Retirement Security

Retirement Security http://tcf.org/retirement/rss-2/rss Resources related to retirement. 2012-02-23T19:16:31Z vice Why Target Date Funds? urn:syndication:65b36391-5cd4-11e1-9b28-002219154821 http://fsp.bc.edu/why-target-date-funds-guide/ Board of Trustee Member Alicia Munnell's Financial Security Project just released this booklet. Download the PDF. 2012-02-21T21:21:30Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Board of Trustee Member Alicia Munnell's Financial Security Project just released this booklet. Download the PDF. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/in-the-news/2012/2/why-target-date-funds/image" /> </div> http://fsp.bc.edu/why-target-date-funds-guide/ <div>Board of Trustee Member Alicia Munnell's Financial Security Project just released this booklet. Download the<a class="external-link" href="http://fsp.bc.edu/why-target-date-funds-guide/"> PDF. </a></div> </body> </html> The Debates We Need urn:syndication:f0c29d4f-4e87-11e1-bc31-002219154821 http://botc.tcf.org/2012/02/the-debates-we-need.html Senior fellow Richard Leone writes in Blog of the Century about what's not being debated. 2012-02-03T16:46:50Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Senior fellow Richard Leone writes in Blog of the Century about what's not being debated. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/in-the-news/2012/2/the-debates-we-need/image" /> </div> http://botc.tcf.org/2012/02/the-debates-we-need.html <div>Senior fellow Richard Leone writes in Blog of the Century about what's not being debated.</div> </body> </html> The Debates We Need urn:syndication:687b25d4-4e78-11e1-9356-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330163009c2cbc970d You might sound like a crazy person if you said there had not been enough debates in the Republican race for the presidential nomination. Perhaps... 2012-02-03T14:38:09Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> You might sound like a crazy person if you said there had not been enough debates in the Republican race for the presidential nomination. Perhaps... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330163009c2cbc970d/image" /> </div> <div>You might sound like a crazy person if you said there had not been enough debates in the Republican race for the presidential nomination. Perhaps a better way to put it is that there hasn’t been much debate about the right things – especially about what the various candidates would do to implement their platforms. For example, all of the Republican candidates, to varying degrees, want to dismantle Social Security. Some want to do away with it altogether; others want to substitute individual private accounts. Mostly they just assert that the program is no good and none of them really discusses the problems posed by the various alternatives. It didn’t help enlighten us that at the two debates before the Florida primary (where one can assume there is a lot of interest in the topic), no questions were asked about Social Security’s future. When they do talk about it, the GOP candidates all start with the premise that Social Security is bankrupt, or as Governor Perry called it, a Ponzi scheme. This characterization, however, doesn’t fit the facts. Social Security was designed from the beginning to be pay-as-you-go, so that each generation pays for the one ahead of them. Not a bad bargain since each generation also inherits everything that was built and all the ideas that were developed by previous generations. The program is supported by the dedicated payroll tax paid by nearly all workers. Social Security has been able to build up a large surplus after 1983 because of a bargain between President Reagan and Speaker Tip O’Neill. Part of the deal was to increase workers’ contributions to Social Security and put the surplus revenues in a Trust Fund. By law, those funds must be invested in U.S. Treasuries. And no matter what anybody says about them, treasury obligations are still considered by the market to be the safest investments in the world. Social Security is not in fact on the brink of insolvency. Even with no changes, it will be able to pay about 75 percent of current benefits for the rest of the century. With some tweaking it can be brought back the level of full benefits. Just what the changes should be ought to be the subject of serious debate. But it is tough to focus on real alternatives if you feel the need to trash the program altogether. So it-seems-like-a-hundred debates later we still have no idea what the candidates would really do to save or replace Social Security. Mostly they reassure today’s retirees that their benefits will be protected, and the changes --whatever they are-- will only affect future senior citizens. The gap between rhetoric and actual proposals it pretty wide and the need for actual proposals is significant. After all, although the average Social Security recipient receives only about $1000 per month, that check lifts half of the elderly above the poverty level. For some groups, such as older women, it is even more important. Moreover, the survivors insurance component is worth more as life insurance than the face value if all the private life policies written in the U.S. None of this is to say that we should not be on the lookout for new ideas whenever they are appropriate. But if we are going to have a substitute for Social Security, or if we are going to have something else in the future, we have every reason to want to hear the candidates debate their alternative visions for retirees. Many of those wanting to privatize Social Security, including former President George W. Bush, ignore or misstate the problem of how workers would pay for the transition. They would need to keep supporting current retirees while accumulating money for their own private retirement investments. Paying double is a tall order for the average American wage earner, Social Security is not a program to be trifled with. Otherwise as Dwight Eisenhower put it "Should any political party attempt to abolish Social Security...you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." –President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1954 At the end of the day there are some tough questions about America’s budget and entitlement programs. Social Security ought to be dealt with intelligently and with a serious debate during the primaries, and one hopes, during the general election. </div> </body> </html> Beverly Goldberg urn:syndication:e7ce445e-dbb0-11df-9e5b-002219154821 http://tcf.org/about/fellows/beverly-goldberg-1 Beverly Goldberg was vice president and director of publications at The Century Foundation for more than two decades, and is now senior fellow. 2012-01-06T10:59:48Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Beverly Goldberg was vice president and director of publications at The Century Foundation for more than two decades, and is now senior fellow. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/about/fellows/beverly-goldberg-1/image" /> </div> <div>Beverly Goldberg, who was vice president and director of publications at The Century Foundation for more than two decades, is now senior fellow. She is author of Age Works: What Corporate America Must Do to Survive the Graying of the Workforce (Free Press, 2000) and Overcoming High-Tech Anxiety: Thriving in a Wired World (Jossey-Bass, 1999) and coauthor of Corporation on a Tightrope: Balancing Leadership, Governance, and Technology in an Age of Complexity (Oxford, 1996) and Dynamic Planning: The Art of Managing Beyond Tomorrow (Oxford, 1994). She wrote a chapter updating some of these issues, “How to Become Employer of Choice for the Working Retired,” for the volume Thriving on an Aging Workforce: Strategies for Organizational and Systemic Change (Krieger Publishing, 2005). Her articles and op-eds have appeared in such publications as the Harvard Business Review, Management Review, the Aspen Quarterly, Directors & Boards, Executive Excellence, the Baltimore Sun, the Albany Times Union, and most recently in <a href="http://www.qfinance.com/balance-sheets-best-practice/managing-retirement-costs?full">QFinance</a>. She focuses on the many problems facing the public sector and businesses as a result of the aging of the workforce, including the health issues presented by an elderly population and retirement security, as well as the problems stemming from inequality. For her recent examinations of these issues, see The Century Foundation issue briefs Facing the Problems of Providing Long-Term Care for the Oldest Old (2007) and The Long Wait for Progress: Women and Economic and Social Equality (2008).</div> </body> </html> The Year in Review: 2011 urn:syndication:005584a8-2a69-11e1-8731-002219154821 http://tcf.org/commentary/2011/the-year-in-review-2011 The Century Foundation fellows discuss the best and worst public policy issues and decisions of 2011. 2011-12-31T15:29:32Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> The Century Foundation fellows discuss the best and worst public policy issues and decisions of 2011. