NYT’s Keller gets it half-right on need to reform entitlements
In a column addressed to his fellow baby boomers (sorry, this Gen-Xer peeked anyway!) New York Times columnist Bill Keller says one way for his generation to shed its reputation of entitlement and selfishness is, well, to be less selfish about entitlements.
He refers to a study by the Democratic think tank Third Way that examines the tremendous growth of, as Keller puts it, the federal government’s “safety-net programs that provide a measure of economic stability for the aging and poor: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.” The growth of this spending, he and Third Way argue, is crowding out federal spending for “‘investments,’ which includes maintaining our national infrastructure, keeping our military equipped, helping assure that our work force is educated to a high standard, and underwriting the kind of basic scientific research that is too risky or long-term to attract private money.”
The answer, he suggests, is for liberals to embrace reforms of the entitlement programs. I agree with his conclusion, but there’s an important misperception to correct along the way.
Here’s how Keller summarizes Third Way’s findings:
In 1962, we were laying down the foundations of prosperity. About 32 cents of every federal dollar, excluding interest payments, was spent on investments, only 14 percent on entitlements. In the mid-70s the lines crossed. Today we spend less than 15 cents on investment and 46 cents on entitlements. And it gets worse. By 2030, when the last of us boomers have surged onto the Social Security rolls, entitlements will consume 61 cents of every federal dollar, starving our already neglected investment and leaving us, in the words of the study, with “a less-skilled work force, lower rates of job creation, and an infrastructure unfit for a 21st-century economy.”
Sounds pretty bleak for “investments,” huh?
But what these figures obscure is that spending on Third Way’s “investments” category — adjusted for inflation and population growth — has in fact increased significantly during the past 50 years.
How can that be?
Start with the fact that, in 1962, federal spending (see Table 8.4) minus net interest payments equaled 17.6 percent of gross domestic product, or GDP. In 2012, it’s expected to hit 22.9 percent of GDP. So federal spending as a share of the economy is higher today by almost one-third.
Then move on to the fact that GDP, adjusted for inflation, is nearly 4.5 times larger today: Annualized, it stood at $13.56 trillion in the second quarter of 2012 (the most recent data available) compared to $3.06 trillion in the same three months of 1962.
Finally, consider that our population has grown by only about 70 percent during the past half century: from 186.5 million to 314.4 million (note: the Census Bureau has not yet released its estimate for July 1, 2012, so I took the figure for a year earlier and applied the same growth rate the Census Bureau applied for 2010 to 2011; my number ought to be pretty close to the eventual Census estimate, or at least close enough for today’s exercise).
Run the numbers, including Third Way’s calculations of “investments” and “entitlements” as percentages of the federal budget, and here’s what you get:
Inflation-adjusted, per capita federal spending
So, while it’s true that entitlement spending has grown massively since JFK’s presidency — by more than 1,000 percent on a real per capita basis — it’s also true that real per capita spending on that group of “investments” has grown by 60 percent. Not too shabby. Viewed similarly, spending on everything else (besides net interest payments) has also soared by almost 150 percent.
To reiterate: I agree with Keller and Third Way that entitlement reform is desperately needed. And I join them in urging boomers, particularly those of the liberal persuasion, to be open to such changes. Where I part company with them is in the reason this needs to happen.
It’s not to spend more money elsewhere in the federal budget, but to free the economy from the burden of all excessive federal spending.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
728 comments Add your comment
Jose
July 31st, 2012
4:52 pm
hey ERWIN
you should have tried that at my polling place
i told them i wanted a NON-PARTISAN ballot and they told me I couldn’t
i had to declare either D or R
i told them i hate both parties and they ran around like chickens with their heads cut off
after 15 minutes of arguing i told them to give me a gosh-darn D ballot
after i voted they came running up and said they figured out how to give me a NP ballot
i told them they were typical DEMOCRATS………. only after i took actioncould i find out how to do something………….
can’t wait to leave this liberal licking county
Bruno
July 31st, 2012
4:52 pm
I admire you for that. It’s getting to be a rarity in the news/entertainment business.
