Social Security Doing Just Fine
By Mark Weisbrot
This article was published in the following news outlets:
Knight-Ridder/Tribune
Media Services - Jan. 22, 2004
Providence Journal
- Jan. 23, 2004
Milwaukee Journal - Jan. 25, 2004
Duluth News-Tribune - Jan. 26, 2004
The Tennessean
(Nashville, TN) - Jan. 26, 2004
Miami Herald - Jan. 31, 2004
Aberdeen American News (SD) - Feb. 8, 2004
Chattanooga Times Free Press -
Feb. 15, 2004
Wise County Messenger
(Decatur, TX) - Mar. 4, 2004
Star Democrat (Easton, MD) - Mar. 4, 2004
You may have heard that our Social Security system is headed for trouble
when the generation known as the baby boom begins to retire. You heard
wrong.
In fact, the first baby boomers will begin to draw Social Security
benefits just four years from now. Maybe then this ridiculous urban legend
will finally be put to rest.
You don't have to take my word for it. Anyone with a computer and a modem
can go to www.ssa.gov and read the Social Security Trustees' report. It
shows that the program can pay all promised benefits through 2042, without
any changes at all. That's nearly four decades. Most of the baby boomers
will be dead by then.
If you're the type who likes to worry about unlikely events that may
occur in the far-off, science- fiction future, you're still going to have to
find something else to worry about. The Social Security Trustees plan for 75
years, and even for this immensely long period of time, the much-hyped gap
in financing is quite small relative to our economy. In fact it is less than
three-quarters of one percent of our income.
To put this in perspective, consider that the average wage will be about
45 percent higher -- after adjusting for inflation -- in 2042 than it is
today. Will we be willing to pay a little more for our most popular federal
program, in order to finance the retirement of people who are living longer?
I would guess yes, because our population has been aging for decades and
Americans have always been willing to come up with the money. The additional
funding would be less than our payroll tax increases in the 1950s, 1960s,
1970s, or 1980s.
But in any case this will be decided by future generations. In the mean
time there's no cause for concern. The Social Security Trustees are not
trying to paint an overly-optimistic scenario. The numbers above are
assuming less than 2.0 percent annual economic growth, the slowest in our
history.
And four of the six trustees that signed off on these projections were
appointed by President George W. Bush. The Bush administration has tried to
paint as dismal a picture as possible of Social Security, in an effort to
partially privatize the program.
A number of verbal and accounting tricks have been used to convince
millions of Americans that Social Security needs "reform." One is
to lump the program together with Medicare, which has costs that are
projected to rise explosively. But Social Security is a separate program
from Medicare, financed by different taxes.
And even Medicare's problems are not due to the government program
itself. Nor are they primarily a result of demographic changes, such as the
baby boomers' retirement. Medicare's cost increases are driven by the cost
of health care in the private sector, which is rising once again at an
unsustainable rate.
In fact, the United States now spends 15 percent of its income on health
care -- almost twice as much as the average for other high-income countries.
This is a serious problem that will have to be fixed in the not-to-distant
future. But it has little to do with demographics, and nothing to do with
Social Security.
There are other disturbing economic trends: besides rising health care
costs and an increasing share of the burden being shifted to employees, most
Americans are facing increasing job and retirement insecurity. Over the last
30 years we have also suffered the most massive re-distribution of income in
American history, in which most of the labor force barely shared at all in
the gains from economic growth.
There are plenty of economic problems to worry about, but Social Security
is not one of them.
|