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/commentary/2011/the-year-in-review-2011/image" /> </div> <div>The Century Foundation fellows discuss the best and worst public policy issues and decisions of 2011: <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/the-best-and-worst-news-for-progressives-in-2011.html">The Eight Best Developments for Progressives in 2011</a> by Greg Anrig. <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/the-best-and-worst-in-education-2011.html">The Best and Worst in Education 2011</a> by Richard Kahlenberg. <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/the-best-and-worst-of-2011-the-world.html">The Best and Worst of 2011: The World</a> by Jeffrey Laurenti <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/best-and-worst-health-policy-stories-of-2011.html">Best and Worst Health Policy Stories of 2011</a> by Harold Pollack <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/the-year-in-transnational-crime-and-corruption.html">2011 in Transnational Crime and Corruption</a> by Patrick Radden Keefe <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/policycast-tova-wang-on-voting-rights-in-2011.html">Voting Rights in 2011</a>, Tova Wang on PolicyCast Podcast <a class="external-link" href="http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-year-erdogan-6301">The Year of Erdogan</a>, by Morton Abramowitz (posted on The National Interest) Listen to podcasts: <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/policycast-tova-wang-on-voting-rights-in-2011.html">Voting Rights in 2011</a>, Tova Wang on PolicyCast Podcast <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/policycast-patrick-radden-keefe-discusses-the-roots-of-corruption.html">The Roots of Corruption</a>, with Patrick Radden Keefe <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/policycast-harold-pollack-talks-health-policy-for-2011.html">Harold Pollack Talks Health Policy for 2011</a>, PolicyCast <a class="external-link" href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/12/policycast-richard-kahlenbergs-the-best-and-worst-in-education-for-2011.html">Richard Kahlenberg's the Best and Worst in Education 2011</a>, PolicyCast Stay tuned for more.</div> </body> </html> Time for a "New New Deal" urn:syndication:bbde16a6-33b0-11e1-ab2a-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330162fe97b780970d The challenges facing Franklin Delano Roosevelt upon his inauguration in March 1933 were enormous. The country was in the fourth winter of the Great... 2011-12-31T12:54:37Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> The challenges facing Franklin Delano Roosevelt upon his inauguration in March 1933 were enormous. The country was in the fourth winter of the Great... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330162fe97b780970d/image" /> </div> <div>The challenges facing Franklin Delano Roosevelt upon his inauguration in March 1933 were enormous. The country was in the fourth winter of the Great Depression, the banking system was unraveling, unemployment was huge and growing, and deep divisions existed about what to do next. FDR brought with him both houses of Congress and Democratic majorities that enabled him to take action on a broad front. His choices about policy were not uncontroversial. Even so-called experts were still feeling their way, and there was no consensus about how to deal with the Depression. Indeed, there was widespread doubt about whether anyone had answers that would work—other than more pain and more time. It required the genius of FDR in politics and John Maynard Keynes in economics to devise practical strategies for dealing with the Great Depression, perhaps the worst domestic crisis of democratic capitalism. Roosevelt reconstituted the public’s faith in the notion that those in authority were committed to the interests of the average citizen, and Keynes’s work redirected economic policy toward managing aggregate demand. Roosevelt had campaigned as a budget balancer, but in his first term, he recognized the need for an aggressive federal response to deep and persistent unemployment. In his second term, he tacked again toward fiscal austerity only to find the economy contracting in response. While Keynes endorsed coordinated solutions to the problem of periodic crises in capitalism, FDR did not have a grand strategy. But he did have a willingness to try novel solutions, to discard them if they didn’t work, and to reinforce success wherever he found it. His remedies included direct public jobs programs such as the Works Progress Administration and the Civilian Conservation Corps. In fact, it was the imperative to spend lavishly on defense during World War II that underpinned the momentum that enabled the country to finally escape the dead weight of the Great Depression. One lesson from the New Deal is that capitalism works best when workers as well as managers and owners feel that the system is fair and democratic, that they can gain under it and even have a voice in running things. From Gladstone’s notion of the factory system in England to Bismarck’s conception of the social security systems in Prussia to Henry Ford’s practical insight that workers needed to earn enough to buy the cars they made, leaders of Western countries early in the industrialization process seem to have sensed that capitalism works best when it is combined with community and public values. They grasped that businesses and stable societies in general depend upon institutions and rules that attract broad support. Throughout the first half of the twentieth century, progressives transformed the populism generated by hard times into a constructive force for improved public institutions, championed fairness and community, and laid the foundation for the New Deal. They were not the enemies of the free market, but they were convinced that the role of government was to tame the savage aspects of capitalism and to promote economic growth for all. Fundamentally, the challenge today for progressives is to rally the majority around an ambitious and far-reaching program to restore confidence in government and restore optimism about the prospects for upward mobility. It won’t be easy. But on the other hand, what choice do we really have?</div> </body> </html> The Eight Best Developments for Progressives in 2011 urn:syndication:00451aca-2a69-11e1-bdf7-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330162fdb7fa9c970d Optimists about the U.S. economy continue to see green shoots where there are still mostly tumbleweeds. But even in that grim environment, 2011... 2011-12-22T21:39:05Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Optimists about the U.S. economy continue to see green shoots where there are still mostly tumbleweeds. But even in that grim environment, 2011... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330162fdb7fa9c970d/image" /> </div> <div>Optimists about the U.S. economy continue to see green shoots where there are still mostly tumbleweeds. But even in that grim environment, 2011 offered progressives some genuine reasons to be hopeful. This year there were signs that maybe -- just maybe -- better days are coming for those who believe government should play a much more energetic role in addressing the nation's myriad challenges. Here are the eight best things that happened in 2011 from the standpoint of progressivism: 1. The Birth of the Occupy Wall Street Movement. It has been apparent for a long time that the emergence of a genuine political movement would be needed to fundamentally shift debate in Washington to focus on America's central economic problems. With wealthy donors and corporate lobbyists exerting disproportionate influence over both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, Congress throughout the year had been blithely acting as though the economy were already back on track. It was as if the financial, housing, and jobs crises were distant memories that had already been solved. But then this fall, the large protests that started in lower Manhattan before quickly spreading across the country started to shake the powers-that-be out of their stupor. Although the policy agenda of the Occupy Wall Street movement remains unclear, it has already accomplished the goal of heightening attention to the issue of economic inequality. One <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1111/Occupy_Wall_Street_is_winning.html" target="_self">analysis</a> showed that media references to "income inequality" soared over the period when the protests first began to take hold. And President Obama's rhetoric, most notably in the December 6 <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/07/full-text-barack-obama-speech" target="_self">speech</a> he delivered in Osawatomie, Kansas, has increasingly emphasized formerly unspoken concerns about the hardships confronting a large portion of the population. We are still a long way off from any meaningful political action that would begin to narrow the ever-widening gaps between the very wealthy and everyone else, and that would put the nation on a path to shared prosperity. But already the fledgling movement has had an impact simply by changing the conversation to the central economic challenges of our time. The next test will be whether the protesters can get behind a specific<a href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/10/what-think-tanks-owe-the-people-in-the-park.html" target="_self"> policy</a> <a href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/10/10-reasons-to-eliminate-the-tax-break-for-capital-gains-.html" target="_self">agenda</a> that they hold politicians accountable for. 2. The Failure of the Super Committee. Even though unemployment remained stuck above the historically high level of 9 percent throughout most of 2011, Congress perversely fixated on deficit reduction -- a misguided priority that would directly exacerbate rather than alleviate joblessness. After much squandered time, the so-called Super Committee empanelled to come up with recommendations for significantly reducing government spending ultimately dissolved without reaching a deal. That was good news, because some Democrats on the committee were prepared to make counterproductive concessions in the form of cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs that continue to provide a modicum of essential support to average families. Only the intransigence of the Republican members in opposing any tax increases prevented what would have been a <a href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/11/7-reasons-to-celebrate-the-not-so-super-committees-failure.html" target="_self">much worse outcome for the country</a>. The committee's failure, combined with the new political energy provided by the Occupy Wall Street movement, helps to set the stage for debate during the presidential campaign cycle that concentrates on addressing what voters care most about: the bad economy, not the government's balance sheet. 