Some Simple Points About Social Security
I’ve been talking with some friends and fellow bloggers about how we can help educate the public about the issues surrounding Social Security. What’s needed is boiling down the issues into simple talking points that can be understood by busy people who have been hearing for years that Social Security is going bust. In fact, one 1995 poll showed that the younger generation are more likely to believe in UFOs than that Social Security will be there for them when they retire. It will take simple, and compelling stories (built on a foundation of truth) that can be made into effective presentations, oped pieces and ads. Here is an approach I’ve been thinking about: Explain the dates.
One reason that the Social Security issue is so confusing for people has been the decades long sales job that has been run by those who really don’t like government being in the business of providing benefits to individuals. They say they believe that individuals are corrupted by Social Security (it’s socialism, you know).
When FDR first put the program in place, there were tremendous battles opposing it from the conservative forces. And as we all know now, when George W. Bush ran for elected office in 1978, he was already campaigning on privatizing Social Security.
When Ronald Reagan came into office there was recognition that the program was unsustainable as it was then configured (back then, a pay-as-you-go system where one generation covered the bill for the previous generation) because the baby boomer generation was so much larger in comparison to the next generations.
In 1983, the Greenspan commission was convened to come up with a solution to the problem and they recommended increasing the payroll contributions by a small amount for a number of years so that in essence the baby boomers would be pre-funding their retirement by building up Social Security reserves that could be drawn on when they themselves retired. These excess payroll taxes have been used to buy US treasuries. The treasury notes that have been purchased plus the interest on the notes are what is known as the Social Security trust fund.
Today, when people talk about fixing the Social Security problem they are talking about two different problems with two different dates. When you talk to your friends and family about what is proposed, you should be careful to clarify what is signified by these dates and what the politicians are saying when they talk about the crisis in Social Security.
What happens in 2042? This date is the projected date that Social Security no longer can pay out full benefits because the trust fund will be exhausted based on two assumptions: that the benefits continue to go up as they have historically (maintaining the defined benefit aspect of Social Security) and that the economic projections the actuaries use come to pass. (Even then, the incoming social security funds would cover 73% of the expected benefits.) You should be aware that the Social Security economic projections have been consistently lower than how the economy has done historically, so much so that the Congressional Budget Office is now saying the new date for when the trust fund is empty is 2052. (During Clinton’s administration, in 1997 this date was thought to be 2029, so it has been pushed out by 13 years if you use the 2042 date.) Therefore, you might hear people now saying, There Is No Crisis. When you hear someone assert this, it is because, right now, most reputable economists believe that the shortfall is fairly easily fixed or is actually non-existent if the economy grows like it has over the last 50 years.
So why do people talk about 2018? This is the most important date to understand regarding the intent of those who seek to privatize Social Security. It is the date that those US treasury notes start to come due and the government will have to draw down on the trust fund to pay benefits. Now remember, the trust fund was created by working Americans paying extra on their income for the past 22 years. As there has been a cap on the income that is taxed (and thus paid into the trust fund), these taxes have been regressive. And it means people who were struggling to get by have been paying extra payroll taxes year after year after year to pre-pay part of their retirement.
Today politicians are suggesting that the money you invested into the trust fund can’t be paid back — that it’s been used up. But think about this. If you deposited money into an life insurance account for 35 years, what would you think if the insurance company said, sorry, we don’t have money to pay you now because we used it all up? (Because remember, as long as you are working you are still depositing money into the account and by 2018 it will be 35 years of deposits for those who started working by 1983.)
This is what President Bush is saying and this is what Alan Greenspan said last year. In other words, your money that you worked for now needs to cover Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy.
If you remember, back in Papa Bush’s day, Americans paid for the huge Savings and Loan bailout which resulted in billions of dollars being moved to cover the fraud and theft that resulted from a badly regulated industry run by greedy crooks in cahoots with the politicians looking to fleece the American tax payers. If Shrub gets his way, American workers will be sheared of significantly more than Papa’s little run on the American workers’ pocketbook.
You might hear that it’s not fair for people to have to pay back the money, because it’s all spent. Let’s hear you say that to your mortgage company when you borrow money to invest in some property but then claim you can’t pay them back because you don’t have the money. This suggestion that the trust fund should not be paid back is an attempt to commit a massive theft on working Americans.
And when the President suggests that this should be done, he is setting himself up for impeachment because the President takes an oath that includes being responsible for the debts of the country. Article XIV, Section 4 of the Constitution says, “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”
So when you talk to your friends and family, make sure you tell them that part of the scheme is to rip off every American worker of their hard earned money by the rich and powerful. And one more thing to note is that even the younger generation is being setup for this theft as long as they are working and paying extra into Social Security. Don’t let them steal your money.
Reactions, thoughts and comments to this approach are welcome.



March 1st, 2005 at 9:27 am
Excellent explanation. We baked a pie and put it on the windowsill to cool. Meanwhile, Bush is carving it up and giving it away to corporations in Iraq….sorry, there’s no pie left.
March 1st, 2005 at 9:35 am
This is still too complexly stated, in my opinion. Shorter bullet points would be more effective for “talking points” to be used by dems.
I also think that it’s important to emphasize the “insurance” nature of Social Security in paying survivors with dependents stipends and disability stipends for those under retirement age. This amounts to about a third of all benefits paid out now and Bush’s privatization proposal sweeps it under the rug entirely.
I think an apt analogy to help make our case is the idea of making individuals self-insure their homes against fire and casualty losses. They could invest that money they now pay for insurance in private accounts and through “the magic of compound interest” as Bush likes to say, make a killing. Of course that’s ridiculous as anyone could see. What if fire strikes tomorrow instead of 40 years from now which it might? Insurance is based on two key principles, the law of large numbers and the spread of risk. Social Security spreads risk with a large number of insureds. Bush wants to “personalize” that risk so you’re on your own if disaster strikes.
It’s the implementation of gilded age Social Darwinism as government policy.
March 1st, 2005 at 10:05 am
Good points that I’ve been making for some time. What the Bushies have planned is in fact the biggest looting of the treasury in history; they’ve pissed away your FICA taxes on the war and tax cuts for parasites, and now they don’t want to pay it back. Simple.
March 1st, 2005 at 2:14 pm
Boiling down the issues into simple talking points like:
2018: we enter a temporary pre-pay period we’ve saved for;
we tweak the system so that by
2052: we can still pay out/collect full benefits until
the demographics of the generations are restored.
Oh, yeah. Here’s what happened as a result of one of the first American experiments in “privatization”: Jamestown, 1622: