Tag: The Nation

Categories
Accountability national politics & policies responsibility

Assuming the Fix

caution, danger, debt, social security, collage, photomontage, illustration, JGill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

Social Security, like similar systems in Europe, is on a trajectory to insolvency, which could lead to a sovereign debt crisis.

The reason for the crisis? Social Security has always been a pay-as-we-go system, dependent on many workers paying in to a system that sends their contributions to a smaller number of retirees. When the number of retirees expands above the ability of workers to cover at established rates, the system goes broke. Meanwhile, all the system’s budget overages from the beginning to the present date have not been saved and invested. Congress has been taking the overages and spending them, putting IOUs in a notebook.

It is a serious problem.

Or, it isn’t! That is, not if you believe The Nation, which states in a recent article that this is all the result of a legally mandated “bogus” accounting conceit. The Congressional Budget Office, you see,

assumes that Social Security and Medicare Part A will draw on the general fund of the US Treasury to cover benefit shortfalls following the depletion of their trust funds, which at the current rate will occur in 2034.
That would obviously lead to an exploding debt, but it’s a scenario prohibited by law.

The Nation’s somewhat confused author suggests the dire warnings are wrong because “Congress could preemptively pass laws to avert the situation before the deadline; it could take the approach favored by progressives and increase revenue to the programs by lifting the payroll tax cap, or alternatively raise the retirement age and lower benefits.”

Well, yes. But until a fix happens, the doomsday warning stands.

Why does he think we make the warning?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

caution, danger, debt, social security, collage, photomontage, illustration, JGill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

 

Categories
folly general freedom too much government

Under the Law, Not Beneath It

Magna Carta Nation

Celebrating the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta Libertatum this week, I noted how a document intended to serve the very upper classes, by limiting each others’ powers, led to liberty for all.

The Nation, on the other hand, used it to excoriate the Citizens United ruling.

“Magna Carta reminds us that no man is above the law,” wrote John Nichols on Monday. “But it should not be imagined that Magna Carta established democracy, or anything akin to it.”

Of course the Magna Carta did not establish democracy. No one said it did. And neither Britain nor America has pure democracy, if you define it . . . in Nichols fashion. What is he driving at?

If we respect the notion that the rule of law must apply to all . . . then surely it must apply to corporations.

And, surely, the best celebration of those premises in the United States must be the extension of the movement to amend the US Constitution to declare that corporations are not people, money is not speech, and citizens and their elected representatives have the authority to organize elections — and systems of governance — where our votes matter more than their dollars.

Sure, Mr. Nichols, corporations shouldn’t be above the law. But they shouldn’t be below it, either. And in America we have rights to free speech and press. Those rights “surely . . . must apply to corporations.”

Let’s increase the liberating powers of democracy: open up ballot access, de-privilege incumbents, count votes in a non-mere-plurality-wins fashion.

But let’s not throw out equal rights under the law, even in the name of democracy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Magna Carta Nation

 

Categories
free trade & free markets

Pot, Kettle; Walmart, The Nation

Writing about Walmart is like reading The Nation: neither is as much fun as shopping at Walmart.

At Walmart I get good deals. In The Nation I get skewed analysis. Just look at the old progressive rag’s online “petition” to Walmart:

While Walmart rakes in annual profits of more than one billion dollars, the average hourly wage of a Walmart sales associate . . . is just $8.81. That translates to an annual salary . . . far below the federal poverty level for a family of four.

On top of being unjust, Walmart’s low wages come at a high price for American taxpayers: a recent report revealed that, because the retail giant’s employees are forced to utilize government benefits to supplement their meager income, a single Walmart Supercenter could cost taxpayers from $900,000 to $1.7 million per year.

Typical: there’s so much left out.

What would Walmart workers’ wages be if Walmart hadn’t employed them? More? Not plausible. Walmart’s mom-and-pop competition typically pay lower wages.

Net effect: Walmart lifts workers out of poverty.

Whose responsibility is it to feed “a family of four”? The employer of one family member? No. The parents in the family, who might be morally compelled to develop more lucrative skills or a plan for abstinence. (Of course, many Walmart workers are single, or have spouses or parents who work as well.)

Recently, a Walmart bigwig got a bit testy and sent out an email noting that The Nation has been paying its interns a monthly stipend of $150 per week, far below the minimum wage.

Normally I’d defend The Nation’s (and the nation’s) internship policies. But for now let’s just chuckle.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.