Matt Yglesias explains what Bush’s three-step plan for Social Security entails, in terms adapted to the meanest understanding. It’s a very good post, and you should read it. Regular observers of the present administration will not be surprised to find that by the end, Matt is saying things like this:
If you are in the top one or two percent of the income pyramid, this may be a good deal for you anyway since phase one allows you to keep your income taxes lower. The other 99-98 percent of us are getting the shaft. … This is also good for you if you are a manager or major stockholder in a company that will be managing the private accounts. It also might be good for you if you own a great deal of stock already (i.e., you’re rich!) and this program winds up increasing the share of national wealth invested in the stock market.
Funny how analyses of recent domestic policy always tend to conclude along those lines. It’s almost like there’s a pattern or something.
I honestly struggle to connect things like Iraq, the medicare debacle, and now this.
About the only two threads I can find are total incompetance or depraved greed/plutocracy…maybe both?
if a plan inflates stock prices, this will lower the divident payout relative to purchase price, thus making return to your investment lower than in the past. stock return will be high for the phase-in period, when money flows in to purchase stocks. once the in and outflows from SS reach equilibrium, the even higher PE ration will result in terrible returns.
no free lunch. unless you are buddies with BUsh
Watch out for all of the pitfalls of this plan.
1) “real rate of return” = Inflation + … so when they say 3% real rate of return that’s ( right now ) 3.32+3 = 6.32 and rising. S&P 500’s historical rate of return over 55 years os only ~8.1 percent leaving a rise of inflation of less than 2 points could sink your benifits to below the guarnteed levels.
2) Oh, don’t forget disiability and life insurance so that %3 real rate of return becomes… 3.32 + 3 + premuims for disability and life insurance. That would mean that your investments today would have to best 7 or 8 APR just to keep up with the benifits of social security.
3) Inflation will more than likley rise dramatically under this plan because of the debt the US govt will be under by financing it.
4) Let’s just face facts, by the time this is over the general public will think that Social Security was designed by “Bin Forgoten” as a way to subvert the american people and subjugate them. Or there are WMD hiding in the trust fund system.
“1) “real rate of return” = Inflation + … so when they say 3% real rate of return that’s ( right now ) 3.32+3 = 6.32 and rising. S&P 500’s historical rate of return over 55 years os only ~8.1 percent leaving a rise of inflation of less than 2 points could sink your benifits to below the guarnteed levels.
It’s even worse than that. Come on, does anyone now honestly believe that the US inflation rate is as low as it is claimed to be? Hedonic pricing may have been added to the system with the best will in the world, but it allowed for all sorts of political manipulation, manipulation that many people believe is now actively taking place.
Now maybe I buy an unusual basket of goods, but heck, there’s no way inflation as
I perceive it has been as low as 2.5% over the last three years or so.
Maynard is absolutely right here; it would be most annoying to have one’s retirement income linked to a CPI index which consists of the net effect of rising food prices and Moore’s Law.
Not forgetting that the Inflation Rate for things that older people buy - seldom large capital outlays on new cars or houses, but recurrent personal outlays on care and energy - is rocketing.
Oh and where are the trolls to muddy the waters the way “Al” does over at Matt’s place?
If the social security tax rate is 6.2%, how does Yglesias get that 1/3 of that is 4%? And if Phase 1 is to default on the accumulated social security bomds, wouldn’t that leave the government with plenty of credit to finance the new debt of transferring the program, thus there would be no inflation. It isn’t like the government is defaulting on active investors (treasury bonds).
And someone is going to have to hold my hand through this one, but how does directing money out of the SS government ran ponzi scheme and into the market, hurt the market? Doesn’t cheaper investment capital lead to more growth? If Japanese investors decided to move significant funds to the American market, that would hurt the American market? Does pissing up a stick not get your wee wee wet?
Well, empirically, since the raid on Social Security program has been announced the dollar has gone up and the long-term interest rates remained low.
Based on this fact, one could reasonably conclude that currency and bond traders firmly believe that Matthew’s Phases I and II (default on the General Fund’s debt and benefit cuts) will be successfully accomplished by the Bushies, their Republican lackeys and their friends and fellow co-conspirators at the DLC.
From Everyone By Their Ability, To Everyone By Their Needs. Arbeit Macht Frei.
Condidering the last year elections, the American Public is getting exactly what they deserve, no question about that.
At the very least, it would nice to have a CPI based on the actual consumption basket of old people, which, including more healthcare and fewer computers than the general population, would rise a little more briskly.
My prediction- this will be a big upset for the GOP and the Dems will stand united.
http://voicesofreason.info
I guess I’d say that it’s not surprising that Matt’s saying those things.
