Privatization Pep Rally

Max Sawicky sawicky at
Wed Jul 29 11:30:19 PDT 1998

>>Clinton didn't open it. The Trustees did by
>>issuing their actuarial report, which they are
>>required to do by law periodically, and which
>>report, while open to criticism, is not so biased
>>as to entirely distort its findings. Given the
>>biases of assorted elites, it would be impossible
>>for any president not to acknowledge the issue.
>If you don't think it's biased, I'm afraid you aren't reading it closely
>enough. Doug has done some excellent analysis of this, so

Why not read what you quoted above your note? I didn't say the report was perfect.

>fill in the details. The basic point, though, is that in order to get
>their conclusion that the system is going broke, the trustees assume
>economic growth for the the next few decades at sub-Depression levels.

"sub-depression growth" is an oxymoron. The report assumes low growth, not negative growth, much less "sub-depression growth." Higher growth estimates would reduce the shortfall or, if sufficiently high, eliminate (as in fact the Trustees' "optimistic" scenario does).

The political fact with which we have to work is that the 'middle' scenario assumes anemic growth, relative to the present, so the shortfall becomes a political fact.

We could yell and scream that there will be no shortfall and be ignored entirely.

Alternatively, we could dispute the probability of slow growth and provide palatable solutions to the shortfall that the rest of the world is referring to when they deal with the issue.

We chose option b.


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list