Paul Krugman at CSIS, 3/7/05Sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson School and the Princeton Club of Washington.

Copyright Melissa Waage.  Use as desired but please cite antigravitas as the source for these notes.

 

Contents:

I.                     The lecture

II.                   Q&A

III.                  Random notes 

 

THE LECTURE

 

How the system works

-Social insurance

-Redistributive

-not a means tested benefitàlow administrative costs

 

Problem

-aging of the baby boomers + increased American life expectancy = problem

-Is the system really going broke?  to those who want to overhaul Social Security, “a surplus doesn’t count, a deficit does.” Hypothetical example of a dedicated tax designed to aid hurricane victims—sometimes will run a surplus, which will be needed when a hurricane actually does hit

-Compare the ~$4.5 trillion gap predicted for Social Security to other shortfalls, such as that produced by the big Bush tax cut

 

Privatization

-Term coined by the Right.  Cato’s 1995 “Project on Social Security Privatization” later remade as “Project on Social Security Choice”; web documents purged of the original title.  Heh.

-Is a better rate of return available through private investment as opposed to Social Security? Yes, sometimes.  “It’s also true that my wife and I would have more money if we took my mother-in-law’s savings and let her starve.”

 

The Bush Plan

-people who take the gov’t up on the private accounts option “essentially mortgage [their] guaranteed Social Security benefits”

-Stock market investment would be a bad way to bail out the system because “any notion that you can do better…is predicated on the belief that borrowing money to invest in stocks is a sound retirement strategy”

 

Fees

-Fees can get pretty high.  In Chile, they are %17.

-One way to hold fees down would be to have everybody investing in the same giant index fund…which sort of negates the whole idea of “choice”

 

Why privatize?

-The reasons are philosophical.  One side simply believes that the government should not provide social insurance.  This side believes the program is illegitimate—there’s no way for the sides to truly compromise.

-“This is the first time Bush has asked for anything resembling sacrifice”—and people know about, understand these benefits so they aren’t buying it.  Contrast to tax cuts.  Research shows that people don’t have a solid understanding of the sacrifices involved in such cuts.

-The conservative think tanks are curiously “flat footed” on this issue in public debate.  Krugman calls this “the revenge of the echo chamber.”  These guys have been planning this for years, but are not prepared to face up to people who disagree.

 

QUESTION AND ANSWER

 

Q.  What’s the 30-second elevator speech about what’s good about Social Security?

A. “It protects your mother or grandmother from living on dog food.”

 

Q. Should we allow the Social Security trustees to invest in stock market?

A. Possible—but once again, borrowing to buy stocks?  Greenspan argument on privatization: if the program runs a surplus, the government will just rob the trust fund again.  PK rewords this argument as “stop me before I kill again”

 

Q. Solution?

A. Slight benefit cuts, slight revenue increases is the solution.  In 2042, SS will be bringing in 73 cents for every dollar.  Right now, U.S. Gov’t brings in 68 cents for every dollar.  “I can’t get excited about the fact that 50 years from now, SS will be in better financial shape than the U.S. Gov’t

 

RANDOM NOTES

 

After the talk, PK notes that SS could be a great red state wedge issue.

On the Metro platform, he talks about how SS privatization was one of his big beefs with Bush during the 2000 elections. [I did not realize that]