My comments were made in the spirit of competing with the Bookman Blog. Jay’s sure not shy about hitting the “hot” button. Sometimes I wonder if he really believes half the crap he puts out there. But, Kyle is his own man, boring or not…….
Some people are stupid
July 31st, 2012
4:52 pm
That Black guy -
I do. That’s why I asked. All I hear is the President is spending when in actuality, he doesn’t come up with one spending bill. Even his budget is a waste of time because no Presidential budget is ever passed, even when his party controls the Senate.
Peadawg-
The deficit last year was similar to the projected deficit this year. Can’t some of that 1.6 to 1.2 be attributed to higher revenue as well. If I recall, the CBO said the Republican house only lowered spending by around 50 billion in their first year in control.
josef
July 31st, 2012
4:55 pm
NUMBERS
You can easily discuss such things in reference to the general picture without being tacky. When you start telling the general public what “you” have in terms of shekels, the question is, why do I need to know that?
BRUNO
Kinda fun, isn’t it?
FORMAL BLACK GUY
It never ceases to amuse me how so many of the polaricists and partisans go off on what “they” say, how “they” think and what have you and in the same breath proclaim they never listen to or read what “they” say…as the little ones say, duh….
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 31st, 2012
4:56 pm
“Even his budget is a waste of time because no Presidential budget is ever passed, even when his party controls the Senate.”
Given the fact that it’s been over 1000 days since the Senate last passed a budget, the above statement is patently untrue.
Bruno
July 31st, 2012
4:57 pm
Gotta get some work done.
Back when musicians could play their instruments live:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEwFssgvsC0
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
4:59 pm
I’m under 55. And, technically speaking, SSI is a separate entity from the broader federal government, with its own independent source of funding (FICA taxes). As such, any mythical “tax cuts for the job creators” don’t impact it. Just in case you forgot, the Bush tax cuts helped everyone, with those at the bottom more impacted proportionally. Furthermore, the temporary reduction on payroll taxes was a Democratic brainchild, one which also disproportionately helps those at the bottom tiers.
Payroll taxes have not been brought up as a tax that Republicans are willing to cut even though they talk about cutting entitlements. Yet, income taxes a always on the table to be cut by the Republicans and the places that Republicans propose to cut in order to pay for those tax cuts is entitlements. So good luck on even getting back a piece of what you paid in if Republicans have their way. You might want to start working on those tax-free sources of income that are GOP approved–capital gains and qualifying dividends.
Any reason you’re having difficulty acknowledging that Clinton signed the bill?? Don’t tell me you’ve fallen prey to Bush Derangement Syndrome…….
A Republican introduced it and a Democrat signed it. Sounds bi-partisan, don’t it.
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:00 pm
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
4:16 pm
And you liberals want to give this clown a second term?
Not me. I think Boehner needs to go. Right out the door with the rest of the House Republicans. They have done nothing to create jobs. Nothing. At. All
Why don’t you look into how many bills they have sent to the socialist Senate to get shot down. Democrats are propagandists devoid of any solutions other than government spending Tool!
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 31st, 2012
5:00 pm
Hiya, josef!
Hillbilly D
July 31st, 2012
5:01 pm
Bruno @ 4:52
I think I’ll just not say anything, there.
josef
July 31st, 2012
5:02 pm
TIBERIUS
Howdy! Whazzup?
hmmm
July 31st, 2012
5:03 pm
way to not take a stand on tsplost Kyle….
iggy
July 31st, 2012
5:03 pm
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
4:41 pm
Yes, Clinton signed away the Glass-Steagall signed in the Gramm Leach Bliley, which got the ball rolling. THANKS BILL!!
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:04 pm
I think Congress signed off on another spending bill (aka, budget legislation) just today, didn’t they. Of course there’s nothing like a little sophistry to disguise the fact that Congress and the President do indeed pass the needed legislation to cover those bills regardless of what you want to call it.
