Posted by Morbo
If you live in the United States and plan to grow old, you must read Roger Lowenstein’s piece on Social Security in last week’s New York Times Magazine. (Also read the Time magazine piece that Carpetbagger wrote about on Wednesday.)
Lowenstein’s piece is not light reading for the beach. It will take some time and require your full attention. But it’s well worth it. He makes several important points, primarily that the system is not in crisis. He points out facts that to conservatives must seem rude — mainly that since 1935, government actuaries have been doing future projections and crunching the numbers. They do not see a “crisis.”
Yes, Social Security does require a fix. The fix, he points out, could be enacted right now with relatively little pain.
So why all the talk about radical changes to Social Security? Why the constant scare talk out of Bush and the GOP about a “crisis”? As Lowenstein makes clear, it all boils down to ideology.
What makes this article so valuable is that Lowenstein provides historical context. He discusses the options that faced Franklin D. Roosevelt when he first decided to push a guaranteed retirement plan and explains how the country arrived at where we are today — with a highly effective, popular program that has saved millions of elderly people from living out their twilight years in poverty.
That concept, Lowenstein notes, has always had opponents. In 1935, some Republicans screamed that the plan was socialism. They’ve kept up that drumbeat ever since. He notes that throughout the 1970s, Ronald Reagan attacked Social Security as a “sure loser” of a program. Amazingly, after 60 years of Social Security success, the right wing is still singing this same tired tune.
An understanding of this historical context is extremely important. Progressives need to understand what they are up against. “Reforming” Social Security isn’t something that just popped into Bush’s head one day. Rather, his scheme is part of a long-running attack on that system that has been under way since it was created.
Too many progressives forget or refuse to believe that for most “Beltway” conservatives, ideology trumps everything — including facts, real-world experience and common sense. The more honest ones admit this to Lowenstein. They essentially say that it does not matter that Social Security works, it does not matter that it has enabled millions to live with dignity and it does not matter that Americans support it. The program must be scrapped because it’s a Big Government Program and Big Government Programs are always bad. How do we know Big Government Programs are always bad? Ayn Rand said they were. Conservatives believe it. End of discussion.
You see, conservatives believe in “personal responsibility.” Social Security makes you lazy because it discourages you from saving for your own retirement. How you are supposed to save for your own retirement when you are a middle-class person with a mortgage, a family and utility bills that keep shooting upward thanks to deregulation has yet to be explained. (And oh, by the way, while you’re saving for your retirement, be sure to save for your kids’ college education because paying for someone to go to college is a Big Government Program, and we can’t have that. And save some money for medical expenses if you’re one of the 44 million uninsured because providing health care is a Big Government Program too. And save money in case you have to go into a nursing home when you’re old. And put away some in case you lose your job. And some for a rainy day. And maybe some more, just because it’s a good idea.)
Lowenstein’s article is also valuable because he makes it clear, in a nice way, that certain individuals and interest groups should no longer be listened to when they talk about Social Security, as everything they say is made up and a lie. One of these groups is the Cato Institute. You know the claim that even during its worst 20 years, the stock market managed returns of more than 3 percent? This has become an article of faith among the every right-wing columnist in America. It comes from Cato, and it is a big, fat lie.
Why the lies? Well, the Cato Institute hates all Big Government Programs and lies about them in the hope that people will believe these lies, become alarmed and stop supporting government programs. Lowenstein provides facts that unmask these lies, without ever being so impolite as to call these distortions what they really are: outrageous, filthy and disgusting lies.
Some liberals have called the Bush/GOP attack on Social Security an effort to roll back the New Deal. It’s more than that. The attack on Social Security is nothing else but an attack on the very idea that government has a role to play in the life of the average citizen. It is an attack on the very idea that government has a duty and an obligation to protect people from the ravages of the free market by providing a social safety net. It is an attack on what ought by now to be an inviolate concept — one brilliantly articulated by FDR in defending his vision of a modern state that does more than simply help the rich get richer: freedom from want, freedom from fear.
The Bush/GOP attack on Social Security is this: It is an attack on all that is good, decent and right about this country. It is an attack on your grandmother, on your mom, your dad, on you, your siblings, your spouse or life partner and on your kids (born or unborn) — and by extension your pets. It is downright vile, un-American and sickening, and it’s time someone came out and said that straightforward, straight-up, loudly and without apology.
That felt good.
Stop reading this blog and go read Lowenstein’s article. Right now. But don’t stop there. Once you’ve finished, get off your rear and defend Social Security from these creeps spewing forth from the Heritage Foundation waving high their copies of Atlas Shrugged.
Arm yourself with the truth. Remember, the creeps lie and play dirty.