3. Big Progress on Gay Rights. This year New York legalized same-sex marriage, joining the much smaller states of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Iowa. In addition, following on legislation enacted at the end of 2010, the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy was officially repealed as of September 20. As a result, openly gay and lesbian individuals can now serve in the military. Those two major changes advancing the long-standing progressive values of freedom, opportunity, and equality were the outgrowth of intensive grass-roots efforts. Only a decade ago, few would have imagined that gay marriage and an end to DADT were even remotely on the horizon. The enormous success of the gay rights movement over a relatively short period of time should encourage progressives working on other issues who have become frustrated over their difficulties in achieving progress. 4. Signs That Health Care Reform is Starting to Work. Most provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was enacted in 2010, won't take full effect until 2014. But nonetheless, this year some evidence emerged that it may already be having a positive impact. New data from the <a href="http://www.tnr.com/print/blog/jonathan-cohn/98525/young-adults-under-25-insurance-obamacare-cdc-hhs" target="_self">Centers for Disease Control </a>showed that the number of American adults aged 19 to 25 without health insurance fell from about 10.5 million to 8 million between the middle of 2010 and the middle of 2011. The reason why the Affordable Care Act is likely responsible, especially when insurance coverage declined for other non-elderly adults, is the provision already in effect that enables young adults up to the age of 26 to remain covered by their parents' plan if they have no access to employer sponsored coverage. Another promising development was that the rate of <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-24/medicare-spending-slows-as-hospitals-improve-care-peter-orszag.html" target="_self">Medicare's cost increases slowed significantly</a>. While the explanation for that news is uncertain, and no one knows if it will last, there is growing evidence that hospitals are already reorganizing in anticipation of the legislation in ways that have proven to promote greater cost-efficiency. A third positive development connected to health care reform is the reduction in the "donut hole" in Medicare drug coverage, enabling more than 2.5 million seniors to save, on average, $569. The increased coverage for young adults, the slowdown in Medicare cost inflation, and the improved Medicare prescription drug package are three promising reasons to believe that health care reform really will help to improve America's deeply dysfunctional health care system. 5. The Defeat of Ohio's Anti-Union Law. The most significant referendum to appear on a state ballot this year called for a repeal of Ohio's law, pushed by Republican Governor John Kasich, that stripped most collective bargaining rights from public employees. That law, which was passed by the state Senate in the spring, came on the heels of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's attack on public sector unions and threatened to lead to more widespread conservative steamrolling of labor. As it turned out, Ohio voters <a href="http://atlasproject.net/daily-blog/what-ohio-sb5-means-for-2012/" target="_self">resoundingly supported repeal</a> of the anti-union law by a margin of 61 percent to 39 percent. The rejection of Kasich's aggressive move in such an electorally important state heading into the presidential campaign <a href="http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/11/09/a-good-election-night-for-rearguard-actions-for-liberals/" target="_self">may help to further energize the grass-roots</a> while shifting them from a defensive posture to more proactively supporting progressive candidates and policies. 6. Elizabeth Warren's Senate Candidacy. When Senator Edward M. Kennedy died in 2009, the nation lost a leader who articulated a clear, powerful vision of liberalism while achieving more than anyone in the modern era for progressive causes. So it is rejuvenating that Republican Scott Brown, who took Kennedy's seat, is now being challenged by someone who in her own right has demonstrated a singular ability to articulate and fight for progressive values: Elizabeth Warren. A Harvard Law School professor, Warren has written extensively about the economic forces squeezing the American middle class and <a href="http://www.democracyjournal.org/5/6528.php?page=all" target="_self">created the idea</a> for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that became an important element of the Dodd-Frank legislation. Although many hoped that Warren would be nominated to run the bureau, instead she has entered the political fray in Massachusetts. A <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20110042-503544.html" target="_self">video</a> of her passionately explaining in plain English that "there is nobody in this country who got rich on his own" went viral and excited Americans who have become frustrated with the inability of politicians in either party to persuasively communicate why the country seems to keep heading in the wrong direction. Warren just might become Senator Kennedy's successor as the leading voice of progressivism in America. 7. The End of U. S. Combat Engagement in Iraq. The U.S.-led invasion that initiated the war in Iraq has widely become recognized as a terrible mistake, launched under false pretenses. Most <a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/12/iraq_ledger_update.html" target="_self">estimates</a> of total deaths exceed 100,000, including nearly 4,500 Americans. More than 30,000 U.S. service men and women were wounded, and many thousands of others are suffering from mental health repercussions. The total cost of the war to the U.S. government is estimated at more than $800 billion, with about another half-trillion dollars to be paid in veterans' health care and disability costs. One clear difference between the presidential candidates in 2008 was Barack Obama's commitment to end U.S. combat engagement in Iraq, and this year he is delivering on that promise. Bringing home the remainder of combat troops from the terrible misadventure in Iraq is an important step toward more constructively re-setting American priorities. 8. The Conservative Movement Remains Bereft of Ideas. At the end of the George W. Bush administration's two terms, it had become clear that the implementation of conservative ideas about governance had produced <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Conservatives-Have-No-Clothes-Right-Wing/dp/0470044365" target="_self">one policy failure after another</a>, culminating in the housing and financial crises that arose in large part due to the absence of meaningful regulation. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Republican nominee John McCain put forward <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080103061.html" target="_self">no new substantive policy </a>proposals of his own. Now, four years later, it is clear from the scramble for the Republican presidential nomination that leading conservatives still lack any credible ideas for governing effectively. Beyond the usual proposals to further cut taxes for the rich and reduce government regulations -- the same basic agenda that left the country in the mess it is still trying to dig out of -- the Republican candidates demonstrate<a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_12/the_gop_policy_problem034102.php" target="_self"> little evidence</a> that they have learned anything from past mistakes. We will find out next year what voters have learned.</div> </body> </html> Greg Anrig urn:syndication:bbf2f605-dad6-11df-b18c-002219154821 http://tcf.org/about/fellows/greg-anrig-jr Greg Anrig, is Vice President for Programs who writes on employment and retiree benefits; Social Security solvency and reform; economic security; and tax reform. 2011-12-13T16:55:58Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Greg Anrig, is Vice President for Programs who writes on employment and retiree benefits; Social Security solvency and reform; economic security; and tax reform. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/about/fellows/greg-anrig-jr/image" /> </div> <div>Follow on <a class="external-link" href="http://twitter.com/greganrig">Twitter. </a> Greg Anrig is vice president, programs, at The Century Foundation. Since 1994, he has been responsible for overseeing The Century Foundation’s projects on public policy as well as its fellows. Previously, he was a staff writer and Washington correspondent for Money magazine. He is the author of The Conservatives Have No Clothes: Why Right-Wing Ideas Keep Failing (John Wiley & Sons, 2007). He is coeditor (with Tova Andrea Wang) of Immigration’s New Frontiers: Experiences from the Emerging Gateway States (The Century Foundation Press, 2006), in addition to the three collections of essays he co-edited (with Richard C. Leone): <a href="http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PB&pubid=605">Liberty Under Attack: Reclaiming Our Freedoms in an Age of Terror </a>(PublicAffairs, 2007); The War on Our Freedoms: Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism (PublicAffairs, 2003); and <a href="http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PB&pubid=130">Social Security Reform: Beyond the Basics</a> (The Century Foundation Press, 1999). He also is a featured blogger on TPM Café and a regular columnist for the Guardian Unlimited.</div> </body> </html> The Debt Fallout: How Social Security Went ‘Cash Negative’ Earlier Than Expected urn:syndication:c0917b75-15e6-11e1-97be-002219154821 http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-debt-fallout-how-social-security-went-cash-negative-earlier-than-expected/2011/10/27/gIQACm1QTM_story.html Board of Trustee member Alicia Munnell interviewed in the Washington Post. 2011-11-23T15:15:55Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Board of Trustee member Alicia Munnell interviewed in the Washington Post. