A thread topic for the next few years? Robert Samuelson from the WaPO and Economics Professor Peter Kutner each appeared on NPR this morning to discuss the Social Security Fund's solvency and approaches to addressing it's solvency. Samuelson was gloom and doom, suggesting that the government over-promised and now we are in a crisis situation in which the SS fund is facing a crash. He wants to cut benefits and increase the retirement age. In response to concerns that an advanced retirement age would fall particularly harshly on those who have been involved in hard physical labor during their working life, he said that public policy "cannot be based on the concerns of even a significant minority." At the same time, he defended the tax cuts for the top 2%. I wonder if 2% is more than a significant minority.
Despite his gloom and doom, he acknowledged that SS is fully funded for the next 28 years, and that if wages had kept up with productivity, there would be no problem.
Peter Kutner suggested that a "Social Security Crisis" does not exist. He pointed to Samuelson's necessary acknowledgment that SS is fully funded for 28 more years to demonstrate the lack of any real crisis. Kutner noted that the concern about the impending retirement of the baby boom generation was addressed in '83 by the increased withholdings for social security. About the only thing he agreed with Samuelson is that if wages had kept pace with increases in productivity, there would be no issue with long term funding. Even with the increase in productivity being absorbed by the investment class, Kutner suggested that minor adjustments would further secure future benefits, one of those tweaks being a significant increase in the cap on contributions. Finally, Kutner suggested that the talk of crisis was mostly a smokescreen by those who disagree with social insurance for political reasons.
I know my bias shows through in my summary of their positions, but what is your position of the status and future of Social Security.
Regards,
D-Ray