Bob Lord

Posted by Bob Lord

What do you suppose would happen if Democrats had the guts to advance Paul Krugman's eminently sensible views? Today, he points out the inconvenient truths that Pete Peterson and his band of deficits scolds don't want us to know. First, the mid-term deficit outlook isn't all that terrible:

Recently the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities took Congressional Budget Office projections for the next decade and updated them to take account of two major deficit-reduction actions: the spending cuts agreed to in 2011, amounting to almost $1.5 trillion over the next decade; and the roughly $600 billion in tax increases on the affluent agreed to at the beginning of this year. What the center finds is a budget outlook that, as I said, isn’t great but isn’t terrible: It projects that the ratio of debt to G.D.P., the standard measure of America’s debt position, will be only modestly higher in 2022 than it is now.

The center calls for another $1.4 trillion in deficit reduction, which would completely stabilize the debt ratio; President Obama has called for roughly the same amount. Even without such actions, however, the budget outlook for the next 10 years doesn’t look at all alarming.

Posted by Bob Lord Well, almost always. When the NATO allicance egaged in Libya a few years back, the action was actually timely. And tens of thousands of lives were saved from what would have been a brutal genocide at the hands of their now deposed dictator. But Libya was the exception. As genocides transpire, the … Read more

Posted by Bob Lord David Safier posted earlier about Gun Appreciation Day. It is kind of hilarious, but David subtly warned us to pay attention. I'll be more blunt. If this were a sane, rational country not in decline, Gun Appreciation Day would be something to laugh about and nothing more. Which is to say … Read more

Posted by Bob Lord One thing is clear from the last month's debate on how to address gun violence. Progressives look to the systems employed in other countries (Australia, Switzerland, Israel) that have had success in alleviating gun violence. Conservatives seem confident that we should not look to other countries for guidance. In the health care … Read more

Posted by Bob Lord

One key factor contributing to the projected Medicare
funding shortfall is the longer life expectancies of Americans. The Medicare
trustees’ report actually includes assumes that just a few decades from now the
life expectancy for a woman turning 65 will be age 89. That means we'll have huge numbers of 90+ year olds roaming around, if the assumptions prove accurate. 

The knee jerk reaction of those on the right (with supposed
centrists all too eager to follow along) is to raise the Medicare eligibility
age. But, for the fair minded, it’s not that simple, because life expectancies have not increased
uniformly for all income brackets. Those at the top truly are living much
longer. Those closer to the bottom? Not so much. Indeed, recent data suggests
that life expectancies may be declining for those near the bottom of the income
scale. It’s not hard to figure out that raising the Medicare eligibility age is
unfair because of differing life expectancies. I’ve written about this in a
previous post regarding social security, but the same principles apply. Obviously, if one income group has a 15-year life expectancy at
age 65 and another income group has a 20-year life expectancy at age 65, the
first income group loses a larger portion of its benefits if the eligibility
age arbitrarily is increased from age 65 to age 67.