Political discussion thread

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 Padraic wrote:

 JJLehto wrote:

^ How about this?

A statement by economist Paul Krugman 

[T]here is a long-run financing problem. But it's a problem of modest
size. The [CBO] report finds that extending the life of the trust fund
into the 22nd century, with no change in benefits, would require
additional revenues equal to only 0.54 percent of G.D.P. That's less than 3 percent of federal spending — less than we're currently spending in Iraq.
And it's only about one-quarter of the revenue lost each year because
of President Bush's tax cuts — roughly equal to the fraction of those
cuts that goes to people with incomes over $500,000 a year. Given these
numbers, it's not at all hard to come up with fiscal packages that
would secure the retirement program, with no major changes, for
generations to come.

0.54% of GDP is about 74b - I'm actually surprised that would make that much of a difference.

Also, as far as taking it into the 22nd century (taken from SSA Trustees Report):

"The projected cost outlook for Social Security and Medicare is somewhat worse than described in 
last year’s report. In 2008, the combined cost of the Social Security and Medicare programs represented 
about 7.6 percent of GDP. Social Security outgo amounted to 4.4 percent of GDP in 2008 and is projected 
to increase to 5.9 percent of GDP in 2083. Medicare’s cost was smaller in 2008—3.2 percent of 
GDP—but is projected to surpass the cost of Social Security in 2028, growing to 11.4 percent of 
GDP in 2083, when it would be 94 percent larger than Social Security’s cost. In 2083, the combined cost 
of the programs would represent 17.2 percent of GDP. As a point of comparison, in 2008 total Federal 
receipts amounted to 17.3 percent of GDP.
"

It would seem to me that a modest tax increase would as I surmise alleviate the problem in the short term (even several decades), but not change the overall crisis scenario highlighted above.  But I guess we'll all be dead in 2083, so whatever.  

Fair enough. However, he also commented that was less than we are spending in Iraq. 
So, wouldn't the modest tax increase, coupled with a scale back in defense spending be enough to sustain it? if not forever, at least for a very long time. Ideally a solution could be reached in over 100 years....
OR North Korea and Iran will team up and fix the problem for us!!