Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

ND-Dem

(4,571 posts)
Mon Mar 30, 2015, 12:25 PM Mar 2015

It's Monday and Robert Samuelson Wants to Cut Social Security and Medicare

Yes, once again Robert Samuelson stresses the urgency of cutting Social Security and Medicare. It's the usual pox on both your houses story, but as usual he leaves his thumb on the scale. In discussing the Republicans' proposals to save money by cutting spending, he says that their budget saves $2 trillion over the next decade (@ 0.9 percent of GDP) by repealing Obamacare. This is not quite right. The Republican proposal repeals the spending in the program, but leaves most of the revenue that paid for the spending in place.

In making the case for cutting Social Security and Medicare he suggests raising the retirement age to 69 or 70 over 15 years. By comparison, in 1983 the normal retirement age was raised from 65 to 67 over a 40 year period, so Samuelson is proposing a very abrupt increase in the retirement age. (The increase from age 66 to 67 is being phased in over the years 2016-2022, so Samuelson's rise would overlap with this rise.) More accurately, this should be thought of as a cut in benefits of almost 20 percent over a 15 year period. In addition, Samuelson also wants to raise the age of Medicare eligibility to 69 or 70, implying large increases in health care costs for people between age 65 and 70.

The median retiree will have virtually no income other than Social Security in retirement. The average Social Security benefit is a bit less than $1,300 a month, yet somehow Samuelson views these cuts as being progressive. He does also want to cut benefits for "wealthier" retirees. In order to get any notable savings it would be necessary to have a cutoff for benefit cuts at around $40,000 of non-Social Security income. This gives a whole new definition to the term "wealthier."

The idea that we face any serious budget problems demanding immediate action is a Washington fantasy. For the foreseeable future, with the economy below full employment, we would be much better off with more spending rather than less. Furthermore, if we are worried about the projected deficits toward the end of the 10-year budget horizon the best route would be to have the Fed keep interest rates low and allow the unemployment rate fall back towards its pre-recession level.

The idea that the government can never raise taxes is also bizarre. The Social Security tax was raised by more than two percentage points in the 1980s. This did not prevent healthy job and GDP growth. And, people have shown a willingness to pay more in taxes to preserve benefits. In fact, only about 10 percent of the population even noticed the two percentage point jump in the payroll tax at the start of 2013. So the idea that we can never raise taxes to support Social Security is an invention of Robert Samuelson and the Washington Post gang, not a claim that is based on evidence. It is also worth noting that if workers were receiving their share of productivity gains, any possible increases in Social Security taxes would be trivial by comparison.



Finally, we might expect that people's willingness to pay taxes would be affected by what they get for tax dollars. With a much larger share of health care spending being paid by the government due to Obamacare, it might be reasonable to think that people would be willing to pay some of their savings in higher taxes. This possibility has apparently never occurred to Robert Samuelson and the Washington Post crowd.

It is also worth noting that the huge slowdown in health care cost growth has apparently made no impression on this gang. Why should they let reality interfere with their drive to cut Social Security and Medicare?


http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/its-monday-and-robert-samuelson-wants-to-cut-social-security-and-medicare


Please note that CEPR allows people to repost its content with attribution.

About Beat the Press

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of several books, his latest being The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive.


The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.

Toward this end, CEPR conducts both professional research and public education.... CEPR was co-founded by economists Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot. Our Advisory Board includes Nobel Laureate economists Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz; Janet Gornick, Professor at the CUNY Graduate School and Director of the Luxembourg Income Study; and Richard Freeman, Professor of Economics at Harvard University.


1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It's Monday and Robert Samuelson Wants to Cut Social Security and Medicare (Original Post) ND-Dem Mar 2015 OP
Robert Samuelson, another asshole from Harvard. still_one Mar 2015 #1
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»It's Monday and Robert Sa...