<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Rare Triumph for Liberals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/</link>
	<description>The Sweet Release of Reason</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: picture of zoroastrianism</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5701</link>
		<dc:creator>picture of zoroastrianism</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:28:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5701</guid>
		<description>Declaration of Heaven on Earth!
Chant this prayer &amp; we will have heaven on earth:

Dearest, greatest, holiest!
Please give us all, the full heaven on earth!
I thank you, &amp; I worship you.

For more information, please visit http://www.normism.org !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Declaration of Heaven on Earth!<br />
Chant this prayer &amp; we will have heaven on earth:</p>
<p>Dearest, greatest, holiest!<br />
Please give us all, the full heaven on earth!<br />
I thank you, &amp; I worship you.</p>
<p>For more information, please visit <a href="http://www.normism.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.normism.org</a> !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: picture of zoroastrianism</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5716</link>
		<dc:creator>picture of zoroastrianism</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5716</guid>
		<description>Declaration of Heaven on Earth!
Chant this prayer &amp; we will have heaven on earth:

Dearest, greatest, holiest!
Please give us all, the full heaven on earth!
I thank you, &amp; I worship you.

For more information, please visit http://www.normism.org !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Declaration of Heaven on Earth!<br />
Chant this prayer &amp; we will have heaven on earth:</p>
<p>Dearest, greatest, holiest!<br />
Please give us all, the full heaven on earth!<br />
I thank you, &amp; I worship you.</p>
<p>For more information, please visit <a href="http://www.normism.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.normism.org</a> !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Waligore</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5715</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Waligore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 May 2005 23:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5715</guid>
		<description>Rawls&#039;s next line immediately following Will&#039;s quote?

&quot;Of course, there can be no certainty about this.&quot;

Political Liberalism, p. 68.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rawls&#8217;s next line immediately following Will&#8217;s quote?</p>
<p>&#8220;Of course, there can be no certainty about this.&#8221;</p>
<p>Political Liberalism, p. 68.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julian</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5714</link>
		<dc:creator>Julian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2005 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5714</guid>
		<description>Monkyboy seems to have a fetish about Will.  Doesn&#039;t whoever pays his allowance let him write about anyone else?

Snark aside, two points:
(1) Pointing out that many people who&#039;re taxed heavily with the promise of a future benefit then fail to save and rely on the future benefit proves exactly nothing about how they&#039;d behave in the absence of that program.
(2) Since retirees are often living largely off accumulated assets, focusing on income makes sense only if you&#039;re being intentionally deceptive or obtuse. I&#039;ll assume the former in the case of those who promulgate those figures, but in monkyboy&#039;s case, I think the latter is probably more tenable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monkyboy seems to have a fetish about Will.  Doesn&#8217;t whoever pays his allowance let him write about anyone else?</p>
<p>Snark aside, two points:<br />
(1) Pointing out that many people who&#8217;re taxed heavily with the promise of a future benefit then fail to save and rely on the future benefit proves exactly nothing about how they&#8217;d behave in the absence of that program.<br />
(2) Since retirees are often living largely off accumulated assets, focusing on income makes sense only if you&#8217;re being intentionally deceptive or obtuse. I&#8217;ll assume the former in the case of those who promulgate those figures, but in monkyboy&#8217;s case, I think the latter is probably more tenable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Javier</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5713</link>
		<dc:creator>Javier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2005 03:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5713</guid>
		<description>Monkeyboy, you&#039;ve completely ignored the argument Will has repeatedly made: that social security is a deceptive government program, intentionally designed as a noble lie to trick people into supporting it as social insurance. This deception is inconsistent with a committment to public reason. Also, you ignore the point that a well-designed means-tested program might prevent poverty among the elderly just as well as social security does now. Moreover, I think social security&#039;s fiscal problems would still be present (although delayed) even if Bush&#039;s tax cuts were never implemented.

Will might be wrong about all of this, but please address his arguments and show why he is wrong instead of attacking him as a hack.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monkeyboy, you&#8217;ve completely ignored the argument Will has repeatedly made: that social security is a deceptive government program, intentionally designed as a noble lie to trick people into supporting it as social insurance. This deception is inconsistent with a committment to public reason. Also, you ignore the point that a well-designed means-tested program might prevent poverty among the elderly just as well as social security does now. Moreover, I think social security&#8217;s fiscal problems would still be present (although delayed) even if Bush&#8217;s tax cuts were never implemented.</p>
<p>Will might be wrong about all of this, but please address his arguments and show why he is wrong instead of attacking him as a hack.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monkyboy</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5712</link>
		<dc:creator>monkyboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 23:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5712</guid>
		<description>What exactly are Will&#039;s substansive arguments, Javier?

Social Security provides one third of retirees with their sole source of income and another third with their main source of income.

Any poll you choose to look at shows only a small minority of Americans want Congress to alter SS.

Not even the right-wingers hide the fact that the push to change SS is funded almost entirely by Wall Street firms.

As posted above, the lowest quintile of Americans have a combined annual income of $345 billion. They also have no net worth.

The highest quintile of American families have a combined annual income of over $4 trillion and about $50 trillion in assets.

The problem is that the federal budget continues to grow and those who can afford to pay for this increase have been let off the hook.  We are in debt $8 trillion and growing.  The push to &quot;reform&quot; SS is just a smokescreen to draw attention from the crippling effects of Bush&#039;s massive 2003 tax cut.

