Ruth Marcus Dismantles Paul Krugman
Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus cheerfully dismantles Paul Krugman's "don't worry, be happy" political pontification about Barack Obama and Social Security. I linked to that New York Times embarrassment when he went off on Obama for proposing a tax hike to help save Social Security. In it Krugman essentially took the position of, "Crisis? What crisis?" and called Obama a 'fool' and a 'sucker' for falling for the inside the beltway (read Republican) fantasy of a imminent collapse of the system. Unfortunately for Krugman, Marcus can quote an expert on the crisis that is looming: Paul Krugman.
In liberal Democratic circles, the debate over Social Security has taken a dangerous "don't worry, be happy" turn.
The argument has two equally dishonest components. The first is to deny that Social Security faces a daunting financing problem — one that will be much easier to fix (and less onerous for the low-income retirees that the head-in-the-sanders purport to care about) sooner rather than later. The second is to mischaracterize the arguments of those who advocate responsible action, accusing them of hyping the system's woes.
One prominent practitioner of this misguided approach is New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. "Inside the Beltway, doomsaying about Social Security — declaring that the program as we know it can't survive the onslaught of retiring baby boomers — is regarded as a sort of badge of seriousness, a way of showing how statesmanlike and tough-minded you are," Krugman wrote last week. "In fact, the whole Beltway obsession with the fiscal burden of an aging population is misguided."
Somebody should introduce Paul Krugman to . . . Paul Krugman.
"[A] decade from now the population served by those programs [Social Security and Medicare] will explode. . . . Because of those facts, merely balancing the federal budget would be a deeply irresponsible policy — because that would leave us unprepared for the demographic deluge, with no alternative once it arrives except to raise taxes and slash benefits." (July 11, 2001)
Krugman was for a crisis before he was against it, apparently. This is more than embarrassing; this is humiliating. Krugman is show to have not only ideological blinders on, but to have frankly negated much of his own writing - one set of writings or the other. Positions can and do change over time, but Marcus cites article after article from not all that long ago that argue passionately for the need for an immediate fix to the system. Frankly, that exposes Krugman as the worst form of hypocrite: one who knows full well he is one. I asked who the fool was when I commented on Krugman's column last week. I think Marcus has proved it rather definitively.
Other Links to this Post
-
Ruth Marcus Confronts Krugman with the Most Fierce Enemy Possible « The Van Der Galiën Gazette — Wednesday, 21 November , 2007 @ 12:53 pm
By martian, Wednesday, 21 November , 2007 @ 8:29 am
Social Security was badly designed from its very inception. It is nothing more than a giant pyramid scheme where the new investors (people entering the system as new entries to the work force) pay for the retirement benefits of earlier investors (those who have paid into the system their whole lives thus, effectively, paying the retirement benefits of those who came before them). It never took any kind of population boom (read baby boomers) into account where there would eventually be more people receiving benefits than there are still in the work force to pay those benefits. Add to that the miracles of modern medicine where people survive years, in many cases decades, longer than they were expected to when the system was designed, thus creating a much longer duration drain on the assets of the system, and you have a perfect recipe for financial disaster. Any private citizen that was caught running a scam like this would be doing time in a penitentiary somewhere for fraud.
Any thinking person who atually looks at the way the system was designed can tell you it’s a fiscal disaster waiting to happen. Worse, years ago our law makers voted themselves out of the system and created a sweetheart retirement package for themselves. So they have no real incentive to fix the obvious problems. For years people on both sides of the aisle have played politics alternately accusing each other of “endangering” the retirement of all Americans while all are guilty of ignoring the obvious flaws in the system. And there is no real end in sight. This issue is like the Energizer Bunny - it just keeps going and going and going……….
By upyernoz, Wednesday, 21 November , 2007 @ 12:00 pm
maybe you should consider the fact that marcus got it wrong, or maybe read krugman’s response before claim that his position was “dismantled.”
i’m just saying.
By Al in St. Lou, Wednesday, 21 November , 2007 @ 4:55 pm
upyernoz,
Those were two of the most vacuous things I’ve ever read.