Monday, June 13, 2005

NY Times: Amazing that no one thought of this before!

The New York Times rather breathlessly takes on the absolutely new issue (to them, I gather) that the amount needed for Social Security retirement depends on the expected life span of the retirees.

Gadflyer points out (as the NY Times article does not) that expected life span of retirees is and has been a basic part of the projections that Social Security depends on since the program began.

Nothing new here, people, keep moving. Just the N.Y. Times attempting to weigh in on the Social Security issue and failing to understand what is really happening. Ignore the people in clown suits with NYT written on them.

Anyone who has regularly read my blog here or Talking Points Memo and Kevin Drum on Social Security has a better understanding of the Social Security program than do Robin Toner and David E. Rosenbaum who wrote the N.Y. Times article.

[Thanks to Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo for pointing this out.]


Post a Comment

<< Home