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:04 pm
Obama’s been working at a blistering pace with his jobs counsel to find ways to create jobs. Just ask Jeff Immelt.
Hillbilly D
July 31st, 2012
5:05 pm
By the way, August Kowalczyk died Sunday.
Bruno
July 31st, 2012
5:05 pm
Sounds bi-partisan, don’t it.
And I’ve never argued differently. Furthermore, the credit meltdown was just as much the responsibility of irresponsible consumers as it was the dishonest bankers. We’re all to blame one way or the other. But, for some reason, some folks like to point the finger very selectively.
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:06 pm
Why don’t you look into how many bills they have sent to the socialist Senate to get shot down. Democrats are propagandists devoid of any solutions other than government spending Tool!
If it does not make it to the president for his signature or rejection, it means nothing.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 31st, 2012
5:07 pm
Just got me some great news on my mother’s surgery, so I’m doing just as fine as frog’s hair right now!
In fact, gotta go out and get me something to eat right now (now that my appetite has returned), but should be back before the Kyle gate closes down at 7:00.
luangtom
July 31st, 2012
5:07 pm
How do any of the pundits and the columnists feel about tax-payers and their employers paying into a system that has been raped and pillaged by its very own government and then when they are at the plateau where they may draw on it, the government and the pundits are trying to figure out a way to deny them what they paid into for decades? If the very government that wants to deny me my Social Security at age whatever would only pay back the dollars they so conveniently “borrowed” from the surplus of the funds over the years, we would not be having this discussion.
The Social Security dollars funded programs like LBJ’s own Great Society and put free money into the hands and lives of those that would become the Democratic voting-base. This is a current ploy to garner votes as we see in this election. Offer more social-welfare programs and attain votes. No dollars will go wasted, if it garners votes for those in power now.
Bruno
July 31st, 2012
5:08 pm
I had to laugh earlier today when Dan Patrick claimed he “took one for the team” by covering the Brazilian Women’s Beach Volleyball match. Yeah right.
I’m afraid to ask josef how he gets his Olympics thrills. Synchronized diving, anyone??
josef
July 31st, 2012
5:08 pm
SICK OF
It’s not that liberals particularly want to give President Obama a second term…it’s just that the alternative isn’t exactly the pick of the litter…
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:11 pm
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:06 pm
Why don’t you look into how many bills they have sent to the socialist Senate to get shot down. Democrats are propagandists devoid of any solutions other than government spending Tool!
If it does not make it to the president for his signature or rejection, it means nothing.
Harry Reid doesn’t get his marching orders from O’Blamer??? Go back to Bookman’s blog buddy.
Piedmont South from North Georgia
July 31st, 2012
5:12 pm
iggy
July 31st, 2012
5:03 pm
______
Bill signed it and Phil backed it. Big mistake on both their parts. And I believe the vote was nearly unanimous for it. Everybody screwed up that one.
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:12 pm
Come on Numbers, why is Jeff Immelt the job czar? Come on, think!!
josef
July 31st, 2012
5:13 pm
BRUNO
Tacky, tacky! Overall, though, the Olympics holds no real fascination for me… though I have to admit Magyar gymnists have a certain, well, appeal…
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:15 pm
NUMBERS
You can easily discuss such things in reference to the general picture without being tacky. When you start telling the general public what “you” have in terms of shekels, the question is, why do I need to know that?
Josef,
Is it tacky to ask that georgia representatives have a 100 dollar cap imposed. Is it tacky to proclaim that some have wealth envy when they bring up any discussion of the billions made by some without paying any income taxes on it. Is it tacky to bring up the fact that during the great recession, some 50 percent of tax units paid no federal income tax. Is it tacky for Kyle to promote this idea that those darned self-centered people living just barely above poverty level (as defined by a specific income level based on family size) thanks to their social security income need to sacrifice more. What do you mean by my being tacky, josef, when the whole issue revolves around money and who needs to pay up. I reject your claim that I am being tacky.
