Saturday, November 27, 2010
Alan Simpson is a national treasure, without being the least bit precious. Of course we have to raise the age at which we subsidize retirement. Indeed, I believe that our government should get out of the business of subsidizing retirement entirely, and should only subsidize disability (whether or not that disability is directly a function of old age).
OK, it's very complicated, but were not the terms for people presently that their SS insurance taxes were premiums they were forced to pay for their retirement? That is a very good idea and an ideal use of government intervention. People are idiots and the best among them ought not to have to pay for their old age when their dirt-poor nor feel guilty and this is the solution. I'm not sure subsidizing retirement is a fair bottom line generalization; I'd like to see the numbers, but substantively the US government has those tax revenues for 20-40 years paying 2%. No, not subsidizing. I'm with the seniors and soon to be seniors. If you want to change the terms for those entering the workforce today, fine. Otherwise, get your hands off their retirement savings and do whatever else - gas tax, income taxes, inheritance taxes, whatever. Go for the middle income people more, they're getting more for doing less than ever before. Go for the rich or go for the poor (who get a lot more than they need for free). But leave the hard working old folks alone.
It's easy to deal with all the shortfalls without doing that. Just keep letting in more immigrants (particularly 18-to-25-year-olds who work high-skill jobs) and taxes from their labor will keep the system afloat.