|
To give you one example. Social Security.
We all know Social Security will be gone by the time people in their 20's retire. Too bad we are all wrong. Social Security, even under the most pessimitic senarios, will pay no less than 70% of what it promises. Would that be great? No. Is it people getting no money? No. But it gets more dishonest than that.
When these projections are made, there are three sets of assumptions being used. One is pessimistic, one is middle and one is optimistic. They usually use the middle numbers for their projections but then use the optimistic ones for their stock projections. It matters a great deal which numbers are used. To see that here is an example. Say you have a $1000 that you want to invest. One pays 2%, one 3% and one 4%. You invest for 20 years. The first investment pays $1485.95. The second $1806.11. The third invest pays $2191.12. They are projecting over a period of 50 or more years. Even at 20 years a small change in assumptions makes a huge difference. In reality the numbers they use assume the economy will grow at a smaller rate than it has since the 1930's. But when they look at the stocks they use the average rate of return since the 1930's. The stock market totally tanked during the last time growth was so slow.
In short they are using flawed assumptions, even if their assumptions were true they over state the damage to Social Security, and they use a different, better set of assumptions for their alternative. Yet, they have managed to convince the young that Social Security is a mirage that won't be their when they get old. We can't win the debate if we let lies control it.
|