was listening to NPR on the way home today and I heard the following claims:

1) If we look at current expenses, there is no problem with SS.
2) We can "fix" SS by just raising the cap on the payroll tax.
3) SS is run more efficiently than any private investment.


I really loled at the last one. It was awesome

1/3/2011 6:53:16 PM

This was made by hosts?

1/3/2011 6:58:08 PM

You should have immediately disregarded any evidence that was different from your current worldview, oh wait, nevermind, carry on.

1/3/2011 7:01:23 PM

it was stated by a guest, with no attempt by the host to correct the misinformation, despite other shows on NPR that have specifically discussed the first 2 claims The third claim is just plain absurd, and needs little more discussion than "really? really... really?"

^ this isn't about dismissing different opinions. it's about NPR putting absolute propaganda out there as "fact".

1/3/2011 7:07:42 PM

I don't see Rush or Glenn Beck correcting their dumbfuck guests.

1/3/2011 7:19:36 PM

Quote :

"2) We can "fix" SS by just raising the cap on the payroll tax."

I agree with that, to some degree. By raising the cap, you would extend the injustice that is Social Security to all income levels, rather than having the burden fall disproportionately onto the working class.

1/3/2011 7:20:43 PM

Quote :

"it's about NPR putting absolute propaganda out there as "fact"."

Well the first was probably taken out of context and second is true and most likely he had evidence to back it up. The third depends on your definition of "efficiency". Given the option of an annuity identical to the pay in/pay out levels of SS, it would be much more appealing than any other private annuity, mainly due to unwillingness of the government to adjust terms. Additionally a private annuity would be much more likely to not change terms after purchase, unlike SS.

1/3/2011 7:37:03 PM

who said those claims and on what show and were they accepted as fact?

1/3/2011 7:46:52 PM

Let's not compare apples to oranges. If we really want to compare Social Security's efficiency to that of private sector alternatives, we should start by comparing it with Madoff's ponzi scheme. I suspect that Social Security is much more efficient, as the wealth is being extorted from a much larger population.

1/3/2011 7:47:34 PM

Which show was it? The quality of NPR programming varies pretty dramatically especially when you start talking about locally produced news shows.

1/3/2011 7:49:30 PM

aaronburro, arbiter of credibility

1/3/2011 8:36:27 PM

My understanding is that prior to the recent cut in payroll taxes, a mere one percent increase in the tax would have funded Social Security past the baby boomers' retirement.

1/3/2011 8:58:18 PM

^I've been seeing the same thing, or atleast similar






http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/93xx/doc9385/06-17-LTBO_Testimony.pdf

[Edited on January 4, 2011 at 8:38 AM. Reason : healthcare gonna fuck us over tho . . . . . . . . . .]

1/4/2011 8:37:31 AM

We need a "credibility watch thread credibility watch" thread.

1/4/2011 9:43:12 AM

Quote :

"By raising the cap, you would extend the injustice that is Social Security to all income levels, rather than having the burden fall disproportionately onto the working class."

Yes, but by raising the cap, you also raise their benefits, thereby just kicking the can.

Quote :

"Well the first was probably taken out of context"

not at all taken out of context. he said that if we look the current spending vs income, it's only a deficit of .37% of GDP, and a tax on the rich would fill that gap easily.

Quote :

"The third depends on your definition of "efficiency". Given the option of an annuity identical to the pay in/pay out levels of SS, it would be much more appealing than any other private annuity, mainly due to unwillingness of the government to adjust terms. Additionally a private annuity would be much more likely to not change terms after purchase, unlike SS."

So in other words, if you take "efficiency" to mean something other than the actual definition of "efficiency", then it's "efficient."

Quote :

"who said those claims and on what show and were they accepted as fact?"

It was on Talk of the Nation yesterday, and Flatow made no attempt to question the statements. Even further, a caller phoned in to say "it was nice to see some 'fact' being injected into the conversation," again, with no attempt by Flatow to call it anything otherwise.


^^ did you really just post a graph from the CBO talking about financial projections? How did that work for the several times they did it for Medicare? Does the phrase "orders of magnitude" mean anything to you?

Quote :

"My understanding is that prior to the recent cut in payroll taxes, a mere one percent increase in the tax would have funded Social Security past the baby boomers' retirement."

