Economist Paul Krugman with President Joe Biden on August 14, 2023
(Creative Commons)
November 28, 2023
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley's hardcore supporters have been touting her as the 2024 GOP presidential hopeful who would be the most difficult for President Joe Biden to beat in the general election. Poll after poll is showing former President Donald Trump as the Republican primary's clear frontrunner, but polls are also showing that Haley would be a tougher opponent for Biden.
But in a biting New York Times column published on November 27, liberal economist Paul Krugman emphasizes that Haley is campaigning on something unpopular: attacking Social Security.
"Anyone hoping that (Haley) would govern as a moderate if she should somehow make it to the White House is surely delusional," Krugman warns. "Haley has never really shown a willingness to stand up to Republican extremists — and at this point, the whole GOP has been taken over by extremists."
Haley, Krugman observes, "seems exceptionally explicit…. in calling for an increase in the age at which Americans become eligible for Social Security" — which the economist/columnist slams as "a bad idea that seems to be experiencing a revival" on the right.
Krugman goes on to point out that the right exaggerates Social Security's challenges.
"The first thing you should know about Social Security is that the actual numbers don't justify the apocalyptic rhetoric one often hears not just from the right, but from self-proclaimed centrists who want to sound serious," Krugman explains. "No, the exhaustion of the system's trust fund, currently projected to occur in roughly a decade, wouldn't mean that benefits disappear. It would mean that the system would need additional revenue to continue paying scheduled benefits in full."
Krugman argues that any Republican who, like Haley, wants to raise the Social Security age "is being oblivious, perhaps willfully, to the grim inequality of modern America" — as the poor are more likely to die younger.
READ MORE: 'Not just wrong but dangerous': How social media is warping Americans' view of the economy
"Less affluent Americans — those who depend most on Social Security — have seen little rise in life expectancy, and in some cases actual declines," Krugman observes. "So anyone invoking rising life expectancy as a reason to delay Social Security benefits is, in effect, saying that aging janitors must keep working — or be cast into extreme poverty — because bankers are living longer."
No comments:
Post a Comment