Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review August 28, 2001 / 9 Elul, 5761

Doug Bandow

Doug Bandow
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Uncle Sam's retirement scam -- THE legendary third rail of American politics, Social Security, is lighting up. Only a serious administration commitment will overcome the Democrats' determination to keep Americans locked in an inferior retirement system.

Social Security was long viewed as America's most successful social program. Alas, all Ponzi schemes must come to an end. Demographics is playing a critical role: By 2050, Americans will be living 12 to 14 years longer, on average, than they were in 1940. Indeed, when the system was created, almost half of people died before collecting their first check. No longer, however.

As Americans live longer and have fewer children, the population itself is aging. Every retiree will eventually become dependent on just two workers, down from three today. Indeed, in 15 years, Social Security will be paying out more than it is taking in.

The program's defenders argue that $5.4 billion will be stockpiled in the Social Security "trust fund," but the money doesn't exist. All that sits in Social Security's vault are government IOUs to itself; Washington will have to hike taxes, borrow money, or cut spending to redeem them. Program deficits will grow as the Baby Boom retiree bulge grows.

Here Social Security defender Paul Krugman, a fine economist when he is not pimping for the Democrats, is a bit more honest than many of his political allies. Don't worry about the meaningless trust fund, he says. Just use general tax revenues to pay the bill. But the tab won't be cheap, rising from $93 billion in 2020 to $271 billion in 2030 to $318 billion in 2035, in today's dollars.

The resulting tax hike might not bother a well-compensated academic such as Krugman. It would probably bother most other Americans. Higher taxes wouldn't seem quite so bad if the system's return was good. But today, the average return is less than 2 percent. Many younger workers will actually lose money. Minorities, who have shorter life spans, and women, who are disproportionately dependent on Social Security, do even worse.

In contrast, the average annual rate of return on private investment over the last 75 years, through the Great Depression, is almost 8 percent. Safe investments such as treasury bonds pay about 3.4 percent.

It has taken only two decades for Social Security to go from Sure Thing to Rip-Off. In 1980, the average worker received back his and his employer's taxes, plus interest, in just 2.8 years. It will take 16.8 years in 2001. In 2030, assuming no tax hikes or benefit cuts, it will take 23.5 years. But, of course, those, along with borrowing, are the only alternatives to "save" the system.

Using the intermediate projections of the Social Security Trustees, Congress would have to hike taxes by 37 percent or cut benefits by 26 percent to meet the system's obligations in 2040. Or Washington could engage in an orgy of borrowing - about $47 trillion by 2075, in current dollars. The end result would be a larger debt, as a share of GDP, than at the end of World War II.

But Social Security's deal is even worse. When recipients die, their heirs receive nothing. A private investment, in contrast, passes on. Social Security is in crisis - today. The answer is obvious. Allow people to put their taxes into private, actuarially sound investments, rather than into Social Security's black hole. This is no radical concept.

Nearly half of American families now invest in the stock market. Countries ranging from Chile to Britain to Sweden to Australia have moved toward fully funded private pension programs in place of such government Ponzi schemes as Social Security. Indeed, even President Bill Clinton was prepared to push for private accounts before the Monica Lewinsky scandal struck, forcing him to rely on left-wing interests to survive. And House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, notable for the demagogic abuse he recently poured on the President's National Commission on Social Security Reform, three years ago suggested that private accounts "can be part of the answer."

The alternative is what Democratic commission member Robert Pozen calls the "do-nothing plan." Sit around while the system crashes, then enact Draconian tax hikes or benefit cuts. Social Security represents a battle between ideologues and pragmatists. The ideologues, such as Paul Krugman, believe in income redistribution and social engineering. Thus, Social Security must be preserved, irrespective of how antiquated it has become and how much it harms those it is supposed to aid.

Pragmatists suggest changing the system to put retirees before politics. Allow people, especially the poor, to save for their own retirement, accumulate financial worth, earn a better return, and escape the vagaries of politics.

The decision is up to the American people. Whom do they support?

JWR contributor Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. Comment by clicking here.


08/21/01: Canberra's quaint naivete
08/14/01: Uncle Sam's false fuel economy
08/08/01: The Clinton administration in drag
07/31/01: The high cost of government
07/24/01: Kill the campaign reform illusion
07/17/01: Do as I say, not as I do
07/11/01: Lawyers at play
07/05/01: Western blundering, Macedonian disaster
06/26/01: How best to honor Bill Clinton?
06/19/01: A maturing Europe?
06/15/01: Tell Beijing to mind its own business
06/06/01: Ukraine's boiling cauldron
05/31/01: Protecting privacy from Uncle Sam
05/22/01: America's Balkan quagmire
05/09/01: The Taiwanese flash point
05/01/01: Globalization serves the world's poor
04/24/01: Who's cheating whom?
04/10/01: The NCAA scam
04/03/01: Balkan stupidities
03/27/01: McCain doesn't want a 'risk for our country'
03/20/01: Dubious Korean alliances
03/06/01: Coercive patriotism
02/27/01: Bombing without end
02/20/01: A dose of misplaced outrage
02/13/01: Psst: Tax cuts for taxpayers. Pass-it-on
02/06/01: Bridging the unbridgeable gap
01/23/01: Left-wing demagoguery
01/16/01: The drug war problem
01/10/01: Politics and trade
01/03/01: Hope for liberty?
12/27/00: The debris of war
12/19/00: What's the rule of law for?
12/15/00: Ending silicone breast implant saga
12/05/00: Election may yield victor, but there are no winners
11/21/00: A Bush presidential mandate?
11/07/00: Exprienced Gore? Yeah, right
11/01/00: Interventionist follies
10/17/00: America's brightening prospects in Ukraine
10/11/00: GOP budget scandals
10/03/00: How a pharmaceutical 'crisis' was created
09/27/00: Clinton's empathy has helped nobody
09/13/00: AlGore's risky budget policies
09/05/00: Military readiness and Korean commitments
08/29/00: Let sleeping hypocrites lie
08/21/00: Targeting a journalistic pariah
08/15/00: European garrison for Kosovo?
08/08/00: Journalistic cleansing at the Boston Globe
08/04/00: Junk science on trial
06/22/00: Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty
06/15/00: The end of U.N. peacekeeping
06/07/00: The Clinton regulatory miasma
06/01/00: Administration stupidity, congressional cowardice
05/25/00: The silence of the international community
05/18/00: Protecting the next generation

05/11/00: Freer trade with China will advance human rights

05/04/00: How not to save the Constitution

04/28/00: American tripwire in Korea long ago disappeared: Why are we still involved?

04/18/00: Clinton administration believes the IRS is too gentle, wants more auditors

© 2000, Copley News Service