Who am I?
Christian. Skeptic. Ponderer. Sold on Western Civilization. Background in engineering and software. Rational, but not rationalist.
I'm a Hugh-inspired, long-tail blogger.
I Value
Informs my values.
News
Blog Search
Posts On This Page:
Archives
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- February 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- October 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
- April 2010
- May 2010
- July 2010
- February 2011
- April 2011
- May 2011
- February 2013
Look closer. Think harder. Choose the sound argument over the clever one.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Scrutinizing PFA's Social Security Ad
Progress For America's Social Security reform ad distills the issue better than anything else I've seen. Here's the text (transcribed by me):
It took courage to create Social Security. [FDR:] "This Social Security measure..." It'll take courage and leadership to protect it. Once, 16 workers supported 1 retiree [1950]. But when today's workers retire, only 2 workers will support 1 retiree. Washington must strengthen Social Security. No changes for those at or near retirement. But younger workers should have the option of a personal savings account. Call Congress today. Urge them to strengthen Social Security...for everyone.
16-to-1 in 1950, 2-to-1 when our kids retire. Is that true? Annenberg's FactCheck.org looks into this very ad, and finds...
Where it states facts, the PFA ad gets it essentially right. ... To be strictly accurate the ad should have said "beneficiaries" instead of "retirees." ... But the central point is quite true -- demographic trends make it certain that the current system cannot be maintained without increasing taxes or cutting the growth of future benefits.
So the ad stands to scrutiny. For more info, see SSA's own publications, The Future of Social Security, and the 2004 Trustees Report, particularly the conclusion.
Comments:
(Please keep in mind that each commenter's opinions are only his/her own.)
Post a Comment
<< Home