Category: Social Safety Net

Where the Conventional Wisdom is Wrong

No Comments

This New York Times article about German authorities freaking out about Germany’s falling birth rate:

At first glance, this town in central Germany, with rows of large houses built when it was a thriving center of toy manufacturing, looks tidy and prosperous. But Heiko Voigt, the deputy mayor here, can point out dozens of vacant homes that he doubts will ever be sold.

The reality is that the German population is shrinking and towns like this one are working hard to hide the emptiness. Mr. Voigt has already supervised the demolition of 60 houses and 12 apartment blocs, strategically injecting grassy patches into once-dense complexes.

“We are trying to keep the town looking good,” he said.

There is perhaps nowhere better than the German countryside to see the dawning impact of Europe’s plunge in fertility rates over the decades, a problem that has frightening implications for the economy and the psyche of the Continent. In some areas, there are now abundant overgrown yards, boarded-up windows and concerns about sewage systems too empty to work properly. The work force is rapidly graying, and assembly lines are being redesigned to minimize bending and lifting.

In its most recent census, Germany discovered it had lost 1.5 million inhabitants. By 2060, experts say, the country could shrink by an additional 19 percent, to about 66 million.

Demographers say a similar future awaits other European countries, and the issue grows more pressing every day as Europe’s seemingly endless economic troubles accelerate the decline. But bogged down with failed banks and dwindling budgets, few are in any position to do anything about it.

………

If Germany is to avoid a major labor shortage, experts say, it will have to find ways to keep older workers in their jobs, after decades of pushing them toward early retirement, and it will have to attract immigrants and make them feel welcome enough to make a life here. ………

This is not a problem.

A labor shortage is not a problem.  One only has to look at what happened after the Black Death hit Europe:  Wages for ordinary folks exploded, because of  this.

The top of the feudal hierarchy was hurting, because they lost power, and wealth, relative to the hoi polloi, but that is a good thing.

Doubtless, the costs of supporting an elderly population will increase per capita, which is a sort of social safety net that did not exist in 1350, but if we look at things like a Social Security fix the costs for a timely fix are relatively low.

Even if the taxes of the 99% go up by 5%, and their wages go up by 10%, the 99% wins.

Do the math.

Ancient history, bitches, it just works.

Medicare Trust Fund Lifetime Extended

No Comments

Score another one for Obamacare, the exhaustion date for the exhaustion of the Medicare trust fund has been pushed back:

Falling health-care costs are brightening the financial outlook for Medicare, extending the life of the trust fund that supports the program until 2026 — two years later than previously forecast.

The new projections, released Friday by the program’s trustees, credit President Obama’s Affordable Care Act in part for the improvement in the finances of the federal health insurance program for the elderly. The act’s limits on Medicare Advantage, a more expensive form of Medicare run by private insurers, are proving more effective than previously forecast, the report said.

The trustees also cited lower-than-expected spending in “most . . . service categories — especially skilled nursing facilities,” a development that is not well understood. Costs have been slowing throughout the health-care industry, partly because of the recent recession, economists say, but also because of what appear to be more fundamental changes aimed at reducing waste and improving health outcomes.

This is particularly interesting when juxtaposed against the New York Times article on the pricing of colonoscopies:

A major factor behind the high costs is that the United States, unique among industrialized nations, does not generally regulate or intervene in medical pricing, aside from setting payment rates for Medicare and Medicaid, the government programs for older people and the poor. Many other countries deliver health care on a private fee-for-service basis, as does much of the American health care system, but they set rates as if health care were a public utility or negotiate fees with providers and insurers nationwide, for example.

………

But she noted that gastroenterologists in Austria do have their financial concerns. They are complaining to the government and insurers that they cannot afford to do the 30-minute procedure, with prep time, maintenance of equipment and anesthesia, for the current approved rate — between $200 and $300, all included. “I think the cheapest colonoscopy in the U.S. is about $950,” Dr. Ferlitsch said. “We’d love to get half of that.”

Dr. Cesare Hassan, an Italian gastroenterologist who is the chairman of the Guidelines Committee of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, noted that studies in Europe had estimated that the procedure cost about $400 to $800 to perform, including biopsies and sedation. “The U.S. is paying way too much for too little — it leads to opportunistic colonoscopies,” done for profit rather than health, he said.

The real problem here is that prices are are not transparent, and they are excessive to boot, being many times for routine procedures compared to the rest of the industrialized world.

