Grand Old Entitlements
Spoken like a true Reagan* acolyte, President-Elect Obama has promised to tackle the "thorny" issue of entitlements, including Social Security. Apparently all this free wheelin' and bailout dealin' we've been doing means the cuts are going to have to come from somewhere. Never mind that progressives have already beat back this foolhardy notion recently; it's the era of post-partisanship! Where even "sacrosanct" programs like Social Security are eligible for tinkering to compensate for hundreds of billions in needless tax cuts - and countless other criminal conservative chicanery.
I've written elsewhere how Social Security is one of the most successful anti-poverty programs we have in the U.S. It's also one of the few that's universal (in principle anyway, there is some debate over whether African-American men benefit equally from Social Security). It's also fully funded for at least another 40 years, until 2049.
So how should we be reacting to this? Outrage is always a good choice. I encourage you to consider what Social Security wages are like: in Massachusetts, where I live, the average earnings for working households is $85k. The average Social Security income is $14k (this is different from more general retirement/pension income). In Louisiana, another state near and dear to me, mean SS income is about $12,000 per year. This is one of the beauties of SS: it's progressive, meaning low-income workers benefit more from the program than higher-income individuals. To compare, in LA mean earnings for working households is only $56k, meaning that the elderly are comparatively better off there than they are in MA.
Wait a minute!! Social security is keeping people out of poverty? And disproportionately benefiting lower-income retirees? Why, it's practically socialism! Egads!! Good thing Obama's trying to resurrect one of the few policy failures of Dubya's Administration!**
*Yes, Reagan did ultimately protect SS. Thanks, Tip!







COMMENTS (8)