A few days ago I discussed a suggestion by House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas that blacks, because of their higher mortality rates, were short-changed by social security (and an inane response from Meet The Press host Tim Russert). Now comes New York Times calumnist Paul Krugman with an especially vicious, even for him, attack on President Bush making the same argument.
President Bush recently repeated earlier arguments that the lower life expectancy of blacks means that they receive less benefits from social security than whites. Krugman disagrees. The crux of his argument is that
Mr. Bush’s remarks on African-Americans perpetuate a crude misunderstanding about what life expectancy means. It’s true that the current life expectancy for black males at birth is only 68.8 years – but that doesn’t mean that a black man who has worked all his life can expect to die after collecting only a few years’ worth of Social Security benefits. Blacks’ low life expectancy is largely due to high death rates in childhood and young adulthood. African-American men who make it to age 65 can expect to live, and collect benefits, for an additional 14.6 years – not that far short of the 16.6-year figure for white men.
I’m neither an actuary nor a social security expert, but Krugman’s screed struck me as not only over the top but as factually suspicious. First, you don’t have to be an actuary to notice that the two year greater life expectancy of whites over blacks who reach 65 undermines Krugman’s argument. “Not that far short” indeed, as though white men receiving benefits 14% longer than black men is insignificant.
But now listen to someone who is an actuary: meep, who comments on this site frequently (and well), has this comment on another discussion of Krugman:
Using the U.S. Life Tables, 2002 (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/life2002.pdf), I calculated the following probabilities:
Probability of living to age 65, given you’re 25 years old now:
white males: 82%
black males: 68%
white females: 89%
black females: 80%
….
How about survival probabilities at later ages?
Probability of living to age 80, given you’re now age 55:
White Males: 51%
Black Males: 37%
White Females: 64%
Black Females: 54%
Sure enough, a brief excursion through Google easily turned up a good deal more evidence that Krugman was on shaky ground in attributing the racial life expectancy gap almost exclusively to infant mortality and homicide. Some examples:
- According to Social Security expert David John of the Heritage Foundation, one-fifth of white males die between the ages of 50 and 70. But one-third of black males die between those ages. If you die before you reach the age of 62, you have no chance of collecting benefits, and if you die shortly thereafter, you will not recoup the payroll taxes you paid into the system.
- … assume that a 30-year-old black man and a 30-year-old white man each earns $30,000 per year over his working lifetime. By the time they retire, they will both have paid $136,740 in Social Security taxes and will be entitled to monthly benefits of $1,162. However, the white man can expect to live until age 81. If he does, he will receive $189,389 in total Social Security benefits. The black man, in contrast, with a life expectancy of 79, can expect to receive $161,750.
This may actually understate the unfairness of the current system, since it is based on life expectancies at age 65. If both are aged 30 today, the life expectancy for the white man is 76; for the black man, 70. According to those projections, the black man can expect to receive nearly $100,000 less in lifetime Social Security benefits than his white counterpart, receiving less than half of what he actually paid into the program.
- a 20-year-old black male can expect a real rate of return of only 0.73 percent, while a white male can expect a return of 1.82 percent…. White 20-year-old males can expect 47 cents in benefits for every $1 they pay in taxes; 20-year old black males can expect to receive only 34 cents….
In general, African Americans are over-represented among taxpayers and under-represented among beneficiaries. So one way to see Social Security is as a system in which African American workers subsidize the retirements of longer-living whites.(Report by National Center for Policy Analysis]
- Ron Walters, a professor at the University of Maryland and one of America’s best-known black political scientists, has called Social Security “a form of ‘reverse reparations.’ ”
But as I said initially, I’m neither an actuary nor a social security expert. I don’t offer the evidence above to prove that Krugman is wrong; that argument will have to be made by people far more knowledgeable than I (Two examples that deserve a close reading are here and here). I do think, however, that it (and what is here is just a sample) establishes something Krugman appears incapable of recognizing: Bush’s argument is quite reasonable and not necessarily the result, as Krugman asserts, of bigotry.
Indeed, Krugman’s offensive transgression is not that he’s wrong — although I think he is — but his increasingly shrill insistence that the president, and in fact anyone who disagrees, is guilty of “fundamental dishonesty,” is “shameful,” is telling “black lies” by “playing the race card,” and is doing so because of “bigotry.” What I think is shameful is that the New York Times has allowed itself to be a platform for the dissemination of such discourse-coarsening tripe.
I’ve just said that Krugman similarly slanders “anyone who disagrees” with him, but that is perhaps too kind inasmuch as he is not only a hack but a partisan hack. Otherwise he would have to denounce Sen. Moynihan in the same terms, since, as JustOneMinute points out, Moynihan made the same argument in the 2001 Bush Commission final report.
Ok, then. Granted everything you say is true, can we just ignore Krugman (and the Times) from here on out? Surely that’s what they deserve.
I try not to read Krugman as much as possible. It has been a long, long while since I’ve seen anything from him that is intellectually dishonest… usually, in cases like these, I prefer to ascribe stupidity or ignorance to the author; however, Krugman should definitely know better.
