Krugman and Social Security

Krugman had a piece today about privatizing Social Security. I commented, The amnesia of Republicans and Conservatives when it comes to this is actually a high water mark in their ability to forget what is painful and was just plain wrong. Talk to any of them about this and the gobbledegook you'll get from them is actually funny to behold. They have become, as far as I'm concerned, a bunch of joksters, not to be taken seriously for a time, but the damage they will do in holding up bills and obfuscating the forward-looking plans will be, I fear, considerable. Perhaps the Democrats will gather some courage and push back, but from people like Reid, Pelosi and the rest of them, I somehow doubt it. Maybe Obama will fight a battle at some point, but his concilatory stance at this point doesn't seem to lead down that path. The impetus behind pprivatization was, as many have pointed out, the 3% upfront commissions the Goldman Sachs and Bear Stearns would have made, a virtual bonanza of money that probably wouldn't have kept them afloat anyhow, but oh what fun Bush and his cronies would have had, skimming the money off the top.

For those who think government programs are ineffective

Why haven't I seen this mentioned anywhere?

Those Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians who still believe in less government involvement and regulation need to be confronted with how stupid was their push for private Social Security Accounts. If that had happened, more than 55 million people would have lost, at a rough guess, 40% of their benefit payments or the entire Social Security Program would be at grave risk. This points out:

. That government programs, like Social Security, are always badly administered as contrasted with private investment accounts or IRAs

. Investing in the stock market pays huge dividends in comparison to the stupid, badly-run government-administered social programs

. The enormous funds that investment houses, like Bear Stearns (remember them?), would have earned would have sustained them through the current crises

. The resultant revolution by those over 65 would not have serious social consequences in our country.

(Of course I'm being sarcastic by listing these points here.)

But the point is well-taken and no respectable Republican, Conservative or Libertarian would dare to mention privatization of Social Security today. At least until we've all forgotten the trauma that has been on-going as the stock market has tanked and continues to do so. Or, for that matter, letting investment companies alone as good ole Phil Gramm and Rush Limbaugh recommend, without any regulation or over-sight.