Isn't that what was said about previous payroll tax increases? "Hey, if we raise this tax, we won't have to worry about it again for another 40 years!" So then, in 40 years, it's broke, AGAIN. Ergo, it's NOT a functionally sound system. That's like saying that a Ponzi scheme can work as long as the schemer keeps raising his request for money by a small amount. We know it not the be the case!

1/4/2011 7:11:56 PM

Quote :

"Yes, but by raising the cap, you also raise their benefits, thereby just kicking the can."

I say give them the same amount that they would get if the cap was still in place. The money is being straight up stolen from me, so I really don't give a damn about being "fair" to the older generations.

1/4/2011 7:18:29 PM

2) This is true. Especially if you means test payments

3) I can't recall any articles dealing specifically with social security, but it's a given when it comes to overhead in Medicare v. overhead in private insurance. It makes sense that this would also apply to SS v. a private annuity. Or shoot, if by "efficiently" you mean revenue / payout, it probably is more efficient than any private investment, period. Certainly not higher yielding, but that claim wasn't made.

1/4/2011 9:57:19 PM

Quote :

"we should start by comparing it with Madoff's ponzi scheme"

It is much more like a private annuity than a ponzi scheme, but I'm pretty sure you don't know what either is.

Quote :

"Yes, but by raising the cap, you also raise their benefits, thereby just kicking the can."

It's slightly more complicated than that. Your monthly earnings are only 90% of your 35 year working average, thus the percentage nature of this would help to extend the pool, secondly, many people die before they are able to collect that full amount, thus again helping to make up any deficit.

Quote :

"not at all taken out of context. he said that if we look the current spending vs income, it's only a deficit of .37% of GDP, and a tax on the rich would fill that gap easily."

You're already starting to add a bit more context than your original statement, I'm willing to bet there's even more.

Quote :

"So in other words, if you take "efficiency" to mean something other than the actual definition of "efficiency", then it's "efficient.""

Ok, then tell me how you would measure it precisely. I know it's ambiguous, that's why I said it was.

Quote :

"I say give them the same amount that they would get if the cap was still in place."

Remove the primary insurance amount and cap the monthly earnings? That's been suggested by many people, in fact it is one of my favorite options.

1/5/2011 1:33:59 AM

Ira Flatow doesn't do the regular TOTN - he's host of Science Friday. If he was filling in for Neal Conan, I highly doubt he's in a position to argue with anyone regarding social security.

1/5/2011 9:15:21 AM

Quote :

"It is much more like a private annuity than a ponzi scheme"

No it is the only legal ponzi scheme in the US.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/ponzi.htm

"A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors."

Why do they collapse?

"With little or no legitimate earnings, the schemes require a consistent flow of money from new investors to continue. Ponzi schemes tend to collapse when it becomes difficult to recruit new investors or when a large number of investors ask to cash out."

Or to say the number of workers to retirees shrinks from 40 to 1 to 3 to 1, while you keep on promising higher benefits to the retirees. And we still have the boomers coming up and record unemployment.

Quote :

"The money is being straight up stolen from me, so I really don't give a damn about being "fair" to the older generations. "

Are you talking about the cap on the tax? There is a cap on the tax and the benefit. I dont think you should uncap the tax if you are still going to cap the benefit. If you do, just call it welfare and be honest about it.

I really wish Bush would have gotten SS reform through. The longer this goes the bigger the problem gets.

1/5/2011 9:31:43 AM

Quote :

"It is much more like a private annuity than a ponzi scheme, but I'm pretty sure you don't know what either is."

No, it's not. With a private annuity, both parties involved benefit. With Social Security, one party benefits (those receiving the benefits) and one party is simply asked to give away their money with no discernible benefit. Like a ponzi scheme, those at the top of the pyramid benefit, while the last out (at the bottom) get screwed.

Quote :

"Remove the primary insurance amount and cap the monthly earnings? That's been suggested by many people, in fact it is one of my favorite options."

No, cap the monthly earnings and remove the cap on FICA. This would make Social Security sustainable, though still completely immoral.

Quote :

"Are you talking about the cap on the tax? There is a cap on the tax and the benefit. I dont think you should uncap the tax if you are still going to cap the benefit. If you do, just call it welfare and be honest about it."

If we were going to be honest about it, we'd call it theft.

