tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post4810174337421985832..comments2023-09-09T09:26:22.175-04:00Comments on Andrew Samwick's Blog: Chairman Ben and the Long-Term BudgetAndrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13514024573333057559noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-17358934662234153522007-01-20T15:36:00.000-05:002007-01-20T15:36:00.000-05:00hmmmm, so you think that workers aren't entitl...hmmmm, so you think that workers aren't entitled to Social Security benefits even though they paid a designated tax that is sufficient to cover the cost? I guess I feel pretty much the same way about the people who bought U.S. government bonds.Dean Bakernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-80721074597091197092007-01-20T16:37:00.000-05:002007-01-20T16:37:00.000-05:00I'm saying that those workers--you, me, all of...I'm saying that those workers--you, me, all of us--would have a more legitimate claim to the benefits in excess of the taxes in future years if they--we--had saved those tax revenues rather than spent them.<br><br>Maybe you wish there were a system of personal accounts put in place in 1983 so that we wouldn't be having these discussions now?Andrew Samwickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13514024573333057559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-52191237686729418962007-01-20T18:56:00.000-05:002007-01-20T18:56:00.000-05:00The Clinton era Treasury Dept under Bob Rubin and ...The Clinton era Treasury Dept under Bob Rubin and Larry Summers officially agrees with Prof. Samwick (from Analytical Perspectives on the Budget):<br><br>http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudge...00/pdf/ spec.pdf<br><br>(p 337 or 326, pdf):<br><br>'These [SS Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other trust fund expenditures—but only in a bookkeeping sense. These funds are not set up to be pension funds, like the funds of private pension plans. They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large trust fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits.'Patrick Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14948365865741313524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-34658656619041102672007-01-20T19:04:00.000-05:002007-01-20T19:04:00.000-05:00Andrew - a couple of AB comments accused you of fa...Andrew - a couple of AB comments accused you of favoring Bush's privatization ideas. I said that was not fair on their part so I have directed them here. But your debate with Dean has me shaking my head. <br><br>Now we see Roland Patrick trying to spin the words of Lawrence Summers as if Summers were for privatization. But that's not what Summers is saying (Roland Patrick has put forth this dishonest spin many times). Now Summers may be saying what Dr. Samwick is saying if my read of his words is correct. But if I'm wrong and if Dr. Samwick has turned into a privatization type, then I would have to say that Lawrence Summers is not in agreement.<br><br>But our host is free to express his own views clearly. But beware - Roland Patrick will likely misrepresent what you say. He always does.PGLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-55682367443047934772007-01-20T19:17:00.000-05:002007-01-20T19:17:00.000-05:00Wow. Really Wow. I didn't think Bernanke actu...Wow. Really Wow. I didn't think Bernanke actually was favoring default. But Andrew definitely is. Or at least is favoring one of the largest tax shifts in history. I own a government bond. According to Andrew there is no reason to hold future generations liable for that promise because I enjoyed the spending. Or is it only the old and poor who get shafted to make sure the Chinese keep getting their interest payments?Robnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-46784306954580117222007-01-20T22:27:00.000-05:002007-01-20T22:27:00.000-05:00Rob - I said this over at our blog where some of A...Rob - I said this over at our blog where some of Angrybear readers suggested our host here favors default. Dr. Samwick is NOT favoring this. Of course, this implies that Dean Baker (who I agree with on the policy issues here) and step back and not get in a big argument with Dr. Samwick. I still think Brad DeLong and Andrew Samwick are basically on the same page. I hope Chairman Ben is too. The problem is that George W. Bush is on a very different page. Perhaps the sensible Republicans (see in particular CalculatedRisk who puts this stuff plainly) can note that they don't agree with President Bush's fiscal folly agenda.PGLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-61406060569294068702007-01-21T01:38:00.000-05:002007-01-21T01:38:00.000-05:00We have no compelling justification to assert that...<i>We have no compelling justification to assert that future generations of workers, who were not party to these decisions, should have to pay higher taxes to honor promises that our generation has made to itself.</i><br><br>They may have to pay higher taxes if they want an equivalent retirement, or have more babies. This is after all not a one time event. No one likes taxes, but few are interested in working in their 70s either. It will be their decision to make, not ours.Lordnoreply@blogger.com