5 ms·

I believe this was one of the reasons for George W. Bush's push for privatizing part of social security.

by cgy1 9y ago

Jtsummers 9y ago
Privatizing it still doesn't address any of the systemic issues regarding ageism, classism, sexism, racism which have impacts on longevity. This argument is fundamentally absurd. It's like saying that public schools in predominantly rich, white districts are better than schools in predominantly poor, black districts so we should get rid of all public schools because poor blacks get a poor education so it's racist. No, we should address the problem of the schools and opportunities themselves, not eliminate it (though that may still be part of the solution). Here, with pensions, they serve a need. Eliminating them will actually hurt the poor, and minorities, more despite the discrepancies in payouts. The focus should be, why do they have worse life expectancies and what, if anything, can be done to address that. Why do they have worse savings rates so what can be done to increase their savings rates, or increase their wages so they're more able to save.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  It's unfashionable to recognize it publicly, but there really are minor physiological differences between different races. Race is a dumb word, but people with DNA from different regions will be susceptible to different types of problems. And doctors who aren't racist at all will provide different medical care based on these things because of what tends to work best for different groups. Hell, we even know red heads need more anesthesia, and that's just a hair color, not even a race. Even correcting for income, education, and all that blacks and hispanics have a lower lifespan than whites and Asians. Additionally, women live longer than men.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Even correcting for income, education, and all that blacks and hispanics have a lower lifespan than whites and Asians. Hispanics in the US (which even those who believe race is a real thing consider an ethnicity that crosses racial lines, not a race) have longer life expectancy than non-Hispanic Whites. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6335a8.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6335a8.htm
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      Thank you for the correction on hispanics and life expectancy, but it doesn't change the racist nature of the system just because one of the groups that would benefit the most might happen to be a minority.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    I believe this point is valid, but I'm unsure how to relate it to the discussion at hand. That said, while it's true there are differences in different genetic ethnicities and in different sexes, that we choose to downplay these currently is probably mostly for the best. Until there is much more acceptance for the idea that we're all actually much more similar than we are different, and that natural variability based on specific, non-racial genes and upbringing overwhelms most group differences, promoting the idea that we are all the same is probably the most beneficial path. The alternative is that these small differences get blown far out of proportion and are used as explanations and excused in inappropriate ways.
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      The difference is significant. On average a white woman out-lives a black man by 10 years. That's a lot of wealth redistribution. The SS retirement age is surely intended to correlate to something akin to stage of life, ability to perform labor, etc. There have to be better ways to do this than simply drawing a line in the sand that applies to every group. One of the many ways this could be done, and I only mention it for its relative simplicity, would be to privatize and switch to a defined contribution system rather than a defined benefit system. This has other problems, of course, but it would at least allow a person to pass on whatever they accumulated to their children, even if they didn't get to use it themselves.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > On average a white woman out-lives a black man by 10 years. Most of the difference in life expectancy at birth is because black men are particularly likely to die as children or in young adulthood without having paid much, if anything, into Social Security. At age 65, the difference in life expectancy between black men and white women is about 4 years, and it's about 3 years between black men and black women. And about 2 years between black men and white men. The main redistribution is that between men and women, regardless of race. There's a smaller racial redistribution effect. > it for its relative simplicity, would be to privatize and switch to a defined contribution system rather than a defined benefit system. This has other problems, of course, but it would at least allow a person to pass on whatever they accumulated to their children, even if they didn't get to use it themselves. It would be a far simpler change to simply make survivor benefits for dependents of a worker who dies early more generous (and on a sliding scale depending on how early they die),though if you do that without decreasing baseline benefits you need to do it at the same time as a revenue enhancement like uncapping taxed income and expanding beyond labor income (perhaps with additional bend points, though the existing bend point system may be enough that you don't need that.)
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  >Privatizing it still doesn't address any of the systemic issues regarding ageism, classism, sexism, racism which have impacts on longevity. There are potentially many solutions to this problem, but privatization would be a huge step forward compared to the current system. At least with privatization you could pass on your accumulated wealth to your children, even if you didn't get to enjoy it yourself.
  - Jtsummers 9y ago
    That certainly would be a benefit, but that changes it from a traditional pension to a retirement savings/investing account. Traditional pensions are typically not inheritable (except, potentially, by a spouse) and, also typically, offer guarantees on payout. You will get $3000/month. A retirement savings/investment account can make no such guarantees.

