----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: ABC Muddles the Social Security Debate]

> > Thus, the baby boomer population bulge does matter.
>
> Yes, but is suspect the real nature of the "crisis" is the GOP not
> being able to even consider more upper-income tax cuts soon and even
> requiring those cuts to be rolled back and the SS wage cap raised.

While I am suspect of the figures coming out of the White House, I'm also
very keen on obtaining my own good understanding.  It's important to know
that the demographic shift is a world wide problem that needs addressing.
As Gautam said a couple of years ago, the US is one of the few countries
(with GB and Australia) that is in decent position to address this.  I have
written that this can be addressed with fairly modest cuts in the increase
in the real social security.  Erik has argued that a floor needs to be
provided by SS.

In short, Gary, while I agree with you that Erik can be more tactful in
expressing his viewpoint, I also see some things from Erik's point of view
(or at least I think I do...Erik is obviously free to correct me here).
Both Erik and I are very interested in what the facts are.  I think he has
done more legwork than me, but I've done at least some analysis to try to
understand things.  I try hard to lay out my assumptions, so someone can
correct them, when I was questioning the 80%+ marginal net tax rate.  I'd
bet a beer that this figure involves some funny math, that in a practical
sense the marginal tax rate is not close to this high between 20k/year and
40k/year, but I am more interested in seeing the actual facts than winning
this bet. So, I am grateful to Erik for the work he promises to do.

In short, I see this discussion as an opportunity for a group effort at
self-education between a number of folks.  I appreciate Erik's work in
helping me develop my understanding.  I'm pretty sure he also appreciate my
desire to get at what's really going on...and the bit of leg work that I've
done.  Even though we may end up with different opinions on what the best
course of action is, I feel that we can help each other learn.

I think you could help too.  I interpret Erik's post as criticism that you
are not adding to our basis for understanding...that your posts contain
more partisan rhetoric and reference to partisan websites than analysis
that advances our common understanding.  I'll have to say that I think
there may be some basis for this....even when I tend to agree with you on a
point, I don't see your posts advancing those points in an analytical
sense.

Your reference to your work indicates that you can provide useful thought
on this issue. I would find that helpful. Obviously this is a YMMV issue,
not everyone wishes to take a busman's holiday and do analysis on a mailing
list.  If you just enjoy making rhetorical points, then that's OK....I
just, from a selfish perspective, want to learn things from you.  I'm
guessing that Erik would actually be very happy if, by reading your posts,
he learned something. So, as a result, Erik may bluntly tell you he sees no
use in your posts and I may try to push you into giving me some
information.  For example, I think that, by running just a few numbers, you
could have strengthened this post so that it had a good deal of meat on it.
You could even quote Erik to make your point, I think. :-)

Finally, Erik and I don't need to like your posts any more than you need to
like mine.  I appreciate the fact that you haven't been rude in replying to
my posts...so they don't really upset me.  I guess I'm just greedy and want
more.

Dan M.

I hope this post is more informative than rude sounding....that it gives
you a bit more information which you can either choose to ignore or apply.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to