General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Stop it, stop saying Social Security needs reform, you are a Democrat, right? [View all]HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)2086 is full of shit.
Ergo, the long-term projection is mostly bullshit and the main reason it exists is to set up strictures that will allow the privatizers to pressure the public and herd people into their desired solutions.
Current retirees are always supported by current production. (As is everyone). If SS can't support retirees, then nothing can, because if it can't support them that can only mean one of two things:
1. The US is not producing enough goods and services to feed shelter and clothe all its people, or
2. Some fractions of the US population are taking too much.
I do know, however, that the average UE rate during the period from 1970 to the present has been about 6% and we produced $3 billion in Social Security surpluses.
And finally I'll say that we have a reasonable amount of control over what they unemployment rate actually is. For example:
Greenspan, who is not an orthodox economist, decided to let the unemployment rate fall below the 6.0 percent target because he saw no evidence of inflation. He had to argue with the Clinton appointees to the Fed who wanted to raise interest rates to head off inflation. It was really due to Greenspan's policies that the unemployment rate was allowed to fall to 5.0 percent and eventually to 4.0 percent as a year-round average in 2000. This allowed millions of people to work who would not have otherwise had a job. The tight labor market also allowed for large gains in real wages for workers at the middle and bottom of the wage distribution for the first time in a quarter century. Oh, and for the DC policy wonks, it also gave us a budget surplus.
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/beat-the-press/Page-2