no matter that a COLA is in effect, And while what's known as a “hold harmless” rule does protect most Medicare beneficiaries by ensuring the premium hike does not reduce their net Social Security check below the previous year's amount, that in no way negates the fact that ones COLA might still be negated by the now higher Medicare monthly premiums,thus meaning monies available for groceries, etc., might still come up short.

So what would be considered a fair COLA in today's America given the fact that in today's economy a 2.8% increase in monthly checks really is a joke? While a COLA increase in the range of 2.8% to 3.0% has been deemed to be the number for actually maintaining purchasing power in regards to today's economic climate, most Social Security beneficiaries...as in the 75 million people, including somewhat younger retirees and individuals with disabilities, that receive Social Security benefits...I believe a COLA increase of 5%, 8% or even10% would not only outweigh Medicare's always increasing monthly premiums, but would give every Social Security beneficiary at least a fighting chance to build up some monetary reserve that could be used in case of an emergency.

Think of it this way...my friend mentioned at the beginning of this article will soon, based upon his current monthly Social Security check, be receiving a $43 COLA increase which in reality amounts to a monthly $13 increase after his allowing for the $30 increase in Medicare. However, if the COLA increase had been 5% he would have received a $56 COLA increase which in reality amounts to a $26 increase after having to deduct the $30 increase in Medicare.

Now if his COLA increase had been 8% my friend would have received an $89 monthly increase which would then drop down to $59 when the $30 increase in Medicare is taken in to account, And lastly, if the 2026 COLA had been set at a more helpful 10% my friend would have received, again based upon his current Social Security check, an additional $112 per month which too would have fallen to $82 because of the $30 monthly increase to Medicare.

Simply, my friend and so many others like him, are not seeing enough of a COLA increase** in monthly monies to really make a long term difference in their lives.

And while others who worked longer and/or made more money did pay more dollars into the Social Security system, and thus will see a larger increase in their monthly checks even with their Medicare costs rising, the fact remains that those with lower monthly checks are the very ones not only hurting the most, but are the ones who at least should see a large enough monthly increase to counter their rising Medicare costs.

But here you might ask, and rightfully so, where would these additional monies for a proper raise in the COLA come from? That answer is two fold with the first possibility being...according to some experts...that Social Security should stop using what many consider to be outdated monetary measures that actually drive up benefit costs (like Medicare for instance) instead of lowering them or leaving them as is. Recommended instead is using what is referred to as the “Chained Consumer Price Index” (C-CPI-U), which is simply an alternative and supposedly a more reliable measure of inflation.

Put out by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the key differences arise in the fact that C-CPI-U accounts for how consumers now are being forced to substitute cheaper goods for more expensive ones, where as CPI uses what is called a fixed “basket of goods," where prices are set without taking into account “substitution.” Also, the chained CPI uses data from adjacent periods to adjust spending patterns monthly, thus leading to a slower growth rate that its proponents claim now better reflects what are real-world needed budget adjustments minus the artificially inflated estimates that worsen Social Security's what is already its possible future of unsustainable finances.

But the problem here is that using a “Chained Consumer Price Index” to determine COLAS also comes replete with its own set of negatives which includes the fact that while it is a more accurate measure of the cost of living, it tends to understates the actual inflation experienced by Social Security beneficiaries. How so...because it assumes a greater ability to substitute cheaper goods than is realistic for that population. Remember, the elderly do tend to be “more set” in their ways including in how they shop and what they purchase,

In other words, neither the currently used COLA determining system nor the proposed by some alternative “chained” system works or would work to realistically help raise COLAS to more welcomed and needed levels. Only one of two things would work with the first being to actually switch the actual “tracking index” from CPI-W (urban wage earners) to CPI-E (elderly consumers), which would better reflect the higher inflation in senior-specific expenses like healthcare and rising prescription drug costs.

And the second option would be to do what has been needed to be done since the time of Obama, as in purge the Social Security and Medicare rolls of illegals who should never have been allowed on said rolls in the first place. Giving monies to illegals is paramount to rewarding criminals...criminals who knowingly and willingly broke our laws to come here...criminals now being rewarded for having done so.

