|
September 24, 2008
The third rail is easy to embrace
George Will thinks that in the near-hysteria over how to control the current economic stampede, people are forgetting the big picture: An enormous range of complex judgments will have to be made about who will decide -- and by what criteria -- to whom money will be directed, and how to value and price the financial instruments, and the assets behind them, that the government might soon own. But these micro problems, although quite huge, pale next to the macro problem, which is:Eric S. Raymond wrote a very disturbing post about this, and he thinks it will require getting rid of the so-called "entitlements.": The IBD correctly notes: "Allowed to grind on without real reform, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will do what no invading army or cabal of terrorists has done or will ever do: bring this mighty republic to its knees. Increasing federal taxes by 150% will strangle economic growth."(My previous thoughts about this are here.) The problem is, even though the Big Crash is ultimately inevitable, getting rid of the "entitlements" could result in rioting in the streets. Even revolution. Politicians cannot face things like that. They can't even talk about entitlements, which have long been considered a "political third rail." Fortunately, there is no such third rail for bloggers, because bloggers don't have to worry about getting elected. In that sense, they are either part of the current flow, or else they're ungrounded, depending on your point of view. So I can reach out and touch the third rail with complete impunity. I won't get shocked, not even if I say it's time to scrap the welfare state. Why, I can even yell "Get rid of Social Security!" "Take care of yourself and your own family!" "Buy guns!" "Store food!" But I wish that those for whom this really is a political third rail would remember that there's nothing to fear but the fear of death. (Which means we have nothing to fear but the inevitable itself.) QUESTION: Amidst the endless talk about bailouts, I have a nagging question for those who think "the government" is a blank check: Who will bail out the bailout? (Or, if we look at the government the way a college kid looks at daddy's money, "What happens when Daddy's check bounces?") posted by Eric on 09.24.08 at 11:30 AM
Comments
I thought immigration was the third rail, but my solution there would work just as well on entitlements. Start by fixing something, not trying to fix everything at once. Raise the retirement age in graduated steps. It should be 70 by now, with half-benefits available at 65. Or, set COLA's at a more accurate rate. Or, allow younger people to opt-out at increasing percentages. Any of these would be a start. But politicians like horse trading, making it look like they've fixed everything, and hiding stuff in the details - hence the frequent use of the word "comprehensive." Assistant Village Idiot · September 24, 2008 12:00 PM The third-rail is the Barack Obama of political suicide--it's whatever you want it to be! Like AVI said, it seems to me the fix on social security is pretty simple (if politically dangerous)--raise the retirement age. When 65 was picked, I think life expectancy was 62. So it was expected that most people wouldn't get back a dime. We should raise the retirement age in steps (say, 2 months per year) until it is within 10% of life expectancy. So most people will still have a decent retirement period but without the threat that people will live 30-40% of their lives on social security. tim maguire · September 24, 2008 12:12 PM One way to ease the strain would be to start leasing more off shore areas to oil exploration and recovery. It would give the government revenue from the leases and royalties and boost economic activity. M. Simon · September 24, 2008 02:34 PM Thanks Loren, The difficulty the Republicans have with the economy as the major issue is twofold. One is incumbency (which needs no explanation). Two is that there is a very stubborn reason why economic problems favor the Democrats: people vote for the candidates who tell them what they most want to hear. The Republicans are better if there are insecurities relating to war, but the Democrats are the undisputed masters where it comes to bestowing economic largesse. And the bottom line is that no one wants to hear that the money just isn't always gonna be there! Eric Scheie · September 24, 2008 02:44 PM Raise the retirement age until the fewer retirees are supported by more (then still working) workers. There's always a balance point. Simply go to it, whatever it is. If you want to retire earlier, fine, but bridge the gap on your own dime. Ron Hardin · September 25, 2008 09:43 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2008
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2008
August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
the case for bailout?
Top Obama Fundraiser Meets Ahmadinejad the coverup of the coverup of the coverup Eight Is Enough Jewish Democrats For McCain-Palin Just Weird Harry Reid Can't Make Up His Mind McCain Suspends Campaign To Work Mortgage Crisis Better a fiddle than a flame thrower The Crony Capitalist Clique
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Good post, Eric. You've really been on lately.