The idea of market driven healthcare does not work, because there is no transparency in pricing, and even if there were, much of the time there is no opportunity to engage the market as a rational actor (auto accident, gun show wound, etc.).

It’s why, even with its apparent benefits, Obamacare, does not address the core of the problem, which is that healthcare in the US is tremendously overpriced.

Just When You Thought that Democrats Could Not Get Any More Craven………

No Comments

David Vitter proposes a lifelong ban from food stamps for felons, and Democrats blithely included it in the Ag bill:

In today’s Senate debate on the farm bill, Senator David Vitter offered — and Senate Democrats accepted — an amendment that would increase hardship and will likely have strongly racially discriminatory effects.

The amendment would bar from SNAP (food stamps), for life, anyone who was ever convicted of one of a specified list of violent crimes at any time — even if they committed the crime decades ago in their youth and have served their sentence, paid their debt to society, and been a good citizen ever since. In addition, the amendment would mean lower SNAP benefits for their children and other family members.

So, a young man who was convicted of a single crime at age 19 who then reforms and is now elderly, poor, and raising grandchildren would be thrown off SNAP, and his grandchildren’s benefits would be cut.

Given incarceration patterns in the United States, the amendment would have a skewed racial impact. Poor elderly African Americans convicted of a single crime decades ago by segregated Southern juries would be among those hit.

Robert Greenstein, the author of this post, is an optimist. He notes the disparate racial impact, but does not draw the proper conclusion: Disparate racial impact is a goal of Vitter, not an incidental effect of the proposal.

I’m not surprised that David Vitter proposed this.  He’s just another evil Republican with a diaper fetish who procures prostitutes.

I am depressed that Democrats allowed this amendment to pass.

I Wonder if this is About Race

No Comments

The New York Times has an article about how the Danes are looking to roll back their social safety net:

It began as a stunt intended to prove that hardship and poverty still existed in this small, wealthy country, but it backfired badly. Visit a single mother of two on welfare, a liberal member of Parliament goaded a skeptical political opponent, see for yourself how hard it is.

It turned out, however, that life on welfare was not so hard. The 36-year-old single mother, given the pseudonym “Carina” in the news media, had more money to spend than many of the country’s full-time workers. All told, she was getting about $2,700 a month, and she had been on welfare since she was 16.

In past years, Danes might have shrugged off the case, finding Carina more pitiable than anything else. But even before her story was in the headlines 16 months ago, they were deeply engaged in a debate about whether their beloved welfare state, perhaps Europe’s most generous, had become too rich, undermining the country’s work ethic. Carina helped tip the scales.

With little fuss or political protest — or notice abroad — Denmark has been at work overhauling entitlements, trying to prod Danes into working more or longer or both. While much of southern Europe has been racked by strikes and protests as its creditors force austerity measures, Denmark still has a coveted AAA bond rating.

But Denmark’s long-term outlook is troubling. The population is aging, and in many regions of the country people without jobs now outnumber those with them.

Some of that is a result of a depressed economy. But many experts say a more basic problem is the proportion of Danes who are not participating in the work force at all — be they dawdling university students, young pensioners or welfare recipients like Carina who lean on hefty government support.

“Before the crisis there was a sense that there was always going to be more and more,” Bjarke Moller, the editor in chief of publications for Mandag Morgen, a research group in Copenhagen. “But that is not true anymore. There are a lot of pressures on us right now. We need to be an agile society to survive.”

The better term for an “Agile society” is a race to the bottom, and this really is the underlying principle of the Euro Zone, but I’m also wondering whether the fact that Danish society has become more multi-ethnic, and that there is a feeling, particularly amongst the nativist right, that taxpayer dollars are going to people who are not truly Danish.

It seems an unfortunate truism that attacks on the social safety net are frequently couched in terms of a condemnation of the lazy and undeserving “other”.

And Cue the Republicans Accusing Obama of Throwing Grandma Out on the Streets in 3 … 2 … 1 …

No Comments

Because offering cuts that Republicans are afraid to mention in public work so well

Well, right now:

Appearing on CNN, the National Republican Congressional Committee chairman accused Obama of “trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors” and signaled Republicans may try to use the changes against Democrats in the coming election.

 Walden’s comments come even as key Republicans have embraced Obama’s “chained CPI” proposal to cut Social Security benefits.

