CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research


En Español

Em Português

Other Languages

Home Publications Blogs Beat the Press The Post's Jihad Against Social Security

The Post's Jihad Against Social Security

Sunday, 10 July 2011 10:19

The Post continued its Jihad against Social Security by trying to take the poor hostage. The subhead of its lead editorial told readers:

"The never-cut liberals insist that Social Security grow forever — and thereby would hurt the poor."

There is nothing in this piece that connects the opposition to Social Security cuts to hurting the poor. In the event that nothing is ever done to change the program and it begins to face a shortfall in a quarter century, the amount of additional revenue needed to fully fund the program would be far less than the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is not clear why the Post thinks that at a time when the elderly's share of the electorate is roughly 50 percent larger than it is today, Congress would not come up with the funds to maintain benefits. It is certainly hard to understand why Congress would not maintain funding for poor.

The Post is also badly misleading readers when it says that "Social Security grow forever." The main reason that Social Security is projected to grow is that the economy is projected to grow. Benefits actually are being cut as the age for full benefits is being raised from 65 to 67. From 2035 to the end of the century, Social Security benefits are projected to remain almost constant as a share of GDP.

Comments (5)Add Comment
Killing the debt ceiling
written by Treasury Secretary Jim, July 10, 2011 10:54

A bit off topic but I just wanted to highlight that some innovative internet-types have figured out a way to get around the debt-ceiling which seems more straightforward than your proposal. Might be worth a look (and a plug)?


Repeal SS for the Wealthy!
written by Paul, July 10, 2011 11:24
Immediately the WaPo will get religion and back off its jihad against SS and the poor. It can't say anything that would hurt its elitist buddies.
written by urban legend, July 10, 2011 1:48
Maybe it's time to remind everyone that we already have been and still are cutting benefits by increasing the retirement age. There is no need to do it again.

I don't know how Washington Post editors and writers sleep at night. They lie through their teeth about Social Security over and over and over, and think nothing of it. It would be nice to see one of them have the guts to explain how they do it. What a disgrace that publication is.
written by denim, July 10, 2011 4:29
Some might say that the editorial just represents a difference of opinion. Like Liberal versus Conservative opinions. And that we should respect those opinions with civility. I will be frankly civil. These writers are liars and they wrote lies. They are not errors. There are facts available that refute these lies. It is a journalist's duty to research his information and cross check it for factual accuracy. These writers made up a fiction and presented it as fact. They are liars.
written by Calgacus, July 11, 2011 2:43
"The never-cut liberals insist that Social Security grow forever — and thereby would hurt the poor."

Yes, listening to the never-cut-ers would deprive the elderly poor of their right to starve or freeze and realize that their whole existence was a malinvestment, that they did not understand that the only good was wealth, that the wealthy are gods who they have no right to share the planet with.

Write comment

(Only one link allowed per comment)

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.


Support this blog, donate
Combined Federal Campaign #79613

About Beat the Press

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of several books, his latest being The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive. Read more about Dean.