When Will offers up anything other than lines from Carl Rove&#039;s talking points, I&#039;ll be glad to counter it...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What exactly are Will&#8217;s substansive arguments, Javier?</p>
<p>Social Security provides one third of retirees with their sole source of income and another third with their main source of income.</p>
<p>Any poll you choose to look at shows only a small minority of Americans want Congress to alter SS.</p>
<p>Not even the right-wingers hide the fact that the push to change SS is funded almost entirely by Wall Street firms.</p>
<p>As posted above, the lowest quintile of Americans have a combined annual income of $345 billion. They also have no net worth.</p>
<p>The highest quintile of American families have a combined annual income of over $4 trillion and about $50 trillion in assets.</p>
<p>The problem is that the federal budget continues to grow and those who can afford to pay for this increase have been let off the hook.  We are in debt $8 trillion and growing.  The push to &#8220;reform&#8221; SS is just a smokescreen to draw attention from the crippling effects of Bush&#8217;s massive 2003 tax cut.</p>
<p>When Will offers up anything other than lines from Carl Rove&#8217;s talking points, I&#8217;ll be glad to counter it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: asg</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5711</link>
		<dc:creator>asg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 23:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5711</guid>
		<description>Monkyboy wouldn&#039;t know an argument if it bit him in the ass.

Seriously, Will, hasn&#039;t he overstayed his welcome yet? I&#039;ve actually stopped bothering to read a lot of your comments threads because I&#039;m sick and tired of having to scroll past his brain-dead non sequiturs and slanders. He&#039;s already proved he&#039;s not interested in debate; why don&#039;t you start deleting his posts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monkyboy wouldn&#8217;t know an argument if it bit him in the ass.</p>
<p>Seriously, Will, hasn&#8217;t he overstayed his welcome yet? I&#8217;ve actually stopped bothering to read a lot of your comments threads because I&#8217;m sick and tired of having to scroll past his brain-dead non sequiturs and slanders. He&#8217;s already proved he&#8217;s not interested in debate; why don&#8217;t you start deleting his posts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Javier</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5710</link>
		<dc:creator>Javier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 22:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5710</guid>
		<description>Monkeyboy, why don&#039;t you respond to Will&#039;s substantive arguments instead of engaging in pure ad-hominem?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monkeyboy, why don&#8217;t you respond to Will&#8217;s substantive arguments instead of engaging in pure ad-hominem?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monkyboy</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5709</link>
		<dc:creator>monkyboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 21:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5709</guid>
		<description>Given the current polls, I&#039;d hardly say EVERYBODY is fighting.  Just the wealthiest Americans and their lackeys like the Republicans and CATO.

I don&#039;t know the solution to helping out America&#039;s poor, but it sure ain&#039;t the scam you&#039;re pushing...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Given the current polls, I&#8217;d hardly say EVERYBODY is fighting.  Just the wealthiest Americans and their lackeys like the Republicans and CATO.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know the solution to helping out America&#8217;s poor, but it sure ain&#8217;t the scam you&#8217;re pushing&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will Wilkinson</title>
		<link>http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/05/20/a-rare-triumph-for-liberals/#comment-5708</link>
		<dc:creator>Will Wilkinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 21:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=714#comment-5708</guid>
		<description>Gareth, I guess I didn&#039;t make this explicit it my post. If you&#039;re going to be technical about the meaning of insurance, then SS just doesn&#039;t qualify. If you&#039;re going to be loose about it, and say that SS is insurance because it indemnifies old people against the risks poverty, then so do the alternatives.

Now, as a matter of legal fact, the social security payroll tax is a tax. The Supreme Court ruled that SS was constitutional because it uses, on the one hand, congressional taxing power, and, on the other, spending power under the rubric of promoting the &quot;general welfare.&quot; There is simply no dispute whether or not thhe SS payroll tax is a tax. The question is whether a tax plus a set of non-guaranteed intergenerational transfers counts as insurance in any strict sense. The answer is that it does not. I admit that it is insurance in the loose sense, but then so is everything else, and the regular criteria about progressivity etc.  kick in.

The first generation got a phenomenal deal. But there is simply NO WAY that the current cohort of workers is going to get the same ratio of benefits to tax dollar as the current cohort of retirees. THAT IS WHY EVERYBODY IS FIGHTING. Taxes will go up, future benefits will go down, or both. And that is the sound of current workers getting screwed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gareth, I guess I didn&#8217;t make this explicit it my post. If you&#8217;re going to be technical about the meaning of insurance, then SS just doesn&#8217;t qualify. If you&#8217;re going to be loose about it, and say that SS is insurance because it indemnifies old people against the risks poverty, then so do the alternatives.</p>
<p>Now, as a matter of legal fact, the social security payroll tax is a tax. The Supreme Court ruled that SS was constitutional because it uses, on the one hand, congressional taxing power, and, on the other, spending power under the rubric of promoting the &#8220;general welfare.&#8221; There is simply no dispute whether or not thhe SS payroll tax is a tax. The question is whether a tax plus a set of non-guaranteed intergenerational transfers counts as insurance in any strict sense. The answer is that it does not. I admit that it is insurance in the loose sense, but then so is everything else, and the regular criteria about progressivity etc.  kick in.</p>
<p>The first generation got a phenomenal deal. But there is simply NO WAY that the current cohort of workers is going to get the same ratio of benefits to tax dollar as the current cohort of retirees. THAT IS WHY EVERYBODY IS FIGHTING. Taxes will go up, future benefits will go down, or both. And that is the sound of current workers getting screwed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