 “I thought it’s very intriguing in that his budget really lays out kind of a shocking attack on seniors, if you will,” Walden (Ore.) said. “We haven’t seen all the detail yet, so we’ll look at it. But I’ll tell you, when you’re going after seniors the way he’s already done on Obamacare, taking $700 billion out of Medicare to put into Obamacare, and now coming back at seniors again — I think you’re crossing that line very quickly here in terms of denying access to seniors for health care…”

Not only is this mind-blowingly bad policy, it is mind-blowingly bad politics.

And let us remember something important:  Social Security contributes nothing to the deficit, and it will not for decades.

Once again, we have Obama playing the Manchurian Democrat.

Just In Case You Wondered if Obama Didn’t Want to Gut Social Security

No Comments

Notice his shout out to Bob (Rubin) who wants to privatize Social Security

This is Obama at the opening meeting for the Wall Street driven “Hamilton Project”, and when he says, “too many of us have been interested in defending programs the way they were written in 1938, believing that if we admit the need to modernize these programs to fit changing times.”

Notice how he is enthusiastic about the idea of cutting Social Security.

He knows that it involves “throwing momma from the train,” so when he says, “This is not a bloodless process,” (7:56 in the vid) it ain’t his blood, or Bob Rubin’s blood that he is talking about.

This is not eleventy dimensional chess.  Obama sees gutting cutting Social Security as a potential bipartisan legacy.

This is what he wants.

H/t Naked Capitalism.

Obama is Not On Our Side

No Comments

After increasing signs that even rank and file Republicans oppose to cutting Social Security, but Barack Obama is determined to throw mama from the train:

President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say.

In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Mr. Obama on Wednesday will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on arrival. Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to Speaker John A. Boehner late last year, before Mr. Boehner abandoned negotiations in opposition to the president’s demand for higher taxes from wealthy individuals and some corporations.

 Congressional Republicans have dug in against any new tax revenues after higher taxes for the affluent were approved at the start of the year. The administration’s hope is to create cracks in Republicans’ antitax resistance, especially in the Senate, as constituents complain about the across-the-board cuts in military and domestic programs that took effect March 1.

 Mr. Obama’s proposed deficit reduction would replace those cuts. And if Republicans continue to resist the president, the White House believes that most Americans will blame them for the fiscal paralysis.

Yeah, and who is going to take the blame for gutting Social Security?

Seriously, when I have referred to him as the Manchurian Democrat, I was being prophetic.

He just flushed Democratic protection of Social Security down the f%$#ing toilet.

This is so contemptible MoveOn has gotten its hipster head out of its hipster ass and condemned his move without taking the time to set it up as a lame video contest:

“President Obama’s plan to cut Social Security would harm seniors who worked hard all their lives. Under this plan, a typical 80-year-old woman would lose the equivalent of three months worth of food every year. That’s unconscionable.

 It’s even more outrageous given that Republicans in Congress aren’t even asking for this Social Security cut. This time, the drive to cut Social Security is being led by President Obama and Democrats.

 Millions of MoveOn members did not work night and day to put President Obama into office so that he could propose policies that would hurt some of our most vulnerable people. Just as we fought and defeated President Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security, we will mobilize and stop this attempt to diminish the vital guarantee of Social Security. MoveOn’s 8 million members will not stand by and watch a Democratic President chip away at one of the most successful government programs of all time. Every member of Congress — Democrat or Republican — who votes for this proposal should expect to be held accountable.”

Call your Congresscritter, and tell them that you will do your best to have them primaried if they vote to support this.

Dick Durbin Wants to F%$3 Us Like a Steubinville Football Player Would

No Comments

He is proposing a Social Security to “fix” the program:

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin announced Wednesday morning that he will introduce a bipartisan bill to create a Social Security commission tasked with making the program solvent for the next 75 years.

………

Durbin says the bill would require votes in the House and Senate on whatever the commission proposes.

With no possibility of filibuster, or amendment.

It’s another way to accommodate Obama’s, and the other Washington, DC “very serious people’s”, burning need to gut security.

The solution is straightforward. If you lift the cap. It’s solvent for at least 75 years.

If you extend the tax to things like capital gains, or at least carried interest, it’s solvent basically forever.

I am sick to death of people trying to create yet another cat food commission.*

*In the interest of health, I would suggest that people eat dog food, and not cat food. Cats because they are one of the few true carnivores, do not need the complex carbohydrates and fats that people, and dogs do. As such, dog food is better for you than cat food because it provides carbs and essential fatty acids. A dog can go blind if it is fed on cat food, but a cat lives just fine on dog food. The phenomenon is known as rabbit starvation.

