USA Today typically pairs an editorial today with an opposing view–as it did with its recent editorials on redistricting and NFL rules.
When it editorializedyesterday (10/25/10) on the need for the United States to adopt austerity measures similar to those of France and Britain, however, only one view was allowed: “The French are addressing their problems. So are the British. American leaders are not.”
It’s not that other credible views aren’t out there–see Mark Weisbrot (Huffington Post, 10/21/10) questioning the need for France’s retirement rollbacks, and Dean Baker (Guardian, 10/25/10) and Paul Krugman (New York Times, 10/22/10) on the economic foolishness of the British cutbacks. If an opposing voice had been allowed in, they might have pointed out the twisted reasoning behind USA Today‘s call for Social Security benefit cuts:
Social Security is projected to get better once the economy recovers, but only temporarily. The system is forecast to go into the red again in 2015 and then get steadily worse. That means more borrowing until U.S. politicians acquire the courage–so far lacking–to make benefits match payroll tax revenues at the risk of French-like protests. The argument that the system can simply spend its huge trust fund is nonsense, unfortunately. The trust fund’s cash was spent long ago. It is a moral and political obligation, but the money still has to come from somewhere else.
One more time: Social Security is “in the red” exactly the way you would be in the red if you loaned money to a wealthy friend and expected it to be paid back. If your friend said, “That cash was spent long ago,” you’d be unlikely to find that a satisfactory answer; money that is lent, after all, is rarely placed in a vault waiting for the time that it’s due to be paid back. As to where the money might come from: When it was originally lent it was used to lower tax rates for the rich, so the obvious answer as to where it would come from would be to raise them back up again.
That’s an answer, apparently, that USA Today didn’t want its readers to hear.
I am 58, looking at early retirement because no one wants to hire older men.
I am unemployed and without health insurance.
Republicans and Tea party want me to shut up and accept poverty.
Democrats say much but so far have accomplished little to help me.
The Baby Boomers need a political party that will really represent their interests without compromise. I am ready to help organize such a party- are you?
You’d better vote for the democrats until we actually organize a third party.
Social Security’s problem is that millionaires and billionaires are not paying their fair share. If the richest people would pay up, Social Security would never be in the news.
The corporate press isn’t woth the paper it’s printed on!
Michael when the hell did 58 become old?Duane voting for Dems will only limit more job growth.Frank how much more(percentage please)should the rich pay before it infringes on the recreation of wealth.And as far as the coporate press….how about the job the press did hiding every pertinent fact about Obama the last election?
Michael e.
58 became old with the current job market. Perhaps you missed the part where the other Michael is out of a job. Of course he’s too young to be a WalMart welcomer.
The explanation given in the article is absolutely correct. Since the additional SS taxes that we “Boomers” were required by Reagan to pay since the 80s were used to give tax cuts to the rich, then obviously, the Trust Fund should be paid back by lifting the cap on Social Security taxes. Incredibly, it turns out that the approximately 6% that would add is the exact amount it would take to make Social Security solvent for the next 75 years. Fact is, if we really wanted to be fair we should make all the rich return the tax cuts they got under the Republican administrations during the last 30 years as well!
Dennis….If that is true we can change it.Glen Beck(Im sure you hate him) said something that i found profound.He said to all you old folks who are comfortably retired.Playing golf..relaxing on your investments.Get off your ass.Back to work.Your country needs you.You are the wellspring that knows how this country should be run.And that means you are the Dems enemy number one.The last thing they want is for you to teach the young how messed up things have become.Get back in the game.
Silly??I have been in countries around the world where the word of the elders is revered.We need that.Though certainly 58 seems a bit extreme.I do not know what kind of job he seeks or what pay scale.I hope he finds what he needs. Certainly this administration can not” create”even one job.We need people with a vision of how to recreate wealth.
Karen how high a tax bracket would you see the rich being placed in?Remember their were no tax CUTS…..Just less theft from the FED upon their lively hoods.When did it become Ok to decide how much a person should be able to keep of their lifes work depending on class prejuduces above, and beyond equality and fairness?