Republicans have shown some consistency on issues of economic and fiscal policy. These may be of consequence to our listeners at the NABWMT. Republicans seem exceptionally explicit in calling for an increase in the age at which Americans become eligible for Social Security — a bad idea that seems to be experiencing a revival.
But Social Security actual numbers don’t justify the apocalyptic rhetoric one often hears, not just from the right but from self-proclaimed centrists who want to sound serious. No, the exhaustion of the system’s trust fund, currently projected to occur in roughly a decade, wouldn’t mean that benefits disappear.
It would mean that the system would need additional revenue to continue paying scheduled benefits in full. But the extra revenue required would be smaller than you probably think. The most recent long-term projections from the Congressional Budget Office show Social Security outlays rising to 6.2 percent of gross domestic product in 2053 from 5.1 percent this year, not exactly an earth-shattering increase.
It’s true that the budget office projects a much bigger rise in spending on Medicare and other major health programs. But much of this projected rise reflects the assumption that medical costs will rise much faster than economic growth, which has been true in the past but need not be true in the future.
Indeed, since 2010, Medicare spending has been far less than expected. And there is every reason to believe that smart policies could further curb health care costs, given how much more America spends than other wealthy nations.
Still, Social Security does face a funding gap. How should it be closed?
Anyone who says that the retirement age should rise in line with increasing life expectancy is being oblivious, perhaps willfully, to the grim inequality of modern America.
Until Covid struck, average life expectancy at 65, the relevant number, was indeed rising. But these gains were concentrated among Americans with relatively high incomes. Less affluent Americans — those who depend most on Social Security — have seen little rise in life expectancy, and in some cases actual declines.
So anyone invoking rising life expectancy as a reason to delay Social Security benefits is, in effect, saying that aging janitors must keep working (or be cast into extreme poverty) because bankers are living longer.
The obvious answer — which happens to be favored by a majority of voters — is to raise more revenue. Remember, America collects less revenue as a percentage of G.D.P. than almost any other advanced economy.
But many Republicans want to cut income taxes. On fiscal and economic policy, many are in favor of tax cuts for the rich and benefit cuts for the working class.
70 percent of Americans — including 54 percent of Republicans — support raising taxes on families making more than 10 million dollars a year.
The myth is when taxes on the rich are cut, they invest more and everyone benefits; when taxes on the rich are increased, economic growth slows.
This is “trickle-down economicsTrump, George W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan all cut taxes on the rich, and nothing trickled down. And America’s largest corporations cut more jobs than they created. They used their tax savings largely to increase their stock prices by buying back their own shares of stock — enriching executives and wealthy investors but providing no real benefit to the economy.
So, when they come after your Social Security, don’t believe the hype that we are in a disaster .and vote for your values and those at the margins