The IMF Gets One Right

No Comments

IMF chief Christine Lagarde is calling for increases in the minimum wage, strengthening the social safety net, and reining in bankers pay:

Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF, has warned that “corrosive” inequality was hindering the world’s economic recovery.

 In a combative speech to an audience of some of the world’s wealthiest financiers at the World Economic Forum, [Davos] Ms Lagarde said that bankers’ pay should be cut to close the gap between the rich and poor. “Excessive inequality is corrosive to growth; it is corrosive to society. I believe that the economics profession and the policy community have downplayed inequality for too long” she said.

 Ms Lagarde, a former French finance minister who was appointed head of the International Monetary Fund in 2011, added that it might be necessary for nations to impose minimum wages in order to reduce income gaps.

 II believe policies such as robust social safety nets, extending the reach of credit, and – in some cases – minimum wages can help” she told the audience of business and political leaders in the Swiss ski resort of Davos. Ms Lagarde also warned that necessary reforms of the multinational banking sector, which plunged the Western world into recession in 2008-09, were being watered down by industry lobbying.

 ………

 Ms Lagarde told delegates that bankers’ pay is too high. “We must move in the direction of more prudent compensation practices” she said. “Ultimately, this is all about accountability: we need a financial sector that is accountable to the real economy– one that adds value, not destroys it”.

Your mouth to God’s ear, ma’am.

A New Year, More Caving

No Comments

Your Obama Hat. Useful for Caving

Well, it’s not surprising.

New year, same old Obama. He caved, permanent tax cut, permanent reduction on the AMT, permanent reduction of the inheritance tax, and temporary continuation of extended unemployment benefits and a few other social programs, and 3 months on the debt ceiling.

Obama wants his grand bargain, where he guts Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and he’ll continue to subvert his own bargaining position so that he can have granny eating cat food.*

*In the interest of health, I would suggest that people eat dog food, and not cat food. Cats because they are one of the few true carnivores, do not need the complex carbohydrates and fats that people, and dogs do. As such, dog food is better for you than cat food because it provides carbs and essential fatty acids. A dog can go blind if it is fed on cat food, but a cat lives just fine on dog food. The phenomenon is known as rabbit starvation.

Pelosi Draws a Line in the Sand

No Comments

If you can count, and make an educated guess as to how many Republican Congresscritters are batsh%$ insane teabaggers, it’s pretty clear that a greater proportion of Democrats in the House have to vote for a budget/tax proposal.

Well, Nancy Pelosi just made it clear that the votes aren’t there if the measure includes an increase in the Medicare eligibility age:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday escalated her opposition to hiking Medicare’s eligibility age, warning Republican leaders that it’s a non-starter as part of the lame-duck fiscal talks.

“Don’t even think about raising the Medicare age,” she said during her weekly press briefing in the Capitol. “We are not throwing America’s seniors over the cliff to give a tax cut to the wealthiest people in America. We have clarity on that.”

Nancy Pelosi is not trying to convince Boehner or McConnell not to cut entitlements, she’s offering a shot across Obama’s bow.

Even the Teabagger back benchers understand the politics of trying to pass cuts to Social Security and Medicare without any Democratic votes is political suicide, so even if Obama cuts a deal with the Republicans, they cannot afford to vote for it alone.

Nicholas Kristof is an Evil Person

No Comments

I’m not sure what I can say about a man who says this (No link, not ever, he is on my “do not link” list after this):

This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire. Some young people here don’t join the military (a traditional escape route for poor, rural Americans) because it’s easier to rely on food stamps and disability payments.

You have to understand that he came to this conclusion after talking to ONE guy from Kentucky, and an American Enterprise Institute “Scholar” who believes that all social welfare programs should be block granted to the states, so the money can be given to rich people.

You see, he thinks that the money spent on kids who get SSI, most of whom actually need the support, should instead be spent on should be spent on early childhood development.*

Somehow Mr. Kristof thinks that overpaid people with cushy jobs, like New York Times OP/ED columnists, shouldn’t pay a bit more in taxes, or pay a bit more to have their lawns manicured, or their tables bussed, or their clothes cleaned, or their floors swept.  Somehow, that suggestion is simply gauche.

I do not have the words to express my level of contempt for Kristof as a failed human being.

Fortunately, Charlie Pierce does have the words.

Go read/

H/t Atrios.

*BTW, when Michelle Rhee went to war with the teachers’ unions in Washington, DC, she never had a plan for early childhood development. This is typical of people like Rhee and Kristoff. They are less interested in finding solutions than they are in demonizing the least amongst us.

