[Speed Gibson,
Wednesday January 19, 2005 at 3:36pm]
Social Security: What, Me Worry?
Monday's lead editorial in the Minneapolis Star Tribune (MST) leads off with (emphasis added):
In my book, you had better be sure of your facts before you call someone a liar, let alone the President. You had better be very sure if you use the strong language I highlighted.
This didn't originate with the Heritage Foundation. Indeed, it's just common sense. Consider this analysis:
Since African-Americans are unfortunately still averaging less income and life span than most, the above still holds. If there was any doubt, Dr. Walter E. Williams and Dr. Thomas Sowell, two prominent African-American economists have repeatedly made the same point for the same reasons. The MST only focuses on the Heritage Foundation study.
The problem that the MST and liberals in general have here is that once again, they think in only in terms of groups. Fairness within a group or at the individual level is not considered.
But if you're a young black man starting out, you know better. Increasingly, so does every young worker. Their grandparents got back far more than they put in. Their parents won't do as well, but they'll be fine. Your generation will not; if we do nothing, your taxes will be raised and your benefits slashed. Oh, but I must be lying again. Let the MST reassure you:
What was President Bill Clinton, really most everyone in Washington, talking about in 1998-1999, when the possibility of running a Federal surplus appeared? "Save" - "Strengthen" - "Shore up" Social Security was the call, priority one for "spending" the surplus. Tim Russert quoted Clinton on Meet the Press to a Democrat, asking what happened to the crisis? He ducked.
As for all the information the MST quoted from the Social Security Administration and the General Accounting Office, consider these strong words from the normally soft-spoken Roses, again from Free to Choose:
Of all the lies -- let's call them by their right name -- that the Bush administration is spreading about Social Security, none is as vile as the canard Bush repeated last Tuesday, when he said, "African-American males die sooner than other males do, which means the [Social Security] system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people. And that needs to be fixed." That is an entirely phony assertion; it has been debunked by the Social Security Administration, by the Government Accountability Office and by other experts. Bush and those around him know that. For them to repeat what they know to be a blatant lie is despicable fear-mongering.
In my book, you had better be sure of your facts before you call someone a liar, let alone the President. You had better be very sure if you use the strong language I highlighted.
Bush didn't make up this phony line on his own; it comes from the Heritage Foundation, which a number of years ago did a study purporting to show that because African-Americans have a shorter life expectancy than whites, they get less in return for the taxes they pay into the Social Security system.
This didn't originate with the Heritage Foundation. Indeed, it's just common sense. Consider this analysis:
Children from poor families tend to start work - and start paying employment taxes - at a relatively early age; children from higher income families at a much later age. At the other end of the life cycle, persons with lower incomes on the average have a shorter life span than persons with higher incomes. The net result is that the poor tend to pay taxes for more years and receive benefits for fewer years than the rich - all in the name of helping the poor! -- From Free to Choose by Milton and Rose Friedman, published 1979.
Since African-Americans are unfortunately still averaging less income and life span than most, the above still holds. If there was any doubt, Dr. Walter E. Williams and Dr. Thomas Sowell, two prominent African-American economists have repeatedly made the same point for the same reasons. The MST only focuses on the Heritage Foundation study.
The problem that the MST and liberals in general have here is that once again, they think in only in terms of groups. Fairness within a group or at the individual level is not considered.
The GAO reached the same conclusion. It said that, "In the aggregate, blacks and Hispanics have higher disability rates and lower lifetime earnings, and thus receive greater benefits relative to taxes [paid] than whites."
But if you're a young black man starting out, you know better. Increasingly, so does every young worker. Their grandparents got back far more than they put in. Their parents won't do as well, but they'll be fine. Your generation will not; if we do nothing, your taxes will be raised and your benefits slashed. Oh, but I must be lying again. Let the MST reassure you:
The system is not in crisis; it has money to last for about the next half century, and even then, if nothing is done the required benefit cuts would still leave retirees better off than those getting benefits today. Pay close attention to this debate, and don't get snookered. The crisis in Social Security is no more real than the "crisis" that led the United States to war in Iraq.
What was President Bill Clinton, really most everyone in Washington, talking about in 1998-1999, when the possibility of running a Federal surplus appeared? "Save" - "Strengthen" - "Shore up" Social Security was the call, priority one for "spending" the surplus. Tim Russert quoted Clinton on Meet the Press to a Democrat, asking what happened to the crisis? He ducked.
As for all the information the MST quoted from the Social Security Administration and the General Accounting Office, consider these strong words from the normally soft-spoken Roses, again from Free to Choose:
As we have gone through the literature on Social Security, we have been shocked at the arguments that have been used to defend the program. Individuals who would not lie to their children, their friends, or their colleagues, whom all of us would trust implicitly in the most important personal dealings, have propagated a false view of Social Security. Their intelligence and exposure to contrary views make it hard to believe that they have done so unintentionally and innocently.