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/in-the-news/2011/11/the-debt-fallout-how-social-security-went-2018cash-negative2019-earlier-than-expected/image" /> </div> http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-debt-fallout-how-social-security-went-cash-negative-earlier-than-expected/2011/10/27/gIQACm1QTM_story.html <div>Board of Trustee member Alicia Munnell interviewed in the Washington Post.</div> </body> </html> 7 Reasons to Celebrate the Not-So-Super Committee's Failure urn:syndication:da190ac2-1496-11e1-afe7-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330153935dc5a9970b "Hopes are Dashed," The New York Times headline announces in one of the bajillion articles about the inability of the so-called Super Committee to... 2011-11-22T14:45:22Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> "Hopes are Dashed," The New York Times headline announces in one of the bajillion articles about the inability of the so-called Super Committee to... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330153935dc5a9970b/image" /> </div> <div><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/us/politics/deficit-deal-fell-apart-after-seeming-agreement.html?hp" target="_self">"Hopes are Dashed,"</a> The New York Times headline announces in one of the bajillion articles about the inability of the so-called Super Committee to reach a grand bargain to cut federal deficits. But outside of Washington's insular preoccupation with government balance sheets, few actual citizens ever conjured anything resembling hope one way or the other related to the committee's mission. What polling shows the public wants Washington to focus on -- jobs -- had been deemed a distraction as the futile deliberations dragged on. Now that the exercise is finally over, there are plenty of genuine reasons to be at least a bit more hopeful than before: 1. Congress can re-focus on today's lousy economy. That's not to say that Congress will agree to act on anything that would help create jobs. But at least the debate can shift to the much more urgent set of economic problems that preoccupy voters rather than centrist pundits and institutions financed by billionaire Peter G. Peterson. Virtually every "reform" under consideration by the committee would have weakened rather than boosted the economy, which on its current path won't return to full employment until sometime in the next decade. The premise that it was legitimate to concentrate now on deficit reduction because job growth will soon bounce back had no empirical underpinnings. While some analysts are speculating that the collapse of the super committee <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-markets-arent-tanking-on-fears-of-debt-theyre-tanking-on-fears-of-growth/2011/08/25/gIQAxGiaiN_blog.html#pagebreak" target="_self">diminishes</a> the probability of extending emergency unemployment insurance relief and the payroll tax holiday beyond year-end, it's at least plausible that President Obama can more effectively rally public support for those and other economically helpful provisions now that unpopular cuts to Social Security and health care programs are off the table. Even if Republicans block those economically beneficial changes, heading into the election the lines between Democrats and Republicans with respect to economic and jobs policies will be clearer without a counterproductive grand bargain muddying the waters. 2. Congress is less likely to delegate its responsibilities to committees, super or otherwise. For certain circumscribed tasks, like neceessary military base closings that parochial interests can impede from occurring, it is legitimate for Congress to delegate responsibility to a group that can make collective decisions that would otherwise be extremely difficult. But the latest committee was labelled "super" in part because nothing circumscribed its mission. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, sundry safety net programs, and the entire tax code all were subject to changes by a small group working behind closed doors. If they had managed to reach a grand bargain, which would have been subject to take-it-or-leave it votes by the full Congress, the likelihood was high that the deal would have inflicted higher costs on average citizens than anything that could be enacted through the conventional process. The advantages to wealthy special interests are even greater in a closed process with a small number of empowered committee members than it is in the normal course of the legislative process, which is tainted enough. With luck, the latest debacle will discourage the creation of a super-duper sequel down the road. 3. Defense spending is on the table. The failure of the Super committee means that half of the budget cuts now scheduled to take effect beginning in 2013 must come out of defense. It remains an open question whether Congress will rescind those cuts, which especially rankle Republicans along with plenty of Democrats. But at least the pulling of the so-called trigger has started a debate over specific military reductions that would never have happened otherwise. That's a positive outcome in and of itself, because the U.S. spends far more on the military than other advanced countries and <a href="http://www.comw.org/pda/1103bm47.html" target="_self">well in excess</a> of what is needed to remain secure and advance our international interests. 4. Social Security dodges another bullet. Because the Republican members of the committee predictably refused to entertain even modest tax increases, they left Democrats who would likely have accepted significant reductions to Social Security benefits with no deal that could be fairly labelled a compromise. Notwithstanding the relentless hand-wringing in the media about the urgency of "reforming" Social Security, any changes can wait. The latest report of the program's Trustees report shows that Social security can pay benefits in full until 2036, after which payroll tax revenue will still be sufficient to pay about 75 percent of promised benefits. Social Security has proven once again during the Great Recession and its aftermath to be the government's most effective program at alleviating hardship. Yet it is less generous that the public pensions of the vast majority of advanced nations. Raising or even eliminating the cap on income subject to the payroll tax would significantly strengthen the program's long-term financial outlook. As the population ages, it is reasonable to expect that Congress will become more amenable to reforms along those lines rather than deep benefit cuts that would weaken the economic security of future retirees. 5. Health care reform gets space to succeed. In contrast to the Affordable Care Act's emphasis on reforms that make the overall health care system more cost-effective -- expanding coverage while countering the forces that produce rapid medical inflation -- the ideas under consideration by the committee were old-fashioned benefit cuts that would most likely have shifted costs onto households. Largely under the radar screen, many health care providers have already begun making meaningful changes in the way they organize and carry out their practices, and there is some evidence that Medicare's costs are <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-24/medicare-spending-slows-as-hospitals-improve-care-peter-orszag.html" target="_self">growing more slowly</a>, at least for the time being. Because forecasts of soaring medical costs in the context of population aging almost entirely explain why federal deficits are expected to become unmanageable in the next decade, the goal should be to build on, rather than undercut, the Affordable Care Act. From that standpoint, the demise of the committee is constructive. 6. Taxes are back in play. At the end of 2012, the Bush tax cuts are once again scheduled to expire. President Obama has vowed to veto legislation to extend them in their totality, though he supports continuing the reductions affecting individuals earning less than $250,000. If a stalemate occurs, then federal revenues would increase so substantially that the deficit problem would be significantly alleviated. That would also be bad for the economy, so it is not a desirable scenario. But in contrast to any deal that <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/11/supercommittee_failure_why_the_absence_of_a_deal_may_cut_the_deficit_more_than_a_deal_would_have.html" target="_self">might have emerged from the committee</a>, which would have been heavily weighted toward spending cuts rather than tax increases, the public debate over the expiring Bush tax cuts is more likely to raise revenues, particularly on the wealthy. That outcome, if it occurs, would be more progressive and balanced than anything the committee might have done given the Republican intransigence about taxes. 7. An opportunity to educate the public about domestic discretionary spending. The only clearly negative upshot to the committee's failure is the nearly <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-defense-cuts-arent-the-biggest-problem-with-the-trigger/2011/11/21/gIQAyORTiN_blog.html#pagebreak" target="_self">$300 billion in reductions </a>over 10 years to so-called domestic discretionary programs, starting with a nearly 8 percent cut in 2013. Those categories include just about everything the federal government does within our borders aside from social insurance programs -- public health research, environmental protection, transportation, housing assistance, and so on. They are not only intrinsically valuable activities that serve popular missions, but they also provide jobs and enhance economic productivity as well. In search of a silver lining, it is possible that during the election season, the prospect of cuts to those programs the following year will provide Democrats and other progressives with a "teachable moment" about the virtues and benefits of government. After decades of a relentlessly anti-government conservative and centrist message dominating debate, seizing this opportuntity to defend specific activities that are now under a very direct threat could help to build public support for reversing those cuts. Otherwise, the damage will be real, albeit still much less severe than any agreement the committee might have reached.