Progressive Wednesday

The Nitty-Gritty from the Twin Cities: Shortest Social Security Article Ever

Social Security was not founded as a retirement program. It was a New Deal program meant to fight poverty.

Back in the day, people worked until they couldn't work any more (read: frail, sick, dead, etc.). Most (if any) had no pension, and the idea of saving for retirement didn't exist at that point, so the elderly were often in dire straits. Indeed, the official name of the Social Security program is OASDI: Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance.

This is an important distinction. Because if you see Social Security as merely a retirement account, then it becomes tempting to say that it's not doing the job compared to other options. However, if you recognize that it's a safety net on a number of fronts– payments to the disabled, widows, orphaned children, as well as a source of modest retirement income to keep people out of poverty — then it gets a bit harder to argue about dismantling it, either outright or through Trojan Horses like “private accounts.–

One other thing, though, regarding private accounts: we already have them. They're called Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs); they're optional, and a great way to put money away on a tax-advantaged basis. So, if you want private accounts, fund your IRA. If you want to dismantle Social Security, at least have the gumption to say it, and don't pretend you're “reforming– it.

The Nitty-Gritty from the Twin Cities: More than Mowing

I am not a rich man. I have an okay job with an okay income. I live in an okay house in an okay part of an okay city. I do not pay people to help with everyday home upkeep. I vacuum my carpets, do my laundry, shovel my show, and mow my lawn.

However, if some kid came by and said “I'll mow your lawn for $5, Mister Tall Guy,– I'd pull out a sweet Lincoln for little Jimmy and down an ice-cold Rolling Rock while he sweats away. That $5 would be an absurd bargain for me.

Ladies and gentleman, I present to you AmeriCorps. A program where, each year, thousands of young men and women dedicate a year of their lives to service – “ doing all sorts of difficult and often-thankless tasks. What do they get for that year? A stipend of not even $10,000, health insurance, and an educational scholarship of $4725 (barely a semester of school at most public colleges nowadays).

Think about that. Even if you count the scholarship as money in hand, that's $7.50 per hour over the course of a year. And those AmeriCorps members aren't schlepping coffee or wiping down tables at Chipotle. They're building houses, tutoring children, feeding the poor, cleaning up polluted sites, and so on and so forth.

Some conservatives will mutter, “You shouldn't have to pay volunteers.– Well, the military is all-volunteer, isn't it? No one would ever dare suggest not paying the military. There are many ways to serve America selflessly, and our government should encourage that in whatever way possible.

I can appreciate the libertarian view of limiting government as much as possible. However, the practical, real-world, value-oriented part of me sees AmeriCorps as one of the most absurdly great bargains out there for my tax dollars. Now, if I can only find a kid to mow my lawn for $5.