1/5/2011 11:25:36 AM

any time a guest on a program says something, it represents the views of the station and shall be immedately accepted as factual by all who listen

thank you aaronburro, for cutting through the bullshit and telling us how it really is.

1/5/2011 11:42:46 AM

Quote :

"If we were going to be honest about it, we'd call it theft. "

are they not the same thing? Hard to call it a charity bc if you choose not to "donate" they throw you in jail. haha

1/5/2011 12:58:34 PM

Quote :

"If we were going to be honest about it, we'd call it theft."

No that's if we were going to be broken-record right wingers who respond to any and all taxation that way

[Edited on January 5, 2011 at 1:40 PM. Reason : .]

1/5/2011 1:39:35 PM

incoming flat tax proposal

1/5/2011 1:42:42 PM

At least with other taxes, I sometimes get something in return. That's the difference.

1/5/2011 2:20:13 PM

It looks like Laura Leslie was nudged out of WUNC for covering who was really making the big political donations in the last round of statewide elections. Flew too close to the sun I guess.

Quote :

"In other words, Art Pope got his knickers in a knot because a reporter dared to tell the truth about his toxic influence, so he threw his considerable weight around the WUNC newsroom. As a result, someone at the station changed a perfectly accurate story to accommodate his wishes."

I think this hurts their credibility more. Its not about being left or right leaning, so much as leaning towards moneyed interests.

1/5/2011 3:13:40 PM

^I agree.

Wasnt Soros the one that called in to get Williams fired?

1/5/2011 3:56:05 PM

Quote :

"are they not the same thing? Hard to call it a charity bc if you choose not to "donate" they throw you in jail. haha"

what if i don't value "security" and decide i don't want to pay taxes that go towards defense?

or what if i have a fireproof house, can i go to the city and ask them to refund me what went towards fire safety?

you pay for all sorts of stuff others benefit from that you don't really see the direct benefit of every day through taxes at all levels. that's sort of what taxes are, the pooling of money you agree to pay based on living in x, y, or z in order to promote order.

not having impoverished old people or having to pay the emergency room expenses of people who can't get care otherwise goes under that, unless you're a hermit or you just don't understand the concept of government and taxation beyond what you read on some ron paul blog discussing why we need to live in anarcho-capitalist communities with voluntary barter economies.

Quote :

"Wasnt Soros the one that called in to get Williams fired?"

SOROOOOOOOOOOOOSSSS!



[Edited on January 5, 2011 at 4:03 PM. Reason : .]

1/5/2011 4:00:07 PM

Quote :

"what if i don't value "security" and decide i don't want to pay taxes that go towards defense?"

Ah, yes. There's nothing that makes us more secure than murdering foreigners, building faux democracies, and inciting upcoming generations in the Middle East to become terrorists. There's no way I could do that on my own dime, thank God we've got some way to fund it.

[Edited on January 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM. Reason : ]

1/5/2011 4:24:03 PM

I believe protecting the border and the citizens is actually the job of the federal govt. Im not sure where providing cell phones and erection meds are. Care to show me?

I think most people agree with the idea of a safety net, people will argue over that our safety nets have become hammocks for the lazy and are becoming unsustainable. SS is a ponzi scheme. I love the idea of forced savings, but it is YOUR money afterall and you should be allowed more than the dismal 1.5% return you get on SS.... if you get it at all. It isnt like the govt has saved the surplus money the SS tax created, no they pissed it away on other things and gave you a promise to pay it later. Sounds exactly what Madoff did, and he is in jail. go figure.

So Soros didnt push NPR to fire Williams? I know he was critical of Bono for meeting with Bush over his african HIV programs. Even yelled at the man. lol

1/5/2011 4:42:16 PM

Quote :

"secondly, many people die before they are able to collect that full amount, thus again helping to make up any deficit."

If that were the case, then it would be sufficient right now. And yet it isn't...

Quote :

"Especially if you means test payments"

It's really easy to make anything solvent if you just straight up steal from people.

Quote :

"Ira Flatow doesn't do the regular TOTN"

You are correct. It was Neal Conan.

Quote :

"any time a guest on a program says something, it represents the views of the station and shall be immediately accepted as factual by all who listen"

When the station makes no attempt to correct misinformation or point out when something stated as fact is actually opinion, then I will say that station is supporting that view, yes. Especially when NPR goes out of its way at times to point out when conservative statements are opinion or "correct" statements. I've heard it many times of TOTN, especially.