</div> </body> </html> Taxing Our Patience urn:syndication:701b483a-1068-11e1-b35f-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330153931984e5970b There appears to be no shortage of things to complain about this campaign season. But it’s been obvious for some time that the favorite topic is... 2011-11-16T15:31:15Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> There appears to be no shortage of things to complain about this campaign season. But it’s been obvious for some time that the favorite topic is... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330153931984e5970b/image" /> </div> <div>There appears to be no shortage of things to complain about this campaign season. But it’s been obvious for some time that the favorite topic is taxation. Within that general category, two things are almost always at the top of each candidate’s list: advocacy of some form of “flat” tax to replace the current gently graduated income tax, and insistence that everyone should pay something. The latter point is often made by referring to the 47% of workers whose incomes are too low to make them liable for income taxes. To such desires, one can only point out we already have significant flat taxes and just about every worker already pays a healthy chunk of their income to the government. This is true because nearly everyone is part of the Social Security system. The payroll tax imposed to finance Social Security is 6.2 percent (with an equal amount from employers) of total earnings with no deductions. In addition, workers pay a tax to support Medicare, currently at 1.45 percent of earnings. Social Security payroll tax does not apply to income above $106,800, so it is mildly regressive (that is, it takes larger share of income from low wage earners than it does from those with high wages). Medicare doesn't have a ceiling. It’s worth mentioning that most economists consider the employer share of payroll taxes as a further tax on workers, reasoning that wages would be higher if employers didn’t have to pay these taxes. And it’s also worth noting that if one added in the generally regressive levies imposed by states and localities, the “participation” in the tax system by low and moderate income workers is quite meaningful –especially as a percentage of their pay check. The importance of the payroll tax for Social Security is significant. For despite the cries of imminent bankruptcy for the program, the revenue stream from the payroll tax alone – without any other changes in the program –would enable it to pay about 75% of current benefits for the rest of the century. The payroll tax for Medicare pays for about 37% of the program’s cost. Since these payroll taxes are crucially important to the financing of Social Security and significant in funding Medicare, it’s not an exaggeration to say that without them or a substitute revenue stream both programs would have to be scrapped. Ignoring these taxes in order to make a point may be a forgivable campaign sin, but it certainly obscures the truth about the tax burdens borne by average Americans. These flat taxes take a real bite out of the income of average workers. But, in fact, they are good examples of the kind of flat taxes the candidates propose. Overall, the candidates are in the odd position of ignoring the facts about the policies they are attacking or advocating. It’s hard to tell which. And the truth about the consequences of more flat taxes is not very politically attractive. Perhaps that is why we are hearing less about the 9 percent flat tax. It turns out that it increases taxes for 84 percent of workers. Perhaps that is also why no one wants to get into the details of how the tax system really works. Why let the facts get in the way of a useful political punch line?</div> </body> </html> Investing In America's Economy: A Budget Blueprint for Economic Recovery and Fiscal Responsibility urn:syndication:397db105-fbd2-11df-ad98-002219154821 http://tcf.org/publications/2010/11/investing-in-americas-economy-a-budget-blueprint-for-economic-recovery-and-fiscal-responsibility The Century Foundation, Demos and EPI have produced a budget blueprint for economic recovery and fiscal responsibility. The blueprint prioritizes a strong economic recovery because widespread job creation and robust economic growth are essential to successful deficit reduction. Investing in America's Future is a project of Demos, EPI and The Century Foundation. 2011-11-16T14:52:17Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> The Century Foundation, Demos and EPI have produced a budget blueprint for economic recovery and fiscal responsibility. The blueprint prioritizes a strong economic recovery because widespread job creation and robust economic growth are essential to successful deficit reduction. Investing in America's Future is a project of Demos, EPI and The Century Foundation. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/publications/2010/11/investing-in-americas-economy-a-budget-blueprint-for-economic-recovery-and-fiscal-responsibility/image" /> </div> <div>The Century Foundation, Demos and EPI have produced a budget blueprint for economic recovery and fiscal responsibility. The blueprint prioritizes a strong economic recovery because widespread job creation and robust economic growth are essential to successful deficit reduction. Investing in America's Future is a project of Demos, EPI and The Century Foundation. <a class="external-link" href="investing-in-americas-economy-a-budget-blueprint-for-economic-recovery-and-fiscal-responsibility/pdf">Download Investing In America's Economy here</a> and more information is available on the project's homepage at <a href="http://www.ourfiscalsecurity.org/">www.ourfiscalsecurity.org</a>. For highlights <a class="external-link" href="../../../media-center/2010/investing-in-americas-economy">see the Press Release</a> or <a class="external-link" href="../../../audio/2010/press-conference-recording-of-investing-in-americas-economy/">listen to the Press Conference</a>. Follow TCF's work on the project <a class="external-link" href="../../../retirement/high-road">here. </a> Read what's being written in the press about the Blueprint: <a class="external-link" href="http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/11/the-left-and-the-budget/">Matt Yglesias, "The Left and the Budget"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/79476/liberal-alternative-reduce-deficit-federal-budget">Jonathan Cohn, "OK, Now We Can Have a Deficit Conversation"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/the-progressive-deficit-plan/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman">Paul Krugman, "The Progressive Deficit Plan"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/11/wonkbook_the_liberal_budget_pl.html">Ezra Klein, "Wonkbook: The liberal budget plan"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_11/026829.php">Steve Benen, "If They Can't Beat 'em Join 'em"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/11/29/deficit-reduction-from-the-left/">David Wessel, Wall Street Journal's Real Time Economics blog</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/us/politics/29fiscal.html?_r=1">Jackie Calmes, NY Times, "Liberal Groups to Propose Routes to Smaller Deficit"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/11/29/progressive-budget-plan-deals-with-deficit-reduction-through-growth/">Firedog, "Progressive Budget Plan Deals With Deficit Reduction Through Growth"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.americanindependent.com/158400/progressive-groups-unveil-deficit-reduction-plan">American Independent, "Progressive groups unveil deficit-reduction plan"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/11/the-quintessential-liberal-plan-to-reduce-the-deficit/67128/">Derek Thompson,The Atlantic, "The Quintessential Liberal Plan to Reduce the Deficit"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/130949-liberal-groups-blast-obama-pay-freeze-proposal-release-alternative-plan">Erik Wasson, The Hill,"Liberal groups blast Obama pay-freeze proposal, release alternative plan"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/11/the-left-opposition-has-a-budget-balancing-plan.html">J. Bradford DeLong,"The Left Opposition Has a Budget-Balancing Plan"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/deficit-assumptions-who-says-theres.html">digby, "Deficit Assumptions"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/how-does-our-fiscal-securitys-fiscal-blueprint-work-for-climate-hawks/">Mike Konczal, "How Does our Fiscal Security's Fiscal Blueprint Work for Climate Hawks?"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/our-fiscal-securitys-fiscal-blueprint-budget-reform-as-finreg/">Mike Konczal, "Our Fiscal Security's Fiscal Blueprint; Budget Reform as FinReg"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.grist.org/article/2010-11-29-taxing-carbon-as-part-of-responsible-progressive-fiscal-policy">David Roberts, "Taxing Carbon as Part of Responsible, Progressive Fiscal Policy"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://philanthropy.com/blogs/government-and-politics/liberal-deficit-cutting-plan-proposes-new-charitable-tax-credit/27670">The Chronicle of Philantropy, "Liberal Deficit-Cutting Plan Proposes New Charitable Tax Credit"</a> <a href="http://gooznews.com/?p=2174">The Fiscal Times, "</a><a href="http://gooznews.com/?p=2174">Liberals' Deficit Plan Stresses Defense Cuts and Tax Hikes"</a> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AS4Z120101129">Reuters</a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AS4Z120101129">, "Tax, Spending Divide Hampers Deficit Push"</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/29/deficit-commission-debt-unemployment-budget_n_789444.html">Peter S. Goodman,</a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/29/deficit-commission-debt-unemployment-budget_n_789444.html"> Huffington Post, "Deficit Obsession Squelching Job Creation Talk"</a><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/29/deficit-commission-debt-unemployment-budget_n_789444.html"> </a> <a class="external-link" href="http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/11/29/morning-must-reads-leaked/">Time Magazine Online, "Morning Musings"</a> <h1 class="entry-title"></h1></div> </body> </html> Welcome to the Blog of the Century urn:syndication:76446f1c-d88b-11e0-b37c-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330154352f6ed3970c Welcome to a new school year, a new blog name, and welcome to The Century Foundation. 