The Goal is Not Recovery, It’s the Dismantling of the Social Safety State

No Comments

That’s what the right wing push for austerity is all about.

Case in point, the chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, who is saying that since austerity is further depressing the British economy, it has become necessary extend austerity until at least 2018:

Britons, many already weary of government austerity budgets that some economists say are impeding the country’s recovery, are going to have to wait even longer for relief.

The architect of the austerity program, George Osborne, the chancellor of the Exchequer, told Parliament on Wednesday that the government had missed one of its self-imposed debt-cutting goals and would have to extend the belt-tightening into 2018, a year longer than previously promised.

Although Mr. Osborne maintained that the debt reduction plan was still on track, his presentation drew heckling and laughter from some opposition lawmakers, particularly after he argued that new tax measures would show that “we’re all in this together.”

The next general election in Britain will take place in 2015, well before the end of austerity measures that have included cuts in welfare services and the elimination of tens of thousands of public sector jobs.

On Wednesday, the Office for Budget Responsibility, a nonpartisan body that is monitoring the economy, said it now expected full-year data to show that the economy shrank 0.1 percent this year, instead of growing 0.8 percent, as the office had previously forecast.

It also said the economy would grow 1.2 percent next year as opposed to the 2 percent predicted earlier.

“It’s a hard road but we are getting there,” Mr. Osborne told Parliament. “Britain is on the right track. Turning back now would be a disaster.”

The evidence is clear: Austerity in a depressed economy further depresses the economy, and reduces tax revenues.

Austerity is not about creating growth, nor is it about reducing deficits.  It is merely camouflage for an assault on social insurance.

Reid Just Threw a Brush Back Pitch at Barack Obama

No Comments

To which I say good for him:

Nevertheless, getting to a deal won’t be easy — especially if Democrats refuse to entertain cuts on entitlements. Speaking to reporters after the news conference, Reid wouldn’t say whether Democrats would be open to cutting Medicare benefits, but he said that Social Security wouldn’t be touched.

I’m not surprised that he said this.

He picked up seats while defending twice as many seats as Republicans, and the incoming Senators are more liberal than their predecessors, and the only “Democrat” who might have been eager to take point on this, Bob Kerrey, lost his race for Senate.

Christie the Hutt Complains About Americans Being Couch Potatoes

No Comments

Normally I wouldn’t make fun of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for being a lazy fat slob. (Well, except for the bit where he takes a helicopter to his kid’s high school baseball game, and is met by an SUV that takes him the final 100 yards to the bleachers. Ignoring that would be superhuman)

That being said, when he blames the American public for being couch potatoes, all bets are off: (and there is so much WTF in this)

Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie says that American are turning into couch potatoes,(first WTF) just sitting around waiting on their next check from the government.

Speaking to the Bush Institute Conference on Taxes and Economic Growth (WTF? The F%$#ing Bush Institute Conference on F%$#ing taxes and F%$#ing Economic F%$#ing Growth) in New York City on Tuesday, the first-term governor said that he had “never seen a less optimistic time in my lifetime.”

What major political figure resembles a fat slob sitting on his couch waiting for his check from the Koch Brothers Government?

Seriously, the Koch suckers out there have no sense of irony at all.

H/t Cthulhu at the Stellar Parthenon BBS.

David Frum is Right

4 Comments

link

If the healthcare mandate is illegal, so are the mandatory private retirement funds that are so dear to the right wing think tanks is illegal too.

So, if SCOTUS strikes down Obamacare, there is a silver lining.  It takes Social Security privatization off the table.

In fact, it might have the effect of ruling out a lot of the misguided “Market Based Solutions.”

Welcome to Belly Rave*

No Comments

Poverty is growing more rapidly in the suburbs than in either urban or rural areas, this is not something that we have experience in handling:

In many of America’s once pristine suburbs, harbingers of inner-city blight — overgrown lots, boarded up windows, abandoned residences — are the new eyesores. From the Midwestern rust-belt to the burst housing bubbles of Nevada, California and Florida, even in small pockets of still affluent regions like Du Page County, Ill., the nation’s soaring poverty rates are visibly reclaiming last century’s triumphal “crabgrass frontier.” In well-heeled Illinois towns like Glen Ellyn and Elgin, unkempt, weedy lawns blot the formerly manicured, uniform and tidy landscape.

