Do we really care about children?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 03:21:25 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Do we really care about children?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Do we really care about children?  (Read 322 times)
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 02, 2005, 05:16:44 PM »

Walter E. Williams

I cringe with disgust when I hear politicians say, "We're doing it for the children." What's worse is so many Americans mindlessly fall hook, line and sinker for the hype. Judging by our actions, Americans could not care less for future generations, and future generations will curse us for it. Let's look at it.

According to several respected authorities, including the Concord Coalition (co-chaired by former Sens. Warren Rudman and Robert Kerrey), the Congressional Budget Office, U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow, and the Social Security Administration, the estimated present value of the unfunded liability of Social Security and Medicare ranges between $61 trillion and $75 trillion dollars.

"Williams," you ask, "what's this present value business?" Simply put, between $61 trillion and $75 trillion dollars is the money that would have to be put aside right now, at current interest rates, in order to meet future obligations of Social Security and Medicare. To put an astronomical sum like $61 trillion or $75 trillion in a bit of perspective: The value of our entire national output of goods and services (GDP) in 2004 was only $12 trillion.

Congress can't put aside $75 trillion as reserves against future liabilities of Social Security and Medicare. Therefore, according to the Dallas, Texas-based National Center for Policy Analysis, the annual rate of Social Security unfunded liabilities is growing at a $667 billion clip and Medicare's at $4 trillion.

What does all this mean? It means little in pocketbook terms to today's Americans who are 65 years or older. They will collect their Social Security checks and their promised Medicare benefits, but not so for future generations. Here's that future according to House Ways and Means Committee testimony, given by Dr. John Goodman, president of the NCPA (May 2005):

    In 2020, combined Social Security and Medicare deficits will equal almost 29 percent of federal income taxes. At that point the federal government will have to stop doing almost a third of what it does today. By 2030, about the midpoint of the baby boomer retirement years, federal guarantees to Social Security and Medicare will require one in every two income tax dollars. By 2050, they will require three in every four.

And by 2070, Social Security and Medicare will consume all federal revenues.

There are some "optimists" who seek to minimize the pending disaster that will be caused by these and other federal unfunded liabilities. They argue that the federal government can always meet its obligations through its power to tax. According to some estimates, by 2030, Social Security and Medicare obligations alone will require a 50 percent increase in payroll taxes. If tax increases are off the table, 2030 will see a 30 percent reduction in promised Social Security benefits and stringent rationing of health-care services promised by Medicare. There's another "solution." Even though Congress can't increase our life-expectancy, they can raise the age of Social Security and Medicare eligibility. Were Congress to make 80 as the age for Social Security and Medicare eligibility, they'd solve the problem because most of us would be dead.

Let's look at the raw politics of the Social Security-Medicare situation. Few, if any, of our 535 congressmen will be around in 2030 and later when the real crunch comes, but they are subject to today's, not tomorrow's, political pressures. Similarly, few of today's Americans 65 years of age and older will be around. Other than mouthing a concern for future generations, both have little economic incentive to be concerned about what happens in 2030. After all, what do they have at stake?

In 2030, will young people in the labor force be willing to see themselves taxed at Social Security rates of 20, 30 and 40 percent to take care of some old people? I don't think that will politically fly, and they might begin to get ideas about euthanasia. In addition to economic strife, Social Security and Medicare are laying the groundwork for intergenerational conflict. Unfortunately, the politics of today don't give us room to prevent these twin disasters.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.212 seconds with 12 queries.