|
Jewish World Review Feb. 22, 1999 /5 Adar, 5759
Thomas Sowell
"Saving" social security
(JWR) --- (http://www.jewishworldreview.com)NOTHING SEEMS SO INSECURE as Social Security. However, before we start
"saving" Social Security, we need to stop and think about why it needs
saving in the first place. Then maybe we can avoid making the same mistakes
all over again.
Some people blame the problem on the large numbers of "baby boomers" who
will be retiring in the next few decades. But why don't we hear about
private annuities that are worried about the number of baby boomers who will
be retiring?
Social Security's problems go much deeper than the size of the generation
that is going to be retiring. In fact, Social Security's problems go all the
way back to the beginning --- to the way it was set up, to the lies that
politicians told about it and to the misconceptions and political
irresponsibility that have now come home to roost.
Private insurance companies aren't panicked about the annuities they are
going to have to pay to baby boomers because insurance companies operate in
an entirely different way from Social Security. Insurance companies take
their customers' premiums and invest them to create real wealth. Later, the
earnings from that wealth can be used to pay annuities or life insurance
benefits whenever they become due.
For example, if an insurance company uses its customers' premiums to build
an apartment complex, then the rents coming in from those who live in the
apartments can be used to pay the annuities or insurance benefits owed to
those whose premiums built the buildings. The size of the previous
generation or the next generation doesn't matter.
The reason it matters under Social Security is that there has never been
any real wealth created. The government has simply been robbing Peter to pay
Paul. This worked great when the baby boomers were paying into the system
and their money was being used to pay benefits to a much smaller generation
that was retired.
Now it has become obvious to everyone that this game will not work any more
when the huge baby boomer generation itself retires. There will not be
enough people working to pay them all the benefits they were promised,
unless Social Security taxes are raised by huge amounts or the government
welches on its commitments to the retirees.
The biggest lie about Social Security is that it is some kind of
"insurance." But, unlike insurance premiums, Social Security taxes create no
wealth. They are spent when they get to Washington, just like other taxes.
Paper transactions create the illusion of a Social Security "fund," but
there is no corresponding real wealth created --- no factories, farms or
railroads.
The basic principle of Social Security is the same as that behind illegal
pyramid schemes run by con men. The first people to put their money into
pyramid schemes get repaid handsomely from the money received from others
who join later. That is what attracts still more suckers and enables the con
men to rip them off.
Since the first people to join the Social Security system were from the
relatively small generation of the 1930s, their later retirement benefits
were easily paid with the money received from the much larger baby boom
generation. So long as the pyramid keeps expanding, things are great, but
eventually the pyramid stops expanding and those who joined last get left
holding the bag.
That is why pyramid schemes are illegal and that is why Social Security is
now in trouble. It is not because of some demographic fluke. It was a
demographic fluke that kept it from collapsing before now.
It was the deceptions and irresponsibility of politicians that got us into
this mess. If you think the way to get out of it is to let politicians
continue to guide Social Security in the future, then you have missed the
point completely.
Investing the public's retirement money in the creation of real wealth is
an essential part of any permanent fix. But, if that means letting
politicians throw their weight around in the stock market, then this is
truly putting the fox in charge of the hen house.
There are all sorts of sound financial institutions through which ordinary
Americans can put their retirement money into the creation of real wealth,
without having to pick individual stocks themselves. The time is long
overdue to let them do it. The whole history of Social Security shows how
important it is to keep politicians' hands off that
02/18/99: Too many Ph.Ds?
02/8/99: A national disaster
02/8/99: Economic fallacies in the media: Part II
02/5/99: Why economists visit dentists so often
02/2/99: Warning: Good news
01/29/99: What is at stake?
01/26/99:Moral bankruptcy in the schools
01/22/99: Who is going to convict Santa Claus?
