The Pacific Standard reports on Duncan Black, who blogs under the name Atrios. According to the Pacific Standard, Atrios has introduced into the political marketplace the startling notion of increasing Social Security benefits.
For obvious reasons, I like to think that bloggers can make a difference. However, I'm not sure that the notion of increasing Social Security benefits was ever a completely unknown idea or that Atrios has moved that idea closer to becoming reality. Over the years I've often heard those on the left saying that Social Security benefits should be increased, not cut. Those views were on the periphery. I'd say they remain on the periphery. Time will tell whether this idea really moves into the mainstream.
My gut feeling is that Atrios is simply responding to the larger theme that long term demographic trends strongly favor the Democratic party and liberal policies in general. If events unfold as this theory holds, the Republican party, as currently constituted, would lose almost all of its power over the next ten to fifteen years. Would Social Security be increased if this comes to pass? Maybe. It's just too far off to tell.
3 comments:
I don't understand statements like this: "My gut feeling is that Atrios is simply responding to the larger theme that long term demographic trends strongly favor the Democratic party and liberal policies in general." The article quotes Mr. Black extensively and makes clear his motivation was social science and economic research that reveals that retiring baby boomers are woefully unprepared for retirement and that we are headed for a situation similar to what we had when Social Security was first proposed: millions of seniors living below poverty level. Why can't a genuine desire to alleviate that suffering be his motivation, rather than some Machievellian consideration of party politics?
I'm a Democrat. In some perfect world (and it certainly isn't this imperfect world) I might support an increase in Social Security benefits for those at the lower end of the AIME (say, adjust the two lowest bend points upward a little, remove the earnings cap, and institute a lower bend point of 10% for those at the highest level). But this is pure fantasy. If President Obama would not support such a plan (and he would not) then who exactly is the theoretical future Democratic President (Hillary Clinton?) who would jump off a cliff by supporting an increase in Social Security benefits? It isn't going to happen and it's a waste of energy to spend any time on it.
Not hardly a waste of energy. And it has everything to do with negotiations. One side says we want cuts. The other side wants increases. Worst outcome: nothing happens, a wash.
Post a Comment