Krugman: Slanting Social Security (* Admin will Cook the Books)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/11/opinion/11krugman.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=

Many people involved in the debate over Social Security's future worry that the 2005 trustees' report will be slanted in favor of privatization.

I don't expect to see books that are literally cooked: Stephen Goss, the agency's chief actuary, has an excellent reputation. But it's not out of the question. After all, in 2003 the chief actuary of Social Security's sister agency, which oversees Medicare, was told that he would be fired if he gave Congress accurate information about the cost of the Bush Medicare bill.

Even if the numbers aren't fabricated, however, it's a good bet that they will be presented in a way intended to make Social Security's financial outlook seem much bleaker than it really is.

Why should we expect a slanted report?

First, this administration has politicized analysis across the board, from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Food and Drug Administration.

if you missed it.

Fighting the man, YAY Krugman.

eom

have a high school junior taking Saturdays new SAT, I do, this was ROTFLMAO funny.

people in the Red states are really angry about *'s SS BS.
The only way Bush can get SS through is if he blames the Ss problems(faux problems) on Gay Married Terrorists.


So in Krugmans name, I call for all DUers to use the Gay Married Terrorists description from now on.

If your a *supporter your screwed by the gay married terrorist.

And Krugmans other pearl of wisdom"CAT FOOD". Thanks to those who voted * into office we may all be eating cat food in our elderly years.


Cat Food or starve

Gay Married Terrorists

I'll take that bet.

Generally, the numbers coming out of this (mis)administration are about as useful as a leaky bucket full of shit.