2011-11-15T14:30:03Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Welcome to a new school year, a new blog name, and welcome to The Century Foundation. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb969888330154352f6ed3970c/image" /> </div> <div><div>Welcome to a new school year, a new blog name, and welcome to The Century Foundation. If you’re new here, that makes two of us. I started work just last week as the sixth president of the 92-year-old Century Foundation. I succeed Richard Leone, who served this institution long and well, and who has become a senior fellow.</div> <div> Who are we? We’re a progressive think tank, founded in 1919 and funded by a man named Edward Filene. (You may associate his name with his store’s Basement, which was actually founded as a way to make goods affordable by working people.) At his death in 1937, he was a close associate of President Franklin Roosevelt, and one of the leading liberal businessmen in the country. Along the way, he was a leading champion of fair workplaces and employee ownership strategies, all with an eye to ensuring that economic opportunity was available to all. He thought big and he acted big, beginning by using his business as a laboratory for his ideas and, later, influencing national policy and the New Deal. Founded in 1919, we were called the Twentieth Century Fund until the end of the last century, and you may have heard of us under that name, or may remember us for work we published by such leading scholars as Gunnar Myrdal, or for our association with progressive thought leaders such as Theodore Sorensen, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., John Kenneth Galbraith, Justice Robert Jackson, J. Robert Oppenheimer, and many more. (A list of past Century trustees can be found<a href="about/former-board-of-trustees"> here</a>, and it is pretty impressive, I think you’ll agree.) And like Filene, who was a lifelong Republican, we embrace a progressive ideology, but are not partisan.</div> <div> We’re not the best-known think tank these days, or the biggest (although we do have, I believe, the second largest endowment of all progressive think tanks). But we aim to turn out important work that can shape public policy debates in this country and around the world. We provide analyses and convene the best thinkers on questions such as how to make the<a href="economics"> U.S. economy</a> both a stronger safety net and a trampoline for working Americans, understanding what kinds of classrooms<a href="education"> really work for kids</a>, and how the United States can lead in a world of<a href="international"> more diffuse power</a>. Many of these projects, seeded by our endowment, “look around corners” at emerging issues, but we also work to make sense of what is happening today—through this blog, for example, or through one of my favorites, our<a href="special-projects/series/graph-of-the-day/"> graph of the day</a>. All of that said, and while many things will stay the same here at Century (notably our values), many others are about to change, and I’m glad you’re interested enough to have read this far. Most obviously (and probably least significantly), we’ve changed the name of our blog. (Our previous blog, which contained lots of memorable material, but under the unmemorable name Taking Note, can be found<a href="http://takingnote.tcf.org/"> here</a>.) A lot of our work is long form—there was a time when we mostly published books on public policy. But these days much of what needs to be said can be said more quickly, and in shorter form. This blog is the place for that, and much more. In re-naming it Blog of the Century, we hope we’ve made it an easier destination to recall, and also a sign that we take the fate of the nation very seriously, but ourselves somewhat less so. Of course, this Blog of the Century is only one way to follow our work. In addition to our papers, conferences, seminars, and books, there is also our Facebook page (you can become a fan by clicking<a href="http://www.facebook.com/TheCenturyFoundation"> here</a>) and our Twitter feed (follow us<a href="http://twitter.com/#!/search/tcfdotorg"> here</a>). I’d especially invite you to join our e-mail list, which will enable us to send you links to our most interesting work every week or so, perhaps more often as we go along (click<a href="https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:Join/acctId:1407853/signupId:1417824"> here</a> to sign up). A final word about, ahem, money. I mentioned that endowment. A couple of times. It enables us to take intellectual risks, and to provide a backstop to our work. Major foundation funders and others also underwrite additional work, and we hope to persuade them to do more of that. Beyond this, however, more money simply enables us to do more. So, also starting today, we’ll be asking on our website, and elsewhere, for money from you. It’s tax deductible, and will really make a difference. If you like what you see, I hope you’ll give what you can, <a href="https://npo.networkforgood.org/Donate/Donate.aspx?npoSubscriptionId=985" target="_self" title="Donate Now">by going here</a> and either using your credit card or following the instructions and sending a check. In any event, thanks for starting the school year with us, and welcome to the Blog of the Century.</div></div> </body> </html> Why Does Social Security Confuse Reporters So Much? urn:syndication:8806e542-048d-11e1-a98e-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb96988833015392b6a9e0970b Dean Baker, Paul Krugman , and Merrill Goozner explain the ways in which The Washington Post's big Sunday story about Social Security is... 2011-11-09T14:44:22Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Dean Baker, Paul Krugman , and Merrill Goozner explain the ways in which The Washington Post's big Sunday story about Social Security is... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb96988833015392b6a9e0970b/image" /> </div> <div><a href="http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/washington-post-discards-all-journalistic-standards-in-attack-on-social-security" target="_self">Dean Baker</a>, <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/social-security-bait-and-switch-a-continuing-series/" target="_self">Paul Krugman</a>, and <a href="http://gooznews.com/?p=3303" target="_self">Merrill Goozner</a> explain the ways in which The Washington Post's big Sunday <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-debt-fallout-how-social-security-went-cash-negative-earlier-than-expected/2011/10/27/gIQACm1QTM_story.html?hpid=z1" target="_self">story about Social Security</a> is overly alarmist and perpetuates widespread misperceptions. Even though the recession has caused Social Security's payroll taxes to fall short of payments owed to current beneficiaries a few years earlier than expected, which the Post misleadingly casts as a "treacherous milestone," the interest on the program's still rapidly growing trust fund is more than sufficient to cover that gap. According to Social Security's trustees, the program will still be able to continue paying out benefits in full until 2036, when the trust fund would be exhausted and benefits would have to be reduced by about 25 percent. Reasonable people can differ about whether reforms to prevent that eventuality should be undertaken sooner rather than later. Particularly in a political environment when Republicans are refusing to contemplate any tax increases, which would require all changes to take the form of benefit cuts, it is by no means irresponsible to support delay until a more balanced approach is feasible in Congress. Moreover, Social Security's fiscal condition is far less urgent than severe economic problems in the here and now like persistently high unemployment. Still, the entire tone and thrust of the article was that Congress has been negligent in failing to take action, and that politicians and advocates who downplay the urgency of Social Security's fiscal challenges are opposing the public interest. Why are media stories about Social Security almost always built on the erroneous premise that the program is on the verge of a dire crisis? Among the myriad reasons: <ul> <li>There's no story unless a sense of alarm can be created. In this case, it would be difficult for the writer to sell her editors on a big splashy piece about how the decline in payroll taxes below current benefit levels is a long anticipated transition that poses no immediate threat either to Social Security or the overall federal budget. </li> <li>Since almost all other media stories about Social Security sound alarmist, reporters sifting through the web equivalent of clip files must feel reluctant to go out on a limb and write something different.</li> <li>Math. Most reporters don't feel comfortable enough with big numbers to evaluate on their own which of their sources are right and which are purveying misleading information. In that context, fear-mongerers win out because their stories are more dramatic.