The Brookings Institution reported two years ago that “by 2008 suburbs were home to the largest and fastest growing poor population in the country.” In the previous eight years, major metropolitan suburbs had seen poverty rates climb by 25 percent, almost five times faster than cities. Nationwide, 55 percent of the poor living in the nation’s metropolitan regions lived in suburbs.

To add insult to injury, a new measure to calculate poverty — introduced by the Census Bureau just last year — darkens an already bleak picture: nationally, 51 million households had incomes less than 50 percent above the official poverty line, and nearly half of these households were in suburbs.

When juxtaposed with the structure of the suburbs, poverty may be even more problematic in the burbs, particularly in terms of things like transportation.

I’m not saying that the suburbs are heading toward a dystopian world of suburbs as gang infested slums, the there does appear to be a change in the status of suburbs.

*Seriously, if you haven’t read Gladiator At Law, by Frederik Pohl and C. M. Kornbluth, you should.

This is a Feature Not a Bug

No Comments

Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times is noticing that the Social Security tax holiday is putting the program at risk:

The accepted response to the economic deal reached in Congress last week, extending the Social Security payroll tax holiday and unemployment insurance and maintaining reimbursement levels for Medicare doctors, is huzzah!

Finally Congress got something important done with a minimum of brinkmanship and posturing, and more than a few minutes before the deadline. A threat to the embryonic economic recovery was averted, and the extensions even pushed any subsequent fracas over the same issues to the end of this year, safely past the presidential election.

So why should we consider this action cause for despair?

It’s because with every extension of the payroll tax holiday, which was first enacted in 2010, the prospect that Congress will ever restore the tax to its statutory 6.2% of covered income recedes a little bit further over the horizon. And that’s bad medicine for Social Security.

To be fair, thus far the payroll tax holiday hasn’t impaired Social Security’s fiscal resources one bit. By law, 100% of the cut must be compensated for by transfers from the general fund; those transfers have come to about $130 billion since 2010, covering the original “temporary” one-year holiday and a two-month extension passed late last year.

The new extension will require a further transfer of about $94 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Yet because of the unique features of the program’s financing, tampering with its revenue stream is playing with fire. The payroll tax is currently set at 12.4% of wages, split equally between employer and employee, up to a maximum of $110,100. The tax holiday cuts the employee’s 6.2% share to 4.2%.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) put it well when he excoriated President Obama and his fellow congressional Democrats for approving a measure that places Social Security’s financial stability on the table. “I never thought I would live to see the day when a Democratic president … would agree to put Social Security in this kind of jeopardy,” he said. “Never did I ever imagine a Democratic president beginning the unraveling of Social Security.”

Even conservatives who aren’t fans of the program’s current structure acknowledge how hard it will be at any point in the foreseeable future to restore the old rate.

………

But the worst aspect of the payroll tax holiday is that it erodes Social Security’s standing as a unique government program with its own revenue stream, a tax dedicated to its upkeep alone. Melding its own revenue with that of the federal government at large chips away at its standing, facilitating no one’s goals except those who want to see the edifice pulled down.

The more the program has to rely on general income tax revenue, the shakier becomes its claim to being a special case among government expenditures. When program-slashers sharpen their axes in Washington, the line has always been drawn at Social Security because it’s funded by a source distinct from the income tax.

Barack Obama has been looking to dismantle Social Security since the start of his Presidential campaign, he stacked the “super-committee” with Social Security foes, and tried to sell the program out in the debt ceiling deal, so this course of action is consistent with past behavior. (Additionally, he tried to do the same to Medicare. where he suggested means testing)

I’m not sure why, it could be his exposure to Chicago School economists, it could be that he feels that this is a way to stroke his “bipartisanship” fetish, or he could simply have a temperament that cannot see beyond the consensus of the “very serious people”.

Remember, notwithstanding the alleged benefits for the poor, this replaced “Making Work Pay,” which was more generous for people making less than the median household wage.

What Atrios Said

No Comments

The basic thinking seems to have been that it was wonderful for university to be free back when most people who attended were quite wealthy, but once the masses started getting ideas about going it was time to force them to pay. And there again is your generational divide.

—Atrios, on the institution of penury inducing tuitions at British colleges

It’s actually a bit more contemptible than that.

The skyrocketing college costs began with two things:

  • Collusion by the Ivies and similar elite institutions on tuition and financial aid.
  • It started in the 1960s, when the alternative to going to college was getting drafted, and playing hide and seek with a really angry guy with an AK-47 in rice paddies.