Reform vs Head Fake
Paul Krugman reminds us that the health bill isn’t bad. Anything is better than nothing, probably. If we fail to pass any reforms now, our next chance could be another 10-15 years in the future. Even if it means letting Joe Lieberman have his way every time he throws a tantrum (I still love John Stewart’s characterization of Lieberman as the kid who would hold his breath every time he didn’t get his way).
He also reminds us that not too long ago there was a probability that Social Security reform was going to be pushed thru by the W juggernaut. Thank gawd it failed.
One thing not often mentioned in the noise of social security reform is that anything which privatizes pensions or savings away from cash and annuities and bond trusts and into stocks and defined contributions is inherently a giveaway to the wealthiest in society. It’s purpose is not to “give the people control over their savings,” as privatizers suggest. It’s purpose is to inject capital into businesses and enhance stock valuations - capital which is currently being spent by the government (note that Social Security funds are not saved - we have a consolidated budget which spends the funds as if they were any other tax and replaces them with bond debt).
This is why I don’t feel comfortable with the 401(k) either: it’s a way to divert money that should be taxable into a tax-free vehicle for recapitalizing public corporations.
So between the choice of fake savings that are spent on government programs and fake savings that pump up the net worth of wealthy businessmen, I opt for the one that helps those who least need it, least. You?
Posted: December 22nd, 2009 under Deficit Spending, Disinvestments.
Write a comment
Attention Spammers: All comments are moderated and will not appear until approved!
Please don't waste your time and mine by posting here if you aren't making a tangible contribution to the post (or to civilization, for that matter).