</li> <li>A distrust of advocacy groups that represent particular segments of the public. Reporters often discount the arguments of the AARP and other membership organizations that strongly support Social Security because those groups are perceived to be self-interested. In contrast, organizations funded by billionaire Peter G. Peterson are perceived to be less biased because they don't represent public constituencies. That's true even though Peterson has sponsored a long-standing and well known campaign to cut Social Security benefits.</li> <li>The default perspective in Washington is that the "responsible" point of view is that federal budget deficits are inherently dangerous and Social Security contributes to that danger. Both elements of that conventional wisdom are wrong, but understanding why requires the listener to have the rare traits of patience and an open mind. </li> <li>Stories about Social Security, like the Post's, inevitably become entangled with challenges posed by the health care system as the population ages. But the problems confronting America's medical system are far more severe and complex than the modest long-term shortfall facing Social Security. Conflating the two very different sets of issues, which advocates of Social Security cuts consciously do to win over their audience, confuses reporters and misleads the public.</li> </ul> No matter how much effort is exerted to try to educate reporters about Social Security, overly alarmist stories like those in Sunday's Post seem destined to outlive us all even as the program itself continues to survive.</div> </body> </html> Happy Birthday urn:syndication:fd62b511-d8aa-11df-a11a-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/taking-note/6a00e54ffb969888330134861bfb6d970c This week Social Security, the most successful antipoverty program in America’s history, celebrates its 75h anniversary. 2011-10-18T20:25:08Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> This week Social Security, the most successful antipoverty program in America’s history, celebrates its 75h anniversary. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/taking-note/6a00e54ffb969888330134861bfb6d970c/image" /> </div> <div>This week Social Security, the most successful antipoverty program in America’s history, celebrates its 75h anniversary. Maybe “celebrates” is the wrong word since there seems to be a cottage industry in Washington dedicated to the proposition that the Social Security program must be reduced or replaced. So-called deficit hawks keep swooping down on the main income support mechanism and the most successful antipoverty program, eager to tear off a slice of quite modest layers of financial support provided for those too old to find a job or too old to work. It’s a curious spectacle at a time when nearly 10 percent of the workforce is unemployed and millions are facing permanent reductions in income. There are many reasons why millions of Americans still endure poverty. For one thing, the support we provide for those without jobs, or in ill health, or simply too old to work is, by the standards of the most advanced nations, minimal. Yet in some circles, even our limited response to poverty is begrudged and seen as unaffordable and a disincentive to work. And though we are just about the least taxed among the wealthy nations, we have been unwilling to pay more for the social safety net, even if it means that while Americans don’t starve to death, millions still go hungry. It’s certain that the consequences of our stinginess have been worsened by the current deep and long recession. The loss of jobs hits hardest those who work in shrinking areas of the economy. For example, an estimated 5.6 million blue collar workers have lost their jobs in the past few years. Some, perhaps many, of these lost jobs will not be restored. Manufacturing jobs, for example, have pretty much been on the decline for a generation. Sadly, the evidence suggests that many of these workers lack the savings that might cushion the blow of lost employment. Moreover, the market has not been kind, even to the fortunate minority that had meaningful personal savings. Blue collar workers are also among those for whom working beyond age 65 is most problematic. Many economists now believe that recovery from this so-called Great Recession is likely to take many years and be uphill all the way, especially with regard to employment. The road back may be steeper because of a demographic fact of life for the United States. Next year, the first members of the baby boom generation (generally those born between 1946 and 1959) turn 65. For the next decade and more about seventy-five million boomers will need to adjust to a different and more substantial cause of job loss and income decline than a downturn in the business cycle or even the bursting of a real estate bubble: they will be adjusting to retirement and old age. For a substantial fraction of these millions of Americans the main defense against poverty will be Social Security. While there is much wringing of hands about the financial state of the program, it remains the most reliable source of income in old age for about 38 million people million Americans. Social Security dodged a bullet when President Bush’s proposal to “privatize’ the program was rejected. Imagine the condition “sure thing” private accounts would be in today. One of the often-overlooked realities about the circumstances of American workers is just how much market risk they are exposed to already. Most are in the private sector, where their companies expand and, in recent years, more often contract their workforce. A record number of businesses went bankrupt in the last five years; all of those workers were subject to disruption. Others downsized after mergers and acquisitions or changes in market share. Moreover, even those workers fortunate enough to have private pensions may have taken a hit because pension funds have been heavily invested in the stock market. The net result of all this is that the boomer generation, for all its decades of exceptionalism, is likely to live out its last years in economic circumstances not much different from those experienced by their parents. That means that a third to half its members will depend on Social Security to live above the poverty line. It also means that Congress should ensure that the program will remain sound and fully funded through the 21st Century. Now that would be a great birthday present for the American people.</div> </body> </html> Charles R. Morris urn:syndication:e400caee-4a69-11e0-9f00-002219154821 http://tcf.org/about/fellows/charles-r.-morris Charles R. Morris, fellow, is a lawyer and former investment banker whose articles and reviews have appeared in many publications including The Atlantic Monthly, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal. 2011-09-30T15:43:38Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Charles R. Morris, fellow, is a lawyer and former investment banker whose articles and reviews have appeared in many publications including The Atlantic Monthly, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/about/fellows/charles-r.-morris/image" /> </div> <div>Charles R. Morris has written ten books, including The Cost of Good Intentions, one of the New York Times’ Best Books of 1980, The Coming Global Boom, a New York Times Notable Book of 1990, and The Tycoons, a Barrons’ Best Book of 2005. A lawyer and former investment banker whose articles and reviews have appeared in many publications including The Atlantic Monthly, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal.</div> </body> </html> Social Security in Simple Terms urn:syndication:06d1cf8a-e565-11e0-8a93-002219154821 http://botc.tcf.org/2011/09/sense-and-sensibility.html A blog post by Richard C. Leone. 2011-09-23T18:11:57Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> A blog post by Richard C. Leone. <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/in-the-news/2011/9/social-security-in-simple-terms/image" /> </div> http://botc.tcf.org/2011/09/sense-and-sensibility.html <div>A blog post by Richard C. Leone.</div> </body> </html> Social Security in Simple Terms urn:syndication:06d96c73-e565-11e0-b79a-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb96988833014e8bc0232f970d It has become routine for some members of Congress and presidential candidates to describe Social Security as a piece of financial flim-flam. Texas... 2011-09-22T21:24:45Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> It has become routine for some members of Congress and presidential candidates to describe Social Security as a piece of financial flim-flam. Texas... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb96988833014e8bc0232f970d/image" /> </div> <div>It has become routine for some members of Congress and presidential candidates to describe Social Security as a piece of financial flim-flam. Texas Governor Rick Perry is not the first opponent to label it a "Ponzi” scheme. And some of the attacks are premised on a more fundamental disapproval of the very idea of government sponsored social insurance So it’s especially important when discussing what to do about Social Security to keep a firm grip on reality. In the future, barring some movie-scale contagion, there will be more older Americans than there are today. They will be consuming the goods and services produced at that time, not the ones we produce today. At one extreme they could have a very small slice of the pie and live the last years of their lives in poverty, with limited health care. At the other extreme they could be relatively affluent—so-called greedy geezers—consuming large amounts of the pie. Under the current system in the United States, most seniors should be able to live just above the poverty rate. But the basic fact remains that they will be living on of the goods and services of the future. We do not freeze some beef and orange juice now and then defrost it in 20 years. In fact, our retirement system, like that of most advanced nations, is essentially pay as you go (or “paygo”). Traditionally, the payroll taxes that are collected have gone to pay for the Social Security and Medicare costs of