Social Security and Warning Labels
I was having a conversation with a friend of mine a couple of weeks ago (who, it so happens, is majoring in journalism), and the discussion turned to Fox News and the gradual merging of news with editorial content.
She raised fair points about the importance of keeping the two seperate, and rightly noted that Fox, in particular, seemed to blur that line more than most. My response was that even though the point was mostly valid, I thought we needed to trust people to differentiate between reporting and editorializing for themselves. I don't want my news to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
These two viewpoints are ultimately at the heart of the Social Security reformation debate, as well. Nowhere is this made clearer than in a Washington Post article yesterday titled "Bush Social Security Plan Proves Tough Sell Among Working Poor." Here's a quote:
Jonathan Weisman - April 18th, 2005 Somewhere in this busy life stews roughly $13,000 in retirement savings from her 14 years at the U.S. Postal Service, in accounts that she doesn't really understand or monitor.
"I don't know what's going on with it," she said one night at a tax clinic in Southeast D.C. "I just know I have these three accounts, so I just say, 'Let's hope and pray. Let's hope and pray it's not going into Enron. Let's hope and pray it's not going into Tyco.' It's just hard to absorb all I'm supposed to absorb."
This is, presumably, how opponents of privatization/reformation view your average American; incapable, uninformed, and uninterested.
The article, to its credit, is even-handed enough to say as much (or, in this case, to let someone else say as much):
Jonathan Weisman - April 18th, 2005 "I'm 1,000-percent convinced of this: The president cares the most about this $10-an-hour person," said Allan B. Hubbard, director of the White House National Economic Council. "And what he gets most irritated by is when it is suggested, 'Oh the $10-an-hour person isn't sophisticated enough to deal with a personal retirement account.'"
Social Security is controversial not just for its massive political implications, but for its societal implications as well. It's difficult to see opposition to the kind of reforms being proposed as anything other than part of a warning label culture that, no matter the topic, always starts with the assumption that people just can't handle things.
So that's the issue. Will people rise to the occasion when presented with an opportunity to take greater control over their retirement?
Place your bets. My money's on people knowing what to do with their money.
» April 19th, 2005
|
|
Calendar
More Entries
Blogroll
Instapundit
Andrew Sullivan
Tom Maguire
Decision '08
Patrick O'Keefe
Categories
Blogging
Democrats
Economy
Elections '04
Elections '06
Elections '08
Entertainment
George W. Bush
Iraq
Media
Miscellaneous
Republicans
Social Security
Supreme Court
Technology
War on Terror
Email Me
|