Quote :

"what if i don't value "security" and decide i don't want to pay taxes that go towards defense?"

In no way do we call taxes for defense a "charity".

1/5/2011 6:23:09 PM

Quote :

"In no way do we call taxes for defense a "charity"."

Why am I going to argue with you? You made your personality pretty clear back when you said anyone who couldn't get their life in order on temporary private charity should just die because they obviously have bad genes. Most people would call this being a sociopath.

And yeah, pretty sure it was you that said that, but I'm not going to go wade through old threads like I'm hooksaw or something.

[Edited on January 6, 2011 at 12:08 AM. Reason : a]

1/6/2011 12:06:36 AM

He had a point which you glossed over to attack him personally.

1/6/2011 8:27:13 AM

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=132708078

Quote :

"Fifty years ago, today, two African American students walked onto the campus of the University of Georgia in Atlanta, effectively integrating the school. One of them was Charlayne Hunter-Gault. Host Michel Martin speaks with the award-winning journalist and with Vernon Jordan, the civil rights lawyer who fought for black students to attend classes at the university, about that historic event and its legacy."

1/7/2011 1:23:32 PM

that's -1 credibility to whoever manages putting the audio online, because they don't make that mistake in the actual story

1/7/2011 1:28:12 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/08/ron-schiller-former-npr-f_n_832907.html?ir=Politics

let's see... calling the Tea Partiers racist, bashing Jews, meeting with a Sharia-spreading organization... Saying the GOP is anti-intellectual... way to go ahead and remove all doubt about your bias, NPR.

3/8/2011 8:54:34 PM

That is a former NPR fundraiser stating his personal opinions.

3/8/2011 8:59:00 PM

hahaha. "former." only because he was dumb enough to state the company line openly

3/8/2011 11:55:45 PM

Prove it's the "company line" and not just his own opinion. Until then, stfu.

3/9/2011 12:22:09 AM

Of course SS costs a shitton is will balloon but its necessary and must be kept.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=w3xl45ls

We can EASILY fund it. EASILY.

3/9/2011 12:46:50 AM

yes. this guy is a rogue guy. no one else there feels the same way he does. no company ever hires people with similar values to the corporate ones

[Edited on March 9, 2011 at 1:20 AM. Reason : ]

3/9/2011 1:20:35 AM

A safety net is supposed to catch those that are falling, not everyone including the audience. Means test everything. Abolish medicare. If an old person gets sick let them apply for medicaid like the rest of us.

3/9/2011 1:54:40 AM

The right-wing lie machine is so well-oiled that James O'Keefe can put up a video of a major NPR fundraiser speaking the truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd9OYJMX9t4

...and then he'll be denounced by the president of NPR and drummed out of the organization: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/03/08/134358398/in-video-npr-exec-slams-tea-party-questions-need-for-federal-funds

this is doubleplusungood

3/9/2011 6:53:19 AM

Okay, you what, fuck it. I just heard what all this guy said (from the Faux News perspective of all places) and I can't say the guy is all that wrong. He decides to leave NPR and then expresses his feelings about the Tea Party and repeats what anyone who actually listens to NPR already knows and that is that they get most of their funding from contributions and very little from the government. Tell me again how that's scandalous? Oh that's right, because your conservative hacktivist, who is already lacking anything resembling credibility, likes playing "gotcha" so that the conservative sheep can shake their fists at NPR once again. Pathetic.

3/9/2011 7:15:37 AM

He said all that shit before leaving the NPR Foundation.

3/9/2011 7:28:00 AM

Wow, Faux News was mistaken then. I would have figured they'd have erred on making it sound as bad as possible. Regardless, NPR came out against it. O'Keefe is a douchebag and why anyone would defend him or his fraudulent behavior makes me pity them.

3/9/2011 7:32:21 AM

O'Keefe is trying to make a lot out of nothing. He must be pissed that Schiller didn't jump at the $5mil his fake mus-lum group dangled in front of npr. At least his sheep are being well fed.

3/9/2011 12:53:20 PM

damn Vivian Schiller resigned too? that's retarded

3/9/2011 1:00:04 PM

3/9/2011 1:34:07 PM