And some will say that removing illegals from the Social Security rolls would harm the system not help it because less while monies would then be coming into said system, I look at it another way, as in all the monies illegals receive could then be divvied up and funneled out to elder American citizens to help make their “golden years” both more enjoyable and cost friendly. It really is time that we take care of our own and not “nickle and dime” them with a mere 2.8% COLA increase that cannot even negate their now rise in monthly Medicare premiums. If we truly want to “Make America Great Again” let's start with those who gave to America not those who tried and continue to try to rob her blind. Case closed.

____________________________________________________

Footnotes

* Any American citizen or legal resident that has accumulated 40 quarters (ten years) of legal employment is eligible to collect premium free Medicare Part A at age 65. However, one must understand that Medicare Parts A and B are funded differently. Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) is free. Medicare Part B (out of hospital) is not fully funded by past payroll taxes. This premium is an ongoing cost for your current coverage. Most beneficiaries pay a standard monthly premium for Part B, which is often automatically deducted from ones Social Security benefits. This is where the increased premiums cut into the COLA. 

** The highest Social Security “Cost-of-Living Adjustment” (COLA) was 14.3% in 1980, and was driven by the high inflation in the late 1970s, with significant COLA increases also seen in 1981 (11.2%) and 1979 (9.9%), If that kind of adjustment was done then, there is no reason why it cannot be done now.

 Copyright © 2026 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All rights reserved. 

************************************************************************************************** 

For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article Liberalism The Definition of Gaslighting.

************************************************************************************************** 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!                                                              Tomorrow, Tuesday, January 6th from 7 to 8:30pm EST, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'A 2,8% COLA Is Simply Not Enough'; 'Liberalism-The Definition of Gaslighting'; and important news of the day. Hope you can tune in to RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on https://rspradio1.com Click 'LISTEN LIVE' starting at 6:50pm EST, show begins at 7pm EST.

Op-ed

It's All in the Timing 

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor

The article posted here is the authors opinion alone, and does not necessarily represent the views of blogspot.com or Google     

Some will be angry I know, but sometimes things need to be said and opinions voiced in a timely manner, so here goes. Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro needed to be ousted no one is denying that, but in doing so full not partial disclosure needed to be told as to why,,,why on Trump's orders...orders afforded him by the Constitution in Article II, Section 2, which gives the sitting president authority to direct limited, short-term military operations without prior Congressional approval...he took it upon himself to not only do so, but why specifically now with the midterm election but a mere 11 months away...a blink of an eye in the political whelm.

First, we all know that both Russia and China have been trying to make inroads into the Western hemisphere. Second, Maduro was a brutal dictator who made daily life extremely difficult for the Venezuelan people, as well as being the man who would not relinquish power to the true winner of Venezuela's last election. Third, we know Maduro is indeed guilty of narco-terrorism and drug trafficking, no one can deny that, what with thousands of American deaths attributed to said trafficking. And fourth, and this is key, Nicolas Maduro (before capture) controlled 20% of the world's oil reserves...reserves whose prime buyer is China who accounts for approximately 80% of all of Venezuela's oil exports, with the other key buyers being both Russia and Cuba...communist nations all...nations surely not to be trusted,

Last night on FOX News, and again early this Sunday morning (1/4/26) as I write this, it was reported that according to President Trump, the U.S. and U.S. oil companies alone, will now be in control of Venezuela's oil, and thus to whom will and will not be privy to it. And with that said something just did not sit right and with me as to the timing of the drug operation that actually took Maduro down...the very operation that allowed the oil fields to rightfully become ripe for the taking. And while said operation was a total success what with the capture of Maduro and his wife who are now both jailed in Brooklyn, New York, and are awaiting federal trial in New York City based upon narco- terrorism and drug trafficking indictments handed down in 2020...know that said indictments will legally soon expire this March if not dealt with now.

So with this time frame now in place why not “ring the golden victory bell” four times...bringing Maduro to justice if you will; stopping his illicit drugs from killing more Americans (even though most, but obviously not all, knew the dangers of taking street drugs but willingly took them anyway); removing a ruthless dictator from power and hence his people from oppression; and lastly and seemingly what, to me, is really behind it all...garner Venezuela's oil reserves in time to help our Republican side win the 2026 midterm election, which will then hopefully carry over into a 2028 presidential win as well.

