Nicholas Kristoff - FUCKWAD

[MikeG]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/05/opinion/5kristof.html?hp

[MSgt213]

1. I knew the entire issue was us liberals fault. We can't come up with a

stupider plan then Bush and in turn make his plan look better. We have doomed Bush's plan to failure and therefor doomed SS.

[TexasLawyer]

2. I just read that article in the NYT this morning...

was searching for just the right label for Kristoff. "Fuckwad" seems to fit just fine.

[The Zanti Regent]

13. Aw, he's just a Neoconstipated 5th columnist.

Like the other neoconstipated idiots, his loyalty is with Likud and not America. Since Nicky loves Israel more than he does America, let him move there and stop dreaming up ways to kill kids, like he did with my only child.

[Wright Patman]

3. Singapore is cited

as his model country.

So, tell me, when do the canings begin?

http://www.corpun.com/awfay9405.htm

[LiviaOlivia]

4. Singapore acccording to the WSJ

From CJRdaily
http://www.campaigndesk.org/archives/001284.asp

Tip of the Hat
The Sun Sets in the West - Again!
Feb 3, 2005

~snip~

You'd think that on coverage of a complex economic issue such as Social Security overhaul, the Wall Street Journal would stand head and shoulders above, say, the New York Times or USA Today. And you'd be right. The Journal upped the ante this morning by tackling an obvious but seldom-explored angle: It reviewed (subscription required) the experiences of other nations that have partially privatized their own national pension plans.

The first thing we learn from the Journal story by Bob Davis and Matt Moffett is that this is not a new idea; Singapore embarked on the privatization of its equivalent of Social Security 50 years ago, and since then 20 nations have followed suit, including Britain, Sweden, Argentina and Chile.

The Journal takes us on a tour of seven of those nations and their wildly varying experiences with private accounts. A few highlights:

~snip~

-- In Singapore, an extremely discretionary program allows workers to disperse their contributions among three accounts, an "ordinary" account, used for housing and education; a medical account for hospital costs, and a third account for old age and disabilities. As a result, fully ninety percent of Singapore citizens own their own homes -- but payroll taxes eat up 33 percent of paychecks. In addition, many of the elderly contributed so much of their withheld pay to housing and medical accounts that they find themselves with little money in their retirement accounts -- "asset-rich but cash-poor" at retirement.

~snip~

[question everything]

5. Would help to post a few paragraphs

The Daily Breeze

Tuesday, February 08, 2005

Liberals need Social Security plan

Party leaders ought to develop a system for the 21st century instead of just opposing the Bush administration's proposals.
By Nicholas D. Kristof

Liberals are making a historic mistake by lining up so adamantly against Social Security reform.

It's impolite to say so in a blue state, but President Bush has a point: There is a genuine problem with paying for Social Security, even if it isn't as dire as Bush suggests.

As Bill Clinton declared in 1998 about Social Security reform: "We all know a demographic crisis is looming. If we act now it will be easier and less painful than if we wait until later." Clinton then made Social Security reform a central theme of his 1999 State of the Union address, saying, "Above all, we must save Social Security for the 21st century."

(snip)

A crucial economic weakness of America is its low savings rate, and one way to address that would be to finance retirements more out of savings -- with wealth creation rather than wealth transfers.

Singapore helped pioneer private investment accounts (a good rule of thumb in economic policy is to do what Singapore does), and its system has raised home ownership and alleviated poverty.

(snip)

Bush is disingenuous -- and perhaps fiscally reckless -- by refusing to explain who will pay the bill, and the Democrats are trying to shout him down without offering solutions of their own.

As Will Marshall, a founder of the Democratic Leadership Council and now president of the Progressive Policy Institute, said: "The Democratic Party ought to be developing a vision of a modernized social insurance system for the 21st century and moving beyond the 'just say no' position. If Bush is wrong, then what is right?"

(snip)

Find this article at:
http://www.dailybreeze.com/opinion/articles/1240102.html

[Rose Siding]

6. Aw, he wasn't getting invited to the best parties anymore

Time to renew those "non-partisan" beltway creds.

[DemoTex]

7. Former NZ Governor General Dame Cath Tizzard liked "fuckwad."

Bwaa haa haa!

[Skittles]

11. man, I could use a prescription of FUKITOL

yes INDEED :o

[evil_orange_cat]

8. Why is he a fuckwad? He said democrats should present...

... progressive alternatives. I agree with him. THe current system does suck. Bush's plan sucks MUCH MORE. So instead of just whining, why can't the Democrats propose more progressive alternatives?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. Because the Republicans are like Chicken Little, saying

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling! We've got to invest in Star Wars to shoot it back into place!"

And the Democrats respond with, "But the sky isn't falling."

And the Republicans come back with, "You don't have any ideas to deal with the fact that the sky is falling! You're just negative all the time!"

[applegrove]

10. Neocons are back-peddaling - seems they bit off more Karl than they could

Neocons are back-peddaling - seems they bit off more Karl Rove than they could chew. Swallow you idiots!!! This is your "glorious revolution" and your ideas that put the current loonies in power.

I can see the Pendulum a-swinging back too . STAY WHERE YOU ARE! No distancing from what you created. Be a men about it. What are the neocons going to tell us what they mean by SS reform after the debate? Will Americans be told one by one - so it can be explained to each and every one of them according to their own worst fears. We know black men will be told that SS isn't good for them since they all die by violence when they are 25.

Come on! It is your proposal. Tell us what the numbers are so we can figure out that the growth numbers for the USA will be much worse than the growth numbers for the rest of the world. We have as much right to know what your assumptions are - as anyone else.

[hfojvt]

12. Josh Marshall does more than name-calling

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_01_30.php#004700

I also think Kristof is wrong about lifespan increasing by 30 years in the 20th century. Maybe he was looking at world statistics. In 1929, life expectancy from birth was 59.2 and in 2002 it was 77.3 an increase of 18.1. Did it really increase by 11.9 years from 1900 to 1929?
Also the more important number is life expectancy at age 60. That went from 15.24 in 1929 to 22.0 in 2002 an increase of only 6.76.