01/19/99: Seeing through the spin
01/13/99: A trial is a trial is a trial
01/11/99:Trials and tribulations
01/08/99: Rays of hope
01/04/99: Random thoughts
12/31/98: The President versus the presidency
12/29/98: The time is now!
12/23/98: World-class hypocrisy
12/21/98: The spreading corruption
12/17/98: Politically "contrite"
12/16/98: Polls and partisanship
12/14/98: The "non-profit" halo
12/11/98: Corruption and confusion
12/03/98: The health care "crisis"
11/30/98: Knowing what you are talking about
11/23/98: The impeachment legacy
11/23/98: Random thoughts
11/19/98: Tales out of bureaucracies
11/16/98: Scholarships based on scholarship
11/12/98: Forward march
11/09/98: Moral outrage
11/05/98: Will the Republicans ever learn?
11/02/98: A voter's duty
10/30/98: The poverty pimp's poem
10/29/98: Random thoughts on the election
10/27/98: "Partisan" and "unfair"
10/23/98: Ed-u-kai-tchun
10/21/98: McGwire, Maris and the Babe
10/20/98: MURDER IS MURDER!
10/16/98: Lightweight Boxer
10/14/98: A strange word
10/09/98: Impeachment standards
10/08/98: Alternatives to seriousness
10/07/98: Heredity, environment and talk
10/02/98: A much-needed guide
10/01/98: Starr's real crime
9/24/98: Costs and power
9/18/98: Are we sheep?
9/16/98: Judicial review
9/15/98: Hillary Rodham Crook?
9/14/98: Taking stock
9/11/98: Moment of truth
9/04/98: Random thoughts
8/31/98: The twilight of special prosecutors?
8/26/98: "Doing a good job"
8/24/98: America on trial?
8/19/98: Played for fools
8/17/98: A childish letter
8/11/98: Hiding behind a woman
8/07/98: A flying walrus in Washington?
8/03/98: "Affordability" strikes again
7/31/98: Random thoughts
7/27/98: Faith and mountains
7/24/98: Clinton in Wonderland
7/20/98: Where is black 'leadership' leading?
7/16/98: Do 'minorities' really have it that bad?
7/14/98: Race dialogue: same old stuff
7/10/98: Honest history
7/09/98: Dumb is dangerous
7/02/98: Gun-safety starts with
parental responsibility
6/30/98: When more is less
6/29/98: Are educators above the law?
6/26/98: Random Thoughts
6/24/98: An angry letter
6/22/98: Sixties sentimentalism
6/19/98:Dumbing down anti-trust
6/15/98: A changing of the guard?
6/11/98: Presidential privileges
6/8/98: Fast computers and slow antitrust
6/3/98: Can stalling backfire?
5/29/98: The insulation of the Left
5/25/98: Missing the point in the media
5/22/98: The lessons of Indonesia
5/20/98: Smart but silent
5/18/98: Israel, Clinton and character
5/14/98: Monica Lewinsky's choices
5/11/98: Random thoughts
5/7/98: Media obstruction of justice
5/4/98: Dangerous "safety"
5/1/98:
Abolish Adolescence!
4/30/98: The naked truth
4/22/98: Playing fair and square
4/19/98: Bad teachers"
4/15/98: "Clinton in Africa
"
4/13/98: "Bundling and unbundling
"
4/9/98: "Rising or falling Starr
"
4/6/98: "Was Clinton ‘vindicated'?
"
3/26/98: "Diasters -- natural and political"
3/24/98: "A pattern of behavior"
3/22/98: Innocent explanations
3/19/98: Kathleen Willey and Anita Hill
3/17/98: Search and destroy
3/12/98: Media Circus versus Justice
3/6/98: Vindication
3/3/98: Cheap Shot Time
2/26/98: The Wrong Filter
2/24/98: Trial by Media
2/20/98: Dancing Around the Realities
2/19/98: A "Do Something" War?
2/12/98: Julian Simon, combatant in a 200-year war
2/6/98: A rush to rhetoric