Today's e-mail from "There Is No Crisis.Com"

[Coastie for Truth]

This edition is 'solution' edition. I get fairly annoyed at right-wingers who say that Democrats propose no solutions. We do. It's just that when they are lying we don't negotiate in bad faith. Nor should we.

So here's our solution edition talking point edition.

"How do we 'solve' the problem?"

1) This is a trick question for three reasons.



- It's not clear if there is a problem - we don't know what productivity growth will be over the next forty years. In the early 1990s, Social Security looked like it would be insolvent fairly quickly, but because of the rapid productivity growth of the 1990s, the date was moved back to 2042. Analysts have consistently been too pessimistic about our economy (consider what this implies about Bush's attitude about how fast we can grow).

- To the extent that there might be a problem, Bush's plan makes it worse and only tangentially touches the main issue. It's like if you say 'my knee itches', right-wingers would punch you in the arm.

- The real issue is retirement savings, and to the extent that we need to increase income for the elderly, Social Security as it exists is actually part of the solution to this, not a problem.


"How do we solve the retirement problem?"


Let's imagine what we want for retirement. A safe, secure, guaranteed retirement system for all those who work and play by the rules that we can carry with us from job to job. It should have survivor's benefits for widows and children as well as safeguards if you become disabled. Let's implement it and call it... Social Security.


"Come on. There's clearly a funding issue. How do we 'solve' that problem?"


Well, let's assume you're right. Which you're not. But let's assume that anyway. 68% of Americans think that we should address the problem by limiting benefits for wealthy retirees. 67% of Americans think that we should require higher income workers to pay Social Security taxes on ALL of their wages. Problem solved.



(http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/2005-02-07-poll-results.htm#socsec)



So to recap:


1) There is probably no funding problem with Social Security.
2) Social Security is part of the SOLUTION to a more general retirement income problem.
3) You can address any funding issues by requiring FICA taxes on wages for the rich, not just those of the middle class.

[rinsd]

1. "What crisis?" is the dumbest meme ever.....

Because its exactly what you state.

"I get fairly annoyed at right-wingers who say that Democrats propose no solutions"

Because many people decryed the myth of the SS Trust Fund and continue to do so. Because there is a problem that we can take care of now instead of waiting until its staring us in the face along with its much scarier twin MediCare/MedicAid.

What Democrats should be doing is say, fine there's a problem and the easiest and best solution is to end the wage cap on payroll taxes.

It's win freaking win; more money coming into SS, it doesn't change benefits, doesn't mess with the retirement age, and doesn;t impact the poor & middle class.

Krugman got the ball rolling on this "what crisis" meme. He has since dropped it in favor of attacking the costs of transition(a good point). Why would he do that? Well he spent some of the mid-90's ridiculing the idea of the trust fund and urging Clinton to do something about the eventual crisis.

You can't spend decades telling the people that's there's a problem with Social Security and then try to pretned that it isn't a problem anymore just because the other side wants to do something abou it(well Republicans can). It's much easier to use political judo, Bush has created a call for reform...well let's reform it....OUR WAY.