Hyperborea
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?050124ta_talk_hertzberg
First a quote from the Wall Street Journal interview with Bush on Social Security that I think sums up his "thoughts" on the matter.
So when does the surplus run out? It depends on whose numbers you use. What if you use the numbers that the Bush administration uses when it touts the benefits of it's tax cuts? Why doesn't it use those numbers for Social Security?
First a quote from the Wall Street Journal interview with Bush on Social Security that I think sums up his "thoughts" on the matter.
That's part of - that's part of the advice my new National Economic Council head will be giving me as to whether or not we need to - here is the plan, or here is an idea for a plan, or why don't you just fix it. I suspect given my nature, I'll want to be - the White House will be very much involved with - I have an obligation to lead on this issue - I think this will be an administrative-driven idea - to take it on. And therefore, that that be the case, I have the responsibility to provide the political cover necessary for members, I have the responsibility to make the case if there is a problem, and I have the responsibility to lay out potential solutions. Now, to the specificity of which, we'll find out - you'll find out with time.
So when does the surplus run out? It depends on whose numbers you use. What if you use the numbers that the Bush administration uses when it touts the benefits of it's tax cuts? Why doesn't it use those numbers for Social Security?
Using the assumptions of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the surplus runs out in 2052. And if one uses the economic growth assumptions that Bush's own budget office uses when it calculates the effects of his own tax cuts, the surplus runs out in - er, maybe never.