Krugman asks why media allows GOP lies about Social Security w/o blasting

[papau]

the comment as a lie.

What Krug calls long term "62 yr +" is "intergenerational" in other GOP reports.

"After Alan Greenspan's call for cuts in Social Security benefits, Republican members of Congress declared that the answer is to create private retirement accounts. It's amazing that they are still peddling this snake oil; it's even more amazing that journalists continue to let them get away with it. Yesterday in The Wall Street Journal, a writer judiciously declared that "personal accounts alone won't cure Social Security's ills." I guess that's true; similarly, eating doughnuts alone won't cause you to lose weight. Why is it so hard to say clearly that privatization would worsen, not improve, Social Security's finances?

Should we consider modest reforms that reduce the expenses or widen the revenue base of Social Security? Sure. But beware of those who claim that we must destroy the system in order to save it."


E-mail: [email protected]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/opinion/05KRUG.html?hp

[dennis4868]

1. The same reason...

the media allows Bush to get away with everything else....the media is sponsoring this presidency!

[otohara]

2. True, True

sickening to watch and listen to blatant tie-in to White House.

[ramapo]

3. Big Republican Lie

Social Security (not Medicaid) has been properly funded and has collected enough money to pay anticipated benefits for something like the next 40 years.

The problem is that the trust fund has been looted in order to give the rich their tax cuts. There is no money in the fund, just IOUs from the general revenue side of the govt that will have to be paid back by, you guessed it, me and you.

Whatever happened to the lockbox?