Our old friend Andrew Biggs is up to it again. Biggs was put in a research position at Social Security by the Bush White House in order to work on Social Security privatization plans. Biggs campaigned with President Bush for the partial privatization of Social Security while working at Social Security. He later received a recess appointment as Deputy Commissioner of Social Security.
The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College has now published a study by Biggs claiming that people born in 1947 are the new "Notch Babies." Biggs bases this, somehow, on the facts that there was no cost of living adjustment for this year's Social Security benefits while there was a large COLA the year before. Basically, those retiring a year earlier benefited from the big COLA while those retiring later do not.
The "Notch Baby" reference is an obvious attempt to invoke an earlier, similarly bogus, controversy. Anyone who is trying to be taken seriously would stay miles away from the term "Notch Baby," a fact that Biggs knows well.
It is impossible for the human mind to devise any system that guarantees that there will never be anyone complaining of unfairness, a fact well known to lawyers like myself. Social Security COLAs are designed to be and are a neutral system. Any alternative system would produce its own allegations of unfairness. Certainly, what Biggs would prefer, a privatized system, would produce massive unfairness.
Fortunately, so far, Biggs' study, unlike the "Notch Baby" controversy, appears to have gained no traction.
The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College has now published a study by Biggs claiming that people born in 1947 are the new "Notch Babies." Biggs bases this, somehow, on the facts that there was no cost of living adjustment for this year's Social Security benefits while there was a large COLA the year before. Basically, those retiring a year earlier benefited from the big COLA while those retiring later do not.
The "Notch Baby" reference is an obvious attempt to invoke an earlier, similarly bogus, controversy. Anyone who is trying to be taken seriously would stay miles away from the term "Notch Baby," a fact that Biggs knows well.
It is impossible for the human mind to devise any system that guarantees that there will never be anyone complaining of unfairness, a fact well known to lawyers like myself. Social Security COLAs are designed to be and are a neutral system. Any alternative system would produce its own allegations of unfairness. Certainly, what Biggs would prefer, a privatized system, would produce massive unfairness.
Fortunately, so far, Biggs' study, unlike the "Notch Baby" controversy, appears to have gained no traction.
I was surprised that he actually recommended an upward adjustment for the 2009 cohort. There's really nothing wrong with his analysis. The likelihood of this anomaly happening again seems pretty small, and thus it is not at all likely that Congress will pay attention to this particular "notch."
ReplyDelete