Still, he’s better than Maureen Dowd.
Obsession
The Anal Philosopher frequently refers to New York Times columnist Paul Krugman as
Meep – saying that Krugman is better than Dowd is like saying that cheescake with chocolate sauce isn’t as fattening as fettucine alfredo :)
meep – I didn’t mean to say that Krugman is intellectually dishonest, merely that he is a partisan hack. I don’t know enough to know whether or not he’s intellectually dishonest, i.e., saying things that he knows not to be true. Or maybe I am saying that, since it surely appears that his controlling standard is not truth but slamming Bush. Still, reasonable people can obviously make his argument about social security and race. The SLATE column I linked, for example (source of the Ron Walters quote), argued that blacks were not short-changed by ss. Again, my point was not that Krugman was wrong but that he can’t seem to argue without calling his opponents stupid bigots.
I’d like to jump on my favorite hobbyhorse, which is that while statistics are wonderful things, you can’t apply them to individuals.
The local paper today has a front-page article about Bettie Rutherford Wilson, who is the oldest person living in the US, third oldest in the world. She is a 114-year-old black lady who lives in New Albany, Mississippi. She could be the last living American whose parents were born into slavery, but that’s impossible to confirm.
The article sez she survived a heart attack at age 100, and gall bladder surgery at age 106, and quotes her as saying, “I feel pretty good these days!” Wow.
So lets fix the problem of black mortality. Or are we just assuming that society won’t do anything about that?
So lets fix the problem of black mortality.
actus, I don
actus, who is society in this context, and what is it supposed to do?
Before answering that question, we have to know why the black mortality rate is so different. Off the top of my head, I can think of several possibilities.
Maybe black people are over-represented among the people who eat unhealthy diets.
Maybe they are less likely to go to the doctor for physicals when they’re not sick, so don’t catch problems like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or diabetes early enough. Maybe if they do, they don’t take their medications like they should.
Maybe they can’t afford to get medical care; and among individuals maybe that’s because they truly don’t have enough money, or because they do have it but they have other priorities.
Maybe they are more likely to be involved in risky behavior or domestic disputes.
Maybe they are genetically prone to diseases that don’t get enough research or that doctors aren’t educated about because white folks aren’t affected so much.
Maybe there is less police and fire protection in black neighborhoods, and less enforcement of safety codes and so forth.
Maybe all of the above and a hundred more reasons besides, all of which have different causes and different solutions, with different groups of people responsible for them.
So I think your question of what society is willing to do about the problem can’t be answered.
The above-mentioned 114-year-old, by the way, attributes her longevity to living right. I think that’s part of it, but also she just hit the genetic jackpot.
Richard, I knew what he meant.
My daughter learned in fitness class that “50% of people with osteoporesis will die”. She said, “Let me get osteoporesis, then, and I’ll have a 50/50 chance of living forever!”
Laura,
Many of your ideas on black mortality are based upon learned behavior. Education and information can aid in that area. Simply stating as you do, “So I think your question of what society is willing to do about the problem can’t be answered.” isn’t appropriate, because, believe it or not, African Americans are actually PART of the society.
Actus’ question is indeed appropriate.
–Cobra
Laura,
Your daughter has a good sense of humor. Obviously, she wont be a liberal.
Cobra, “society” is a word that means different things in different situations. The society that could do something about poor eating habits is not the same society that could do something about differences in police protection.
Of course African Americans are part of society. Of course they are. So what’s with the question about what “society” is willing to do? I could say, if you don’t care enough to take care of yourself, what am I supposed to do about that? Or I could say, if I realize that it would be bad for me to eat at McDonalds morning, noon, and night, why would black people not know that?
I think you’re still oversimplifying.
Richard, I know she won’t. When “W” first was up for election, her Democrat 8th grade history teacher mentioned that most of the proposed tax cut would go to the rich. The kid replied, “Why not? They pay most of the taxes.”
Laura, you have taught your child well. However, you better be careful what you say here. actus is planning to have you charged with child abuse for exposing her to all of these conservative ideas.
Well I noticed our Leftist friends here have once again missed the elephant in the room. Why should they be concerned about the shorter life expectancy of Blacks, but not be concerned about the shorter life expectancy of men. After all, we are all equal, right? Thus, if one group has a different result than another, it must be due to prejudice. So clearly, the shorter life expectancy of men must be due to bigotry against men. Women are driving us to our graves!
Men have shorter life expectancies because they have less DNA.
Men have shorter life expectancies because they have less DNA.
Your just a gene bigot!
Laura,
Now, if I was a CONSERVATIVE, my next argument would be that all men are being cheated by social security, not just African Americans, wouldn’t it?
–Cobra
By the way, if you read Paul Krugman
Well, sure, Cobra. Make that argument. I would. I’ll do it for you, if you’d like.
African Americans are actually PART of the society.
“So I think your question of what society is willing to do about the problem can’t be answered.”