That’s quite a bit diferent from agreeing with him on the merits.
Inflation? Oh, you mean like those $200-300 bills at the grocery store and you’re looking at 12 little plastic bags half-packed? And next, we may have to pay for the bags, too?
Yeah, I would say that the national CPI is junk. It’s not working at my house.
I’m pretty sure that I’m still paying for someone’s whale oil from the last century. I just can’t prove it…
Luckily those Japanese investment banks have the commenters at CT to inform them that the CPI numbers are all wrong.
And using 55 years for the sp500 doesn’t seem right. A lot has changed in the last 55 years for the better. Even with a timid economy, we are looking at 13+% next year.
But most importantly, there will be a choice. No one will be forced into the program. And the biggest benefit of the program is that you own it. If the government decides to change payouts, programs in the future, your personal investment is safe. And if you die at 50, you can will your fund to someone else.
It might also be humorous to note that FDR backed a similiar program. How’s that for an endorsement from the Left?
And for someone (Matthew) who can’t seem to get simple fractions correct (FICA is 6.2%, so 1/3 of that is not 4%), I’m taking the rest of his article with a grain of salt. He needs to point at a Bush site that talks about Phase II rather than have us take his questionable word.
I think we are seeing a lot of hand waving, misrepresentation, and intentional complaexity to make private accounts bad.
Private accounts earn real money assuming historical experience does intimate the future.
Any other system doesn’t — it merely shuffles a deck composed of people that pay money into the government in the form of taxes or receive it in the form of benefits.
If you remove private accounts you remove real earnings, and then we are just talking who pays and who receives.
If you have private accounts then there is a source of money outside the pie so to speak, and in that shuffling of benefts and taxes we have a little more wiggle room.
Interest on government bonds is not “real” money — just a shift in which tax form gets filled out to provide the money.
Time for a little humor….
THE PRIVATE ACCOUNT CONVERSATION
by Movie Guy
Me: Hello?
MGS: Yes…This is Money Going South, Inc. , the Private Accounts Division of the former Social Security Administration. How may I help you?
Me: I retrieved my account online and three fourths of my money is missing. What happened?
MGS: Let me take a look. Account number please.
Me: xxx-xx-xxxx
MGS: Yes, it does look like your account is in a declining balance. How may I help you? Do you wish to change options?
Me: Do you mean move it to a more risky option? I’m losing money and I’m in the lowest risk option. What happened???
MGS: It appears that you have initiated retirement drawdown on your account. Only you have the password.
Me: Lady, I’m only 37.
MGS: How may I help you?
Me: Fix my account! Restore the money that is being ripped off.
MGS: Sir, you’ll have to fill out MGS-FirstGov Form 2006-YouAreScrewed and submit your request to the commission for consideration. Five copies please.
Me: How long will that take?
MGS: Presently, we’re experiencing some difficulty processing claims. Perhaps two years. How may I help you?
Me: Oh, hell. How do I close my account? I tried that online last week and the request was rejected.
MGS: Yes, sir. That would happen. Paragraph 207-14b(1)(f) in your original contract explains that you can not opt out until you’re vested. Looking at your account, you still have four years to go. Sorry, sir. How may I help you?
Me: Who else can I talk to?
MGS: The senior supervisor, but she is in India training our data processors and account managers.
Me: Where are you?
MGS: I’m sorry, sir. I’m not allowed to disclose that.
Me: Can you give me a clue?
MGS: Your country liberated mine right after you set up Iraq. Remember?
Me: Oh, hell. You’re in North Korea.
MGS: Yes. How may I help you?
Me: I think I’ll call back later.
MGS: Sir, I don’t recommend that option. As stated on the back of your MGS Private Account card, personal telephone communications are limited to two times a year. How may I help you?
Me: Grrrrr… Ok, what other options do I have?
MGS: We do offer a margin recovery investment program which will allow you an opportunity to recapture some of your recent drawdowns. Would you like that option?
Me: Don’t know. What do I have to do?
MGS: Just say YES! I will process it.
Me: Hmmm. Ok.
MGS: Thank you, sir. Let me give you your confirmation number. One moment please.
Me: Ok.
MGS: I’m sorry, sir. The request was denied. The account is already margined. How may I help you?
Me: What!! #)*)(*$#^!! @#&#&^#!
MGS: I’m sorry, sir. How may I help you?
Me: I have to go…
MGS: Have a nice day, sir. And thank you for investing with MGS.
“Private accounts earn real money assuming historical experience does intimate the future.
Any other system doesn’t — it merely shuffles a deck composed of people that pay money into the government in the form of taxes or receive it in the form of benefits.”
Serves me right for asking why the trolls hadn’t shown up..
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review