Yesterday was the 129th anniversary of Charles Ponzi’s birthday. Normal people don’t celebrate the birth of con artists, but a tediously left-wing columnist at the Washington Post, Eugene Robinson, must be a big admirer of Charles Ponzi, because he seems very happy that people don’t want to “cut” entitlements.
According to the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, three-quarters of Americans would oppose significant cuts in Medicare or Social Security.
The poll was dishonest, of course, since it was based on the Washington’s dishonest definition of budget cuts. In reality, the reforms that are being proposed would reduce the growth of spending. And I suspect that voters, if asked whether it is reasonable to have Medicare grow 5 percent each year rather than 7 percent each year, would provide more rational answers.
Heck, we already have good polling data showing that people support Social Security reform.
But public opinion is not the key issue. The bigger topic is whether anybody should be celebrating a government program that is actuarially bankrupt, particularly when it hurts minorities, penalizes job creation, and discourages savings.
But that’s just what some politicians are doing.
I’ve already posted a very funny cartoon about Bernie Madoff and Social Security, but hopefully this video has more substantive arguments for reform.
Modifying Social Security is not anywhere near as easy or simple as people might think. Keep in mind that, for many, it was “part of the plan,” in many ways. When many companies had mandatory retirement by a specific age, that age was always based on Social Security eligibility, whether it was partial at 62 or full at 65. Many early retirement incentive programs were built around Social Security as a given. My own former employers, in an effort to remake the workforce with younger, more high tech-oriented personnel, offered a series of early retirement packages, and many of them included a cash stipend until age 62.
And these programs were written and endorsed by those patron saints of conservative philosophy and saviors of all things economic, Blue Chip Big Business Corporations.
The point is, too many people, and too much of our quality of life, is built around Social Security, to the point where it’s accepted – and planned – as a part of life. Today’s newest recipients are the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the first filers. If the government modifies or reduces Social Security for current (and probably the next generation) recipients, a new demographic of disadvantages people will almost immediately result, one rivaling the working poor for impact on the nation.
Proceed with caution.