retired workers. (You pay for your parents and your children pay for you, etc.) Increases in payroll taxes enacted during the 1980s exceeded current needs and thus extra funds were accumulated for future use. By law those trust funds must be invested in U.S Treasury bonds. These Social Security trust funds will be spent by about 2036. This prospect underpins the false claim that the system is going bankrupt. Absent other changes, the program will simply revert to its former paygo character. Without other changes, Social Security would then be able to pay 75-80 percent of the level of current benefits. That would tip some older Americans into poverty, but it would be less destructive than eliminating the program. It is estimated that today 50 percent of retirees would be below the poverty line without Social Security. The average benefit—about $1,200 a month—doesn’t make anybody affluent. Too often in debates about the federal deficit and the national debt Social Security is lumped together with other issues. It shouldn’t be. It’s a special case. It has its own dedicated revenue stream and it represents a social compact among the generations. Retirees really did earn the right to be beneficiaries. So the fundamental question now and in the future is how much of the pie do we allocate to those who, largely because of age and/or health, can no longer work? What standard do we want to employ? What is the minimum amount of acceptable resources we want them to have? What is unacceptable from a humane or humanitarian or patriotic point of view? Frankly, if we were able to incorporate that much reality into the debate, it would be miles ahead of where it is today.</div> </body> </html> Time for a Generational Warfare Truce urn:syndication:4e2f0363-dfdb-11e0-8e7f-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb9698883301543574cd26970c Today's New York Times notes that the newly released census data shows households headed by people aged 65 and older enjoyed a 5.5 percent income... 2011-09-15T20:31:13Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> Today's New York Times notes that the newly released census data shows households headed by people aged 65 and older enjoyed a 5.5 percent income... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb9698883301543574cd26970c/image" /> </div> <div>Today's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/us/poor-are-still-getting-poorer-but-downturns-punch-varies-census-data-show.html?src=rechp&pagewanted=print" target="_self">New York Times</a> notes that the newly released census data shows households headed by people aged 65 and older enjoyed a 5.5 percent income increase from 2007 to 2010, while household income for every other age group fell. "Such data is likely to feed longstanding debates about generational equity, since the largest portion of safety net spending goes to those 65 and older, through Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid," reporters Jason DeParle and Sabrina Tavernise wrote. But the main argument for strengthening such social insurance programs is that those reforms benefit all generations -- not just subgroups. As <a href="http://botc.tcf.org/2011/09/hey-jaded-young-adults-health-reform-is-already-making-a-difference.html" target="_self">Harold Pollack</a>, <a href="http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/94924/uninsured-young-adult-affordable-care-act-census" target="_self">Jonathan Cohn</a>, <a href="http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2011/09/15/census-numbers-the-safety-net-is-working/" target="_self">Henry Aaron</a>, and<a href="http://www.healthpolicyanalysis.com/2011/09/early-victory-for-health-reform.html" target="_self"> Brad Wright</a> have highlighted, other data in the same report indicate that improvements in the Children's Health Insurance Program, along with reforms in the stimulus bill and the Affordable Care Act (ACA), have significantly expanded medical coverage to children and young adults. Wright points out that, "Roughly 810,000 middle-aged adults, those ages 45 to 64, were likely let go from their jobs, didn't qualify for Medicare [or Medicaid], and ended up uninsured. Meanwhile, some 494,000 young adults, those ages 18 to 25, gained coverage, which seems to point to the ACA provision allowing children to stay on their parents' plans until age 26 that went into effect in the fall of 2010. Of course, there may be other explanations, but the simplest explanation is likely the right one." Social insurance is not a zero-sum enterprise in which the benefits flowing to one indvidual or group commensurately subtract from the well-being of others. All generations today are much better off with a poverty rate among the elderly of about 10 percent compared to the past era before the advent of existing protections when elderly poverty exceeded 35 percent. In the old days, workers were <a href="http://www.jstor.org/pss/2648124" target="_self">much more likely to house</a> and be responsible for the subsistence costs of their retired parents. That impinged on the quality of life of everyone in the household, from young to old, relative to the independence provided by the still modest protections of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The aspiration should be to enable all age groups to avoid the broad declines in income during recessions rather than to bring the elderly down along with everyone else. The early evidence shows that building on the Affordable Care Act, based on what appear to be positive results well before its full implementation in 2014, would be a much more promising route to achieving that goal than repealing it or cutting highly successful social insurance programs as conservatives propose. </div> </body> </html> Why Social Security Is No Ponzi Scheme urn:syndication:8065e538-da35-11e0-b3fb-002219154821 http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb96988833014e8b61e146970d In the Republican presidential debate last night, Texas Governor Rick Perry rehashed the tried-and-true scare tactic of calling Social Security a... 2011-09-08T20:34:37Z <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <body> In the Republican presidential debate last night, Texas Governor Rick Perry rehashed the tried-and-true scare tactic of calling Social Security a... <div style="float: right"> <img src="http://tcf.org/blogs/blog-of-the-century/6a00e54ffb96988833014e8b61e146970d/image" /> </div> <div>In the Republican presidential <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/us/politics/08republican-debate-text.html" target="_self">debate</a> last night, Texas Governor Rick Perry rehashed the tried-and-true scare tactic of calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme: "It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you're paying into a program that's going to be there. Anybody that's for the status quo with Social Security today is involved in a monstrous lie to our kids, and it's not right." Perry's ludicrous claim is a microcosm of how the modern conservative movement has come to rely almost instinctively on fear-mongering to undercut public support for long-established, successful governmental activities. Pitting the elderly against the young is central to that rhetorical strategy, and it has much to do with the downward spiral the nation has taken during an era dominated by conservative ideology. The truth is that the Trustees of the Social Security program, a bi-partisan group that bases its forecasts on analysis by non-political actuaries and economists, forecast in its most recent<a href="http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/2011/trTOC.html" target="_self"> report </a>that Social Security will be able to pay promised benefits in full until 2036. After that point, there still would be sufficient income coming in from the payroll taxes of workers to provide 77 percent of promised benefits, declining very slightly thereafter. So even if the system remains unchanged, no one would be left remotely high and dry akin to the victims of ripoffs. Social Security is unlike a Ponzi scheme for two main reasons. One is that participation in Social Security is mandatory for all workers, who along with their employers must contribute a total of 12.4 percent of their earnings to the program. In contrast, Ponzi schemes rely on voluntary payments from individuals who must be duped into making contributions. As with Bernard Madoff's scam, those ruses inevitably collapse when they are unable to continue attracting the ever increasing number of victims needed to sustain the operation. The other major difference is that frauds like Signor Ponzi promised larger returns to investors than could possibly be sustained by its "customer" base, while the growth in Social Security benefits is manageable as long as it doesn't exceed future increases in the size of the economy and the workforce contributing taxes. The Trustees forecast that over a 75-year time horizon, the shortfall between taxes committed to the program and promised benefits amounts to just 0.8 percent of the size of the overall economy, or about 2.2 percent of income subject to payroll taxes. That relatively modest gap could be filled by a variety of adjustments to revenue and benefit levels, including the relatively popular proposal to raise or eliminate the current cap on income subject to Social Security taxes. The proclivity of ideologues to bandy about inflammatory terms like "monstrous lies" wouldn't be constructive even if there was some semblance of truth to their charges. But when the claims are flat-out wrong, the credibility of those selling the rhetorical snake oil ought to be consigned to the same category as Ponzi himself. So who was this Ponzi guy? Learn about his colorful life from the<a href="../../publications/1998/8/the-colorful-life-of-charles-ponzi/" target="_self"> excerpt</a> of The Century Foundation's<a href="../../publications/1998/9/pb146/" target="_self"> Countdown to Reform</a> by Henry J. Aaron and Robert D. Reischauer. </div> </body> </html>