In Which I Make a (Probably Ill-Advised) Foray Into Policy Wonkery

I am genuinely puzzled by the Social Security “crisis.” Not that I doubt that, if present trends continue, there won’t be enough money to fund benefits at current levels for all retirees in the not-too-distant future. That seems plain enough.

What I do doubt is that this “crisis” requires anything as drastic as Social Security “privatization.” Why couldn’t we raise the retirement age, trim benefits, or even (shudder) raise taxes?

But more to the point, maybe we need to be honest about what Social Security is. It’s not a “retirement” plan; it’s welfare for old people, i.e. a wealth transfer from one group of people to another. Not that there’s anything wrong with that! Surely supporting our elders is a fine and noble undertaking. In fact, I believe it was Irving Kristol, the “godfather” (as he is for some reason always called) of neo-conservatism who said that old people are the best welfare recipients: they don’t generally get hooked on drugs, have children out of wedlock, etc.

On this (accurate) understanding of what Social Security is, maybe it makes sense to ask if we should restrict Social Security benefits to people who are, you know, poor. Surely that would save some money.

In any event though, Social Security means guaranteeing sufficient money for retirees to live in dignity. I think this has to be one of the least objectionable uses of the welfare state. Can it really be that at a time of unprecedent wealth we are incapable of making good on this commitment?

ADDENDUM: Blogger Kevin Drum estimates, based on current projections, that the Social Security “doomsday” is 38 years away, and in 1994 it was estimated to be … 35 years away!

Drum continues:

That’s right: even though ten years have passed, doomsday is now farther away than it was in 1994. As every year goes by, the doomsday schedule moves out another year too. Why? Because the doomsday predictions are extremely sensitive to the economic assumptions behind them, and if those assumptions are off by a little bit, so are the predictions.

In other words, Social Security doom mongering has a pretty checkered past — which means that perhaps the current doom mongering isn’t quite on target either. In fact, maybe Social Security is in perfectly good shape and doesn’t need “rescuing.” The most prudent course might be to wait a few years and find out.