Piedmont South from North Georgia
July 31st, 2012
5:15 pm
I like to watch the volleyball and soccer. Everything else I can take of leave. Mostly leave.
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:16 pm
josef
July 31st, 2012
5:08 pm
SICK OF
It’s not that liberals particularly want to give President Obama a second term…it’s just that the alternative isn’t exactly the pick of the litter…
I’m convinced that due to TV programming, both parties choose their candidates based on physical appearance, and who might end up on Dancing With The Stars. American’s should pitch their TV’s, and go back to reading to compete with the rest of the world intellectually.
RC (R--apoi)
July 31st, 2012
5:17 pm
D’OOOOOOH! I think I might of voted for the T-Splost. But if I did it wasn’t my fault. I had that “declare a month before the election” thingy in my head and was POed bad. Anyhow I hit the No on that one ’cause it ain’t anybody’s business when I decide to register or how I vote. Then I went back to the T-Splost thing and decided if the “declare” thing was a No, then the T-Splost thing had to be a Yes. Anyways, I walked out of there feeling pretty good about having all those R incumbents on there with nobody running against them, and then I got to thinking about the T-Splost vote and got all confused.
They need to fix the wording on these referendums. I think the T-Splost thing could of been worded “Do you want the guvmint to pick your pocket for more money every time you buy something and then use your hard-earned money for a bunch of boondoggles?” I think everyone could understand that. But would they word it that way? Nooooooooooooo! They got to fancy the thing up.
Anyhow, I hope all the No voters on this T-Splost will bail me out. I just feel awful about my vote.
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:19 pm
Harry Reid doesn’t get his marching orders from O’Blamer??? Go back to Bookman’s blog buddy.
Boehner and the Republicans declared “vote for us because we need jobs” and they failed to deliver anything that the Senate agreed with them on. You cannot recognize that so you resort to calling our president a name that makes you feel better. Good for you. As for leaving this blog, suck it up. That’s not your call.
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:20 pm
Come on Numbers, why is Jeff Immelt the job czar? Come on, think!!
Because Mitt Romney was too busy to take the job.
Bruno
July 31st, 2012
5:22 pm
Before EOL went pop, they kicked some major ass:
For josef, HD and Reporter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewaz0Fzewns
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:25 pm
Boehner and the Republicans declared “vote for us because we need jobs” and they failed to deliver anything that the Senate agreed with them on. You cannot recognize that so you resort to calling our president a name that makes you feel better. Good for you. As for leaving this blog, suck it up. That’s not your call.
What idea did the senate have for creating jobs other than deficit spending??? If that is their only idea, WHY SHOULD THEY HAVE ANY MEASURE OF CREDIBILITY???
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:27 pm
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:20 pm
Come on Numbers, why is Jeff Immelt the job czar? Come on, think!!
Because Mitt Romney was too busy to take the job.
At least Romney paid some taxes, unlike G.E.
Never can tell
July 31st, 2012
5:28 pm
Jose
Fib much?
getalife
July 31st, 2012
5:30 pm
“Harry Reid: Bain Source Told Me Mitt ‘Didn’t Pay Any Taxes For 10 Years’” Aol.
No wonder he is hiding his papers.
Drop out mitt.
josef
July 31st, 2012
5:32 pm
NUMBERS
Simple. When you go off saying I put X amount here and Y amount there you are opening up your personal account checkbook for public display…figures given in the general picture of things is kosher. Figures given in the first person is tacky…imauo…why do I or anyone else other than those I mentioned in my first post need to know how much you individually play with? It was your personal “I” did with “X” amount that I found tacky…you could have said what you had to say without tacking a figure amount on it…
Never can tell
July 31st, 2012
5:32 pm
getalife
Reid better have good info. He is going to look like a buffoon if that is not true
Piedmont South from North Georgia
July 31st, 2012
5:33 pm
USA men’s beach volleyball just been Spain. Officials made a bad call – in favor of USA. But not on match point, that point was clean.
yuzeyurbrane
July 31st, 2012
5:34 pm
Sick of Progs–the word on the Web today is that the reason Romney has refused to provide more tax returns is that they will show that he paid NO, ZERO, NADA income taxes for 10 YEARS. So you may wish to revise your last comment.
