You are on an individual archive page

Click here to return to the main page


Wikipedia does good things. Reward them.

The Daily Links Page
Got a link to submit?
  • New Evidence Proves First Flag Made By Betsy Ross Actually Shirt For Gay Friend
  • Colbert Leads Huntsman in S.C.
  • Polish prosecutor 'shoots self after news conference'
  • Jim Rome leaving ESPN. Bonus: Footage of Jim Rome getting attacked by Jim Everett & crying like a baby
  • Broncos, Tim Tebow stun Steelers in OT, win 29-23 in NFL playoffs
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Video: Remember 2008
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop faces weapon and drug charges
  • Video: Green Bay anchorman loves lamp
  • Video: Rodgers & Raji in the new Discount Double Check ad
  • Jim Rome: out of The Jungle and onto the (horse) farm
  • New IL Law Requires Photo ID To Buy Drain Cleaner
  • Fawn Cuddles Kitten, Hearts Explode
  • The priest who changed the course of history for the worse... by rescuing four-year-old Hitler from drowning in icy river
  • Get Fit or Get Fined: Web Service Offers to Charge You for Skipping the Gym
  • Fine proposed for botching US national anthem
  • Why Best Buy is Going out of Business...Gradually
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Edina boutique takes heat for trashing $4,000-plus gowns
  • Law Student Goes 'Homeless by Choice' Touts Value of Gym Club Membership
  • VIDEO: Snoop Dogg on 'The Price Is Right'
  • Flynn and Out
       [ 3 comments ]
  • Don't put Bielema on the firing line
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Your end of the season Vikings comment thread
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Mass. budget motel fights forfeiture by feds
  • Vikings scrutinize downtown Mpls. stadium site near basilica
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Kelly Clarkson criticized on Twitter after singer endorses Ron Paul for President 
  • Political Predictions for 2012
  • We're All Doing The Best We Can
  • Video Of Little Girl Getting Pissed Off About Pink Toys Will Make Your Heart Swell
  • The 10 best sports-related Hitler Reactions of 2011
  • Happy Endings on the housing crisis
  • Why You Just Got New York Times Spam
  • There Will Be No Friday This Week In Samoa
  • The Most Hipster State In The US
  • Online Merchants Home in on Imbibing Consumers
       [ 1 comment ]
  • On islamic fashion
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Sears as Lampert's 'Mismanaged Asset' Loses Customers to Macy's
       [ 1 comment ]
  • 5 social network predictions for 2012
  • Cheetah, chimp star of classic Tarzan movies, dies at 80
  • The Hottest Things on TV in 2011
  • Beer in cans: It's not just for Bud anymore
  • Seven Packers earn Pro Bowl selections
  • The Worst Angry Christmas Tweets In the World
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Minnesota cities try to hold back on rented housing
  • Why Iowa Shouldn't Vote First Anymore
  • Some Falcons Players Upset Drew Brees Went For The Record Last Night
  • We've Identified Jilted Packergirl
  • With its 'W' initiative, ESPN tries to solve the equation of serving women sports fans
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Owner surprised to find cat regularly catches bus
  • Charles Barkley: Skip Bayless Has Surpassed Peter Vecsey As The Biggest Jackass In The History Of Journalism
  • Handicapping the 2011 NFL MVP Race, 2.0

     

  • Glamour Weighs in on Social Security Reform

       May 09, 2005

    While I'm not a total girly girl, I do read a couple of women's magazines. Now normally you can't count on these magazines for much more than the latest variation on the "12 things men really want you to do in bed" (hint-it's always the same thing) or "150 great looks that won't make your butt look big - all under $50!!", but I noticed that my latest issue of Glamour has an article on Social Security reform.

    Glamour, under the totally non-scary headline of "Will you die broke?", helpfully tries to explain "what women could lose" under the Bush Social Security plan. The article points readers to the Center for Economic and Policy Research's Accurate Benefits Calculator so each and every Glamour girl can see how she'll be screwed by the proposed reforms.

    Being the skeptic that I am, I checked out the site. The first thing I noticed was that the site simply calculated the difference between what you'd receive per month if Social Security carried on as normal in perpetuity vs. what you'd receive with a 25% benefit cut with no private account and then what you'd receive under the Bush plan with a private account. And, according to the calculator, I must really suck as an investor, because my benefits would be less if I had a private account than if I went with the Bush plan but had no private account at all.

    The Glamour editors seem to think this is a great public service, rather than the complete b.s. that it is. Two quick things I noticed:

    1. The calculator assumes that the rate of return on your private account would be 4.35%. The S&P rate of return was 6.8% last year and the forecasts from the Social Security Adminstration that the Bush plan are based on is a rate of return of 6.5%. Now, this nonpartisan group isn't stacking the deck against private accounts or anything, are they?
    2. The calculator is far too simple. You simply put in a single amount that you expect to earn in a typical year. As far as I can see, there's no way to account for earning more and more throughout your career.

    But finally, this calculator misses the whole idea of why Social Security either needs to be reformed or simply go away. It's irresponsible to pretend that younger people today can retire under the same benefits structure that currently exists. That's not an option, unless we're willing to accept higher and higher taxes. The fact is, if we want the same benefits when we retire, we need to be prepared to keep far less of our paychecks over course of our lifetime in the workforce. I won't die broke, but I won't live lavishly in the meantime.

    Or, alternatively, our economy will continue to grow at a healthy pace, we'll all earn more and the government will cut spending on things other than Social Security and will therefore be able to afford to pay the same benefits to the Baby Boomers and beyond. Heh. I crack myself up sometimes.

    In any case, Glamour needs to stick to telling women what the "12 things men want to say to you but don't" are and stay out of the political arena.


    Posted by at May 9, 2005 06:40 PM

        The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/890

     

    Trackback Entries

     


    Comments

    #  May 10th, 2005 9:53 PM      james
    the ssa calculator at SSA.gov calculates the income for a person born in 1982 and retiring at 65 at $1239.00.

    this site's calculator puts it at $1890.91.

    "accurate" my ass.  
     

     

     


      page rendered in 0.0582 seconds | ©2004, 2005 Dummocrats.com