I believe this was one of the reasons for George W. Bush's push for privatizing part of social security.

by cgy1 9y ago

I believe this was one of the reasons for George W. Bush's push for privatizing part of social security.

Privatizing it still doesn't address any of the systemic issues regarding ageism, classism, sexism, racism which have impacts on longevity. This argument is fundamentally absurd. It's like saying that public schools in predominantly rich, white districts are better than schools in predominantly poor, black districts so we should get rid of all public schools because poor blacks get a poor education so it's racist. No, we should address the problem of the schools and opportunities themselves, not eliminate it (though that may still be part of the solution). Here, with pensions, they serve a need. Eliminating them will actually hurt the poor, and minorities, more despite the discrepancies in payouts. The focus should be, why do they have worse life expectancies and what, if anything, can be done to address that. Why do they have worse savings rates so what can be done to increase their savings rates, or increase their wages so they're more able to save.

Consultant32452 9y ago
It's unfashionable to recognize it publicly, but there really are minor physiological differences between different races. Race is a dumb word, but people with DNA from different regions will be susceptible to different types of problems. And doctors who aren't racist at all will provide different medical care based on these things because of what tends to work best for different groups. Hell, we even know red heads need more anesthesia, and that's just a hair color, not even a race. Even correcting for income, education, and all that blacks and hispanics have a lower lifespan than whites and Asians. Additionally, women live longer than men.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Even correcting for income, education, and all that blacks and hispanics have a lower lifespan than whites and Asians. Hispanics in the US (which even those who believe race is a real thing consider an ethnicity that crosses racial lines, not a race) have longer life expectancy than non-Hispanic Whites. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6335a8.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6335a8.htm
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    Thank you for the correction on hispanics and life expectancy, but it doesn't change the racist nature of the system just because one of the groups that would benefit the most might happen to be a minority.
- kbenson 9y ago
  I believe this point is valid, but I'm unsure how to relate it to the discussion at hand. That said, while it's true there are differences in different genetic ethnicities and in different sexes, that we choose to downplay these currently is probably mostly for the best. Until there is much more acceptance for the idea that we're all actually much more similar than we are different, and that natural variability based on specific, non-racial genes and upbringing overwhelms most group differences, promoting the idea that we are all the same is probably the most beneficial path. The alternative is that these small differences get blown far out of proportion and are used as explanations and excused in inappropriate ways.
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    The difference is significant. On average a white woman out-lives a black man by 10 years. That's a lot of wealth redistribution. The SS retirement age is surely intended to correlate to something akin to stage of life, ability to perform labor, etc. There have to be better ways to do this than simply drawing a line in the sand that applies to every group. One of the many ways this could be done, and I only mention it for its relative simplicity, would be to privatize and switch to a defined contribution system rather than a defined benefit system. This has other problems, of course, but it would at least allow a person to pass on whatever they accumulated to their children, even if they didn't get to use it themselves.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > On average a white woman out-lives a black man by 10 years. Most of the difference in life expectancy at birth is because black men are particularly likely to die as children or in young adulthood without having paid much, if anything, into Social Security. At age 65, the difference in life expectancy between black men and white women is about 4 years, and it's about 3 years between black men and black women. And about 2 years between black men and white men. The main redistribution is that between men and women, regardless of race. There's a smaller racial redistribution effect. > it for its relative simplicity, would be to privatize and switch to a defined contribution system rather than a defined benefit system. This has other problems, of course, but it would at least allow a person to pass on whatever they accumulated to their children, even if they didn't get to use it themselves. It would be a far simpler change to simply make survivor benefits for dependents of a worker who dies early more generous (and on a sliding scale depending on how early they die),though if you do that without decreasing baseline benefits you need to do it at the same time as a revenue enhancement like uncapping taxed income and expanding beyond labor income (perhaps with additional bend points, though the existing bend point system may be enough that you don't need that.)
Consultant32452 9y ago
>Privatizing it still doesn't address any of the systemic issues regarding ageism, classism, sexism, racism which have impacts on longevity. There are potentially many solutions to this problem, but privatization would be a huge step forward compared to the current system. At least with privatization you could pass on your accumulated wealth to your children, even if you didn't get to enjoy it yourself.
- Jtsummers 9y ago
  That certainly would be a benefit, but that changes it from a traditional pension to a retirement savings/investing account. Traditional pensions are typically not inheritable (except, potentially, by a spouse) and, also typically, offer guarantees on payout. You will get $3000/month. A retirement savings/investment account can make no such guarantees.