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:34 pm
What idea did the senate have for creating jobs other than deficit spending??? If that is their only idea, WHY SHOULD THEY HAVE ANY MEASURE OF CREDIBILITY???
What part of “the Republicans campaigned on creating jobs and then failed to deliver any jobs” did you miss. If they have the great jobs bills then they should have no difficulty selling them to the Senate. After all, the Senate went for the Republican healthcare ideas and they passed along with the Democrat ideas and got President Obama’s signature.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
July 31st, 2012
5:34 pm
During a tele-townhall late last week, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) fielded a question about his opposition to animal rights and recently introduced legislation that would undermine local standards preventing animal torture. “It’s wrong to rate animals above human beings,” he told the questioner. To make his point, King argued that “there’s something wrong” for society to make it a “federal crime to watch animals fight” but “it’s not a federal crime to induce somebody to watch people fighting.”
Katie bar the door, the King idiot has really stepped it in. Oy vey, pople chose to fight (in sports), dogs don’t have a choice, any more than they can call shotgun so they don’t have to ride on the roof.
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:35 pm
Quit buying into proggie propaganda. I wouldn’t trust that Harry Reid could accurately be able to tell me if the sun was coming up tomorrow or tell me which state that he supposedly represents. He has as much credibility with thinking people as Pee Wee Herman does as a movie critic….
Piedmont South from North Georgia
July 31st, 2012
5:35 pm
Mitt didn’t pay taxes for ten years? Tough not to have any taxable income. who elected congress that passed all those tax laws anyway.
josef
July 31st, 2012
5:35 pm
SICK OF
@ 5:16
I’d pretty much have to agree with that!
BRUNO
Thanks…
That Black guy
July 31st, 2012
5:37 pm
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:06 pm
Why don’t you look into how many bills they have sent to the socialist Senate to get shot down. Democrats are propagandists devoid of any solutions other than government spending Tool!
If it does not make it to the president for his signature or rejection, it means nothing.
_______________________________________________________________
Do you agree with the repubs being called “the party of NO” when they won’t allow bills to move forward for the President’s signature?
Sick of Progs
July 31st, 2012
5:37 pm
If they have the great jobs bills then they should have no difficulty selling them to the Senate.
Hmmm, you blindly trust these propagandists? Heil Hitler!!
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/inhofe-obama-administration-doesnt-want-all-these-pink-slips-going-out-5-days-election
Numbers-R-US
July 31st, 2012
5:38 pm
Simple. When you go off saying I put X amount here and Y amount there you are opening up your personal account checkbook for public display…figures given in the general picture of things is kosher. Figures given in the first person is tacky…imauo…why do I or anyone else other than those I mentioned in my first post need to know how much you individually play with? It was your personal “I” did with “X” amount that I found tacky…you could have said what you had to say without tacking a figure amount on it…
josef,
You are obviously uncomfortable discussing such matters. That is your shortcoming. Not mine. You call it tacky as an expression of your discomfort with such topics. I don’t. We shall agree to disagree. Meanwhile, if you happened to be one of those that bought facebook at the IPO price, I’ll be glad to take them off your hands for $5/share just because I’m that kinda guy.
Building that, one day at a time
July 31st, 2012
5:39 pm
The data discussed indicate an increase from 21% to 46% entitlements from 1962 to 2012, during which time the total base factors increased almost three and a half time in cost. Knowing that government cannot spend a dollar without first taking a dollar from the citizens paying taxes (revenue), my question is: Who is actually being given the dollars forcibly taken from others, and for what actual (not perceived) reasons or needs?