Max wrote:
>There is NO regard of the fact that diverting the 2% from the trust fund
>(known as a 'carve-out') makes the bankruptcy 'problem' much worse, much
>sooner, and does nothing for the ROR within SocSec. So PK is right, there
>is no plan. It's nice to see MF go
>on the record to that
. . .
PK goes on to critique the Feldstein/Samwick paper. I think he's totally
right here: the F/S paper has the Bush-like plan running down the social
security trust fund much faster than is currently expected. But then the
benefits of the plan -- which are based on a theory that's very simil
>August 2, 2000 / New York TIMES
RECKONINGS / By PAUL KRUGMAN
Man Without a Plan
>Sometimes you just have to concede defeat. I read the Republican platform
carefully, hoping to find some
substance -- say, in the section on retirement security. But there is no
there there.
>So I turned ins
Max wrote:
>The SS problem, such as it is, is rather a matter of reassigning claims to
>output, not augmenting output per se.
the gov't may not know about stimulating long-term supply-side growth, but
they should.
>More claims must be assigned to beneficiaries for benefits to be payable,
>and
One way of boiling this down is to note that
the SS crisis is typically seen as one entailing
too little economic output for a growing, non-
productive population. Hence the metaphor of
saving and recouping later, expanding the pie, etc.
But in fact the mainstream economic models indicate
that s
May 31, 2000 / New York TIMES
RECKONINGS / By PAUL KRUGMAN
Truth in Advertising
>Oh no, not another column on Social Security! But the mailbag suggests
that the issue needs one more go-round, because some readers still think
Social Security is just a pension fund -- one that compares unfavo
May 28, 2000 / New York TIMES
RECKONINGS / By PAUL KRUGMAN
Money for Nothing?
I have a lot of time today, but I don't need it, since I have no real
comment on PK's column criticizing the idea of putting social security
funds into the stock market. He's right to criticize Geo
I doubt it, but this was a particularly well-done column.
mbs
>
>
> today's column [May 17, 2000] is a case where PK is accurate, applying
> economic logic where it's appropriate (criticizing George W. Bush's
> proposal to put Social Security dollars into the stock market. This is a
> big im
today's column [May 17, 2000] is a case where PK is accurate, applying
economic logic where it's appropriate (criticizing George W. Bush's
proposal to put Social Security dollars into the stock market. This is a
big improvement over trying to prove that he's superior to all those folks
who dis