Simply, all of last weeks Maduro take-down events reek of a coordinated effort to beat 2020's time limitation on indictments, while at the same time scoring one for the “Trump team” in 2026. And while that is a good thing, I believe that taking control of Venezuela's oil fields and reserves was what was being kept from “We the People'” as being the prime target all along, Why so...because only if said operation was successful would it become an economy boosting plus to counter the current not so good midterm poll numbers...numbers showing that with waning “Independent” votes it is not guaranteed that we Republicans will keep the House in November, and hence control of America's purse strings.

Basically, only by Trump's removing Maduro from power by any means possible could the what I believe to be his prime and rightful oil garnering goal be accomplished. Timing and corresponding subterfuge...courtesy of Maduro's time limited drug trafficking take-down...hopefully will now serve we Republicans well come the midterm election. Remember, “bait and switch” operations...which I think this operation was...do tend to have positive results more times than not especially when the cause is just.

My opinion and I stand by it...case closed.

Copyright © 2025 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All rights reserved. 

Got Him..But...

MADURO CAPTURED

Trump says Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, wife ‘captured’ after large-scale strikes

This comes as the US military has been targeting in recent days alleged drug-smuggling boats. 

Nicholas McEntyre / NEW YORK POST

 

Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores were captured by US forces during a “large-scale” nighttime military operation early Saturday, President Trump announced.

“The United States of America has successfully carried out a large-scale strike against Venezuela and its leader, President Nicolas Maduro, who has been, along with his wife, captured and flown out of the Country,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“This operation was done in conjunction with US Law Enforcement. Details to follow.”

 “A lot of good planning and lot of great, great troops and great people,” Trump told the New York Times. “It was a brilliant operation, actually.” 

The strikes rocked sites in the state of Miranda, where Caracas is located, and nearby Aragua and La Guiera, sending plumes of smoke and fire into the air and causing power outages.

Photos show a fire tearing through Fuerte (Fort) Tiuna, Venezuela’s largest military complex located in Caracas, after an explosion.

Wishing all my Patriot Factor blog followers and readers a very 

Happy New Year!

May America's 250th Birthday celebration now begin!

 

 

 The 'Patriot Factor' will return on Monday, January 5, 2026 unless there is BREAKING NEWS..  

Ukraine–Russia at a crossroads: How the war evolved in 2025 and what comes next 

President Trump spent much of 2025 personally engaging both Russian and Ukrainian leaders in effort to negotiate settlement

Morgan Phillips/ Fox News  

President Donald Trump spent much of 2025 attempting what had eluded his predecessors: personally engaging both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an effort to bring an end to the war in Ukraine. From high-profile summits to direct phone calls, the administration pushed for a negotiated settlement even as the fighting ground on and the map changed little.

By year’s end, the outlines of a potential deal were clearer than they had been at any point since Russia’s full-scale invasion, with U.S. and Ukrainian officials coalescing around a revised 20-point framework addressing ceasefire terms, security guarantees and disputed territory. But 2025 also made clear why the war has proven so resistant to resolution: neither battlefield pressure, economic sanctions nor intensified diplomacy were enough to force Moscow or Kyiv into concessions they were unwilling to make.

The Trump administration’s push for a deal... The year began with a high-profile fallout last February between President Donald Trump, Vice President

Frustrated by the pace of talks after promising to end the war on "Day One" of his presidency, Trump initially directed his ire toward Zelenskyy before later conceding that Moscow, not Kyiv, was standing in the way of progress. Read more and see video here. 

Trump backs Netanyahu after rumors of friction, talks tough on Iran: ‘We’ll knock the hell out of them’

Steven Nelson / NEW YORK POST 

President Trump gave gushing praise to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Monday — denying reported friction with his counterpart and vowing to “knock the hell out of” Iran if it rebuilds its nuclear program.

“I hear that Iran is trying to build up again, and if they are, we’re gonna have to knock them down. We’ll knock them down. We’ll knock the hell out of them,” Trump said while welcoming Netanyahu to his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla.

“But hopefully that’s not happening. I heard Iran wants to make a deal. They want to make a deal that’s much smarter. You know, they could have made a deal the last time before we went through a big attack on them, and they decided not to make a deal. They wish they made that deal.”

Trump said the men would focus on about five major issues, including the implementation of the Trump-brokered October peace deal in Gaza and Israeli relations with the new Syrian government.