The Life-Expectancy Warm Body

In re: Paul Krugman, The Life Expectancy Zombie, The New York Times, Mar. 5, 2013.

In his recent debate with Joe Scarborough on Charlie Rose, Paul Krugman at the end of the debate reacted involuntarily with a ridiculing "wow" when Scarborough suggested that Social Security was something of a scam at the time it was created because the retirement age was higher than the average life expectancy. In a blog post the next day, supra, Krugman explained his guffaw, quoting a webpage from the Social Security Administration ("SSA") discussing the subject.

On the webpage, the SSA talks about how life expectancy at the time Social Security was created was "low due mainly to high infant mortality, and someone who died as a child would never have worked and paid into Social Security" and wouldn't have gotten scammed by paying in without getting anything back. "A more appropriate measure," the SSA continues, "is probably life expectancy after attainment of adulthood." So far, so good. Now, we need to look at the numbers to flesh out Krugman's objection, but as we see, the numbers didn't give Krugman an opportunity to ridicule.

The SSA goes on to refer to a table and to say that "the majority of Americans who made it to adulthood could expect to live to 65, and those who did live to 65 could look forward to collecting benefits for many years into the future." Yes, it was a majority, but not a large one. According to the table, only about 54% of men and 60% of women could expect to live past 65 and collect Social Security retirement when the program was started. Assuming a ratio of one man to one woman, that leaves about 43% of all men and women who never got anything out of Social Security, even though they had worked and paid into it. Yes, the numbers got better as the years went on, but the relevant time period was, as quoted in Krugman's post, "when Social Security started," and at that time, a whole lot of people were getting a raw deal.

True, Scarborough was wrong on some points and nonresponsive to some questions, but the numbers on this point here don't bear out Krugman's ridicule. To the contrary, they offer only an opportunity for sober analysis, and, at the end of that analysis, the numbers work against Krugman just as much as they do for him, if at all.

They're Crazy, and They're Voting

In a spring edition, Bloomberg Businessweek features a story in which a bio is included of a Tea Party member who "recovered from a stroke with Medicaid assistance," but who nevertheless, with a straight face advocates "to repeal [Obama's] health-care law," complaining the Obama's plan is "really no longer insurance, it's a welfare kind of thing." Christina Lindblad, et al, The Patients: In their Own Words, Bloomberg Newsweek, Mar. 26, 2012, at B8.

Paul Krugman recounts a similar sort of thing during the 2009 Tea Party town-hall invasion:

"There was a telling incident at a town hall held by Representative Gene Green, D-Tex. An activist turned to his fellow attendees and asked if they 'oppose any form of socialized or government-run health care.' Nearly all did. Then Representative Green asked how many of those present were on Medicare. Almost half raised their hands."

Paul Krugman, The Town Hall Mob, The New York Times, Aug. 7, 2009, at A19. How do you deal with unwitting hypocrites?

Time vs. Money

“Time spent is different from money paid; recovery of the latter may be problematic, but recovery of the former is impossible.” Braden v. Downey, 811 S.W.2d 922, 930 (Tex. 1991).

Alienable Rights in the Bible

Apparently, the Old Testament doesn't believe in the inalienability of the rights to life and liberty. An “inalienable right” is a right that “cannot be bartered away, or given away, or taken away except in punishment of crime.” Butchers’ Union Slaughter-House and Live-Stock Landing Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746, 756-57 (1884) (Field, J concurring). In Leviticus, Moses wrote that Israelites could take foreign slaves, and that the slaves would descend as property. He also wrote that an Israelite could sell him- or herself into slavery, but could redeem their freedom at certain times.

“If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves. They are to be treated as hired workers or temporary residents among you; they are to work for you until the Year of Jubilee. Then they and their children are to be released, and they will go back to their own clans and to the property of their ancestors. Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God. Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. If a foreigner residing among you becomes rich and any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to the foreigner or to a member of the foreigner’s clan, they retain the right of redemption after they have sold themselves.” 

Leviticus 25:39-48.

Projection Isn't Always Fair; It Can Be Ethnocentrism

I found these interesting words from Charles Taylor, in an article published in response to Taylor's recent conviction by some Western, multinational tribunal:

"After taking us to task at length, Taylor tried a more personable approach. He insisted we should not impose our worldview on Africa, saying, 'You see, my brother, political feuds border on hatred in Liberia. You cannot expect First World standards. Things are just different; everyone wants power. It is not like the politics you know.' Smiling, he continued: 'I live well and have no regrets. I am a good Christian. I lived and studied in Boston. All these men sitting around you have advanced degrees, most of them from good universities in the United States. But a politician from America could not survive in Africa no more than I could survive in Alaska.'"

Biblical Wisdom

"A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger." Proverbs 15:1 (King James Version).

Process Confers Legitimacy

In re: Obama embraces Islam, The Washington Times, Apr. 25, 2012.

To answer your question, yes, political groups are "legitimized simply by participating in the political process [i.e., by getting elected]." It's a fundamental notion here in representative government.