(originally posted here∞)

I don't think posters like Faramir are arguing against the concept of a social safety net. What I see is a group of people (a silent majority of anti-SS ideologues? who knows) for whom the inefficiencies and overlaps of our various safety nets are offensive to a purely logical mindset.

Why should the minimum benefits accorded to old people under our unofficial social contract be differently funded, banked, and distributed from everyone else? Mind you, I'm not holding up WIC, Medicaid, food stamps, state-run hospitals, unemployment insurance, etc. as a paragon of orthogonal bureaucratic vision :) Much of the present separation is due to historical or political accident; I presume that ideological reformers would like to simply review and eventually consolidate the entire system much as W claims to be doing with the intelligence agencies.

I applaud them for raising the question because while a dramatic top-down reorganization of income redistribution is unlikely and unnecessary in the near term, it fosters dialogue about attacking large sociopolitical problems head-on in related areas where such strategies are needed *cough*healthcare*cough*

Personally, if we phased in a program of welfare consolidation while shifting the subject of retirement savings away from the public sector entirely, I think it would be great. Unfortunately as hiphink notes, the devil within the details is more insidious here than ever, and I don't trust any of the players likely to be in power over the next decade with the task.


Back to CollectedWritings