I see another paper is willing to use the l word against Bush.

Dan and other looking into details might want to read this.

Editorial: Social Security/Blacks get more, not less, from it

http://www.startribune.com/stories/561/5187689.html

Of all the lies -- let's call them by their right name -- that the
Bush administration is spreading about Social Security, none is as
vile as the canard Bush repeated last Tuesday, when he said,
"African-American males die sooner than other males do, which means
the [Social Security] system is inherently unfair to a certain group
of people. And that needs to be fixed." That is an entirely phony
assertion; it has been debunked by the Social Security Administration,
by the Government Accountability Office and by other experts. Bush and
those around him know that. For them to repeat what they know to be a
blatant lie is despicable fear-mongering.

Bush didn't make up this phony line on his own; it comes from the
Heritage Foundation, which a number of years ago did a study
purporting to show that because African-Americans have a shorter life
expectancy than whites, they get less in return for the taxes they pay
into the Social Security system.

But when the Heritage study was examined by actuaries at the Social
Security Administration and by the Government Accountability Office,
serious methodological flaws and numerous bad assumptions were
uncovered. For example:

â Heritage failed to factor in the progressivity of Social Security
benefits; on a taxes-paid to benefits-received ratio, those with lower
incomes get more back. Blacks tend to earn less than whites, and thus
their Social Security benefits are larger in comparison to taxes they
pay.

â Social Security is more than retirement benefits. It also includes
survivor and disability benefits. Blacks benefit disproportionately
from those programs. While blacks are 11 percent of the workforce, for
example, they are 18 percent of those receiving disability benefits.
Almost half the blacks receiving Social Security -- 47 percent -- are
getting disability benefits or survivor benefits.

The Social Security actuaries found that Heritage had exaggerated
substantially the amount blacks pay in Social Security taxes and
low-balled the benefits they receive. "In fact," the actuaries said,
"results from more careful research reflecting actual work histories
for workers by race indicate that the non-white population actually
enjoys the same or better expected rates of return from Social
Security than for the white population."

The GAO reached the same conclusion. It said that, "In the aggregate,
blacks and Hispanics have higher disability rates and lower lifetime
earnings, and thus receive greater benefits relative to taxes [paid]
than whites."

While Bush didn't mention Hispanics, he probably will, as Heritage
did, with similarly misleading results. Both the GAO and Social
Security actuaries found Hispanics, too, in the aggregate, benefit
more than whites from the Social Security system. Hispanics actually
live longer than whites, and thus the mechanism that links their
future benefits to inflation (which the Bush administration wants to
undo) is particularly important. Currently, as Hispanics grow older,
Social Security makes up a more and more important element of their
income.

Social Security is a complex program, so it's easy to tell outright
lies or make misleading statements about it with little fear of
contradiction from the general public. All Americans should be on
notice that the Bush administration, in its drive to start dismantling
Social Security, isn't telling the truth on several fronts.

The system is not in crisis; it has money to last for about the next
half century, and even then, if nothing is done the required benefit
cuts would still leave retirees better off than those getting benefits
today. Pay close attention to this debate, and don't get snookered.
The crisis in Social Security is no more real than the "crisis" that
led the United States to war in Iraq.

(I am also coming around to the view that Social Security is simply
where Bush intends to default first.  He has so mismanaged the economy
government defaults are inevitable and he will derive a partisan
satisfaction any may postpone further defaults by making Social
Security his first fall guy.)

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

Reply via email to