As anyone who can read a census report knows, Social Security is in trouble. See Independent Sources posting on this very issue. Unfortunately the Los Angeles Times is not yet fact checking against census data (or the Independent Sources blog) before going to print. Case in point, their 1/23/05 article by James Flanigan that included these gems:

“…(Social Security) fears are overblown–a crisis manufactured by a White House bent on pushing it free-market ideology.”

“The (Social Security funding) problem can be fixed with a combination of modest increases in the payroll tax, benefit reductions or other tweaks.”

Wow, not sure where to start with this wisdom. First off, unless you don’t consider a collision course with bankruptcy a “crisis”, then Social Security is a crisis. The current adminstration should be commended, and not condemned for addressing it now and not leaving it for future generations (and administrations) to deal with.

Second, there is no such thing as a modest increase in payroll tax. Every increase in that tax kicks American job seekers right in the solar plexus. The U.S. is already experiencing enough job losses to lower cost job markets as it is. We should be thinking about how to make it easier to employ Americans instead of adding more costs on to those companies who still do.

Third, and my favorite, the LA Times has slipped so far out of the mainstream that “free market ideology” is now a big negative. When did this happen? I thought free market was good. I guess the Times is saying we should look at the successful non-free markets like Cuba, Belarus and North Korea to form our social policies.

So what sources does the Times use to support its case against Social Security reform? First of course is AARP. I don’t mean to be cruel, but there won’t be many, if any, current AARP members still alive when the system goes bankrupt. Sorry guys but I’d rather hear from the 25 year olds on this one. That said, AARP can always be counted on for a funny quote. This time they quipped “if we feel like gambling, we’ll play the slots.” The irony in this quote of course is the problem that seniors seem to have with one-armed bandits in particular (check the nickel slots at any Indian gaming casino if you doubt me) and with the fact that the system will allow people to have the option (but not the obligation) to determine their personal risk profile. However, AARP like the Times must see choice as one of another part of that radical free-market ideology being pushed by the Bush administration.

Maybe we should take the tact being proposed by the Times and AARP. First, there is no problem. Second, if forced to admit that there is indeed a population bubble nearing retirement pushing the system into bankruptcy, then raise taxes. The Times seems to believe that there is no problem that can’t be solved by raising taxes. I see AARP’s angle on this one, payroll taxes hit workers, not retirees, so raise away. However, even with their pro-taxes bent, I don’t get why the Times is being such an obstructionist on an area of such apparent common sense. Unless of course if you question the concept of whether “free market” is good or not; in which case I guess nothing makes sense.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 26th, 2005 at 9:09 pm by Insider and is filed under Los Angeles Times, Brilliant, but uncategorizable, Media. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.