Joel Blau
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
don't get me started.
-----Original Message-----
From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Davies
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Social Security
How about, since this is Appeal To The Religious Week, just saying that
gutting SS is a pretty poor way to "Honur thy Father and Mother?"
dd
-----Original Message-----
From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Max B.
Sawicky
Sent: 05 November 2004 18:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Social Security
The points of vulnerability for Bush include:
Your individual account is more risky than a guaranteed benefit;
You bear the cost of annuitizing your nest egg once you retire;
You bear the administrative cost of maintaining the individual account;
If your wages are low, you end up with less compared to the present system
(offset by a converse implication for those with high
wages) (defining 'less' is not a trivial exercise, plus it is an appeal to
losers, a classification nobody likes to be put into);
There is no money to finance the transition; if the Gov borrows, which is
what it looks like will happen, it runs the risk of financial market
reaction (when you ask, why not already you ask, f** if I know).
For anyone who has worked for a while and paid into the system, your
benefits are threatened by the diversion of revenue (the longer you've
worked, the greater the threat).
Obviously this has to be translated for popular consumption, but there is
something to work with.
On the other side, once the accounts are set up with some money in them, it
could be hard to halt the policy and very hard to reverse it.
(expropriate the piddling little savings of tens of millions of workers?)
Bleating about the deficit resulting from the transition, or waiting for a
financial crisis, is not an appealing strategy. That deficit is also a
bludgeon on domestic programs.
Between this and tax reform, it's going to be a busy year for yrs truly.
mbs
-----Original Message-----
From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Michael
Perelman
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Social Security
This is exactly this sort of material where this list could be usefu l. I
wish that Dean Baker were here again to weigh in on this question.
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 06:47:41AM -0600, Bill Lear wrote:So, the lies will soon start flying about the "problems" with Social
Security and how it needs to be "fixed" --- in the same way that your
dog needs to be "fixed".
I would like to see discussion here on this topic, to see how we can
help defend Social Security from Bush, for whom 60% of the eligible
electorate did not vote.
Let's start with an outline of what Social Security is: is it a form
of insurance (against an event that is close to 100% likely for most
people)? Is it a straight redistribution program? Both? What is it,
really and how to best explain what it is to the lay person? Why is
it important? Why should we care?
Bill
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