It might not be. But instead of predicating social security policy forever on it, lets perhaps do something about it.
What, for instance?
Bush\’s “Bigotry” And “Black Lies”? (discriminations)
Bush\’s “Bigotry” And “Black Lies”? (discriminations)
Notherbob writes:
>>>Unfortunately (because of your consorting with those outside the liberal echo chamber
Cobra, I want to address several things in your last post.
1 – You may see some right-wing ideology in my posts. I do not claim to be a centrist. However, to mirror your non-tree hugging, I do recycle. And the more I think about it, the more I believe we have got to embrace and fix the public school system in this country, which many right-wingers would probably want to take me out and shoot me for.
2 – I remember all the public health messages in school, too, and I took them all to heart. Many of my fellow students didn’t. Some of the kids who sat in the room with me and looked at slides of cancer-ridden lungs went on to develop their own smoking habits. I don’t understand why anybody my age (44) or younger would ever pick up that first cigarette. I just honestly, truly don’t get it. Education is important but it’s not going to solve the problem of self-destuctive behavior. Nothing will, actually.
3 – Once again, it’s not “society” at large that’s proactive about these problems. A lot of the breast cancer awareness stuff is done by the Susan G. Komen foundation. The American Heart Association reminds us of the importance of watching our diet. As it happens, some local group here in Memphis (maybe associated with Baptist hospitals? maybe not) sponsors health fairs where people can go to get FREE cholesterol, diabetes, and blood pressure screenings. It seems like that happens about twice a year, and it’s advertised on black radio stations. Somebody has taken out ads on the sides of city buses saying “Who’s your boo doing while he’s doing you?” to get women to think about AIDS. Another group took out ads on the buses that said “NEGLECTION KILLS”. I started to laugh about that and then asked myself what I was doing to stop housefires from killing children, and was heartily ashamed of myself. I don’t know about society with a capital S, but different civic-minded folks are doing different things. I suggest that if there’s a particular cause of black mortality that bothers you, or white mortality or human mortality, find out if there’s a local group trying to do something and see if you can help. I myself support a local homeless shelter and a crisis pregnancy center. Or if there’s not one, start one.
4 – I wonder whether statements about what could happen if only “society” cared enough are an attempt to invoke a guilt trip in people who don’t think critically. Guilty feelings are very useful things, when they correlate to actual guilt, that is, to things done or left undone that shouldn’t be. They’re what make us offer restitution and try not to repeat the behavior. Guilt without guilty feelings is sociopathic. Guilty feelings without guilt is neurotic. I refuse to feel guilty about things I don’t have anything to do with and can’t help. If people asked me if they should do dangerous or unhealthy things, I would tell them “No.” They don’t ask me. I realize that sounds flippant and I don’t mean to, but if I take on the responsibility of self-destructive behaviors in the black community it would look like I don’t think black people know how to run their own lives, and I don’t think that. So there it is.
Extra Credit Assignment
As always, the EduSphere offers some excellent reading that is to be had from a variety of sites and writers. This listing will be updated throughout the weekend…
“What, for instance?”
Figure out whats killing black people more and see if we can do something about it. If its crime, stop it, if its cops, stop that, if its poor health insurance, fix that, if its poverty, fix that.
etc..
actus last post sort of captures the dilemma that liberals have fallen into. Everything is fixable, and nothing is the fault of those who are afflicted.
I suggest this post as the ultimate in modern liberal delusional thinking, and as good a demonstration of why the Democratic Party has gone down the tubes as you can find.
The era of religious belief in the power of government to “fix it” is over. It doesn’t work, often produces counter productive results, and the electorate has rejected it over and over again. Until liberal and Democrats can get over their “fix it” with government religion, they will remain shut out and defeated.
One aspect of the differential returns on Social Security should be mentioned, and that is survivors’ benefits. Women do not get widows’ or divorced surviving spouses’ benefits unless they have been legally married. And their minor children are not eligible for benefits based on their father’s earnings unless they are legitimate. (I recently applied for Social Security and had to obtain a certified copy of my marriage certificate to claim benefits based on my late ex-husband’s earnings.) A large majority of African-American children are non-marital births. (That has other negative consequences as well, of course.)
Actus, you remind me of that cartoon where a scientist has complex formulas scrawled all over a chalkboard, and in the middle the words “Then a miracle occurs.” The other scientist says “I think you need to be more explicit here in step two.”
http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1/acsdisplay.html?DOC=faces\harris.html
Let’s say that crime is a major problem with black mortality. It probably is. What is society supposed to do to stop that? What? What?
Stephen, I don’t think actus is thinking that society = government. I could be wrong.
‘Let’s say that crime is a major problem with black mortality. It probably is. What is society supposed to do to stop that? What? What?’
I don’t know. I don’t know what causes black mortality or what can fix those things. I’m sure people are looking into ways to reduce the impact of crime on black communities.
I just think its interesting that when people find out about black mortality, it becomes an incentive to privatize social security, rather than fix the black mortality problem. Its almost an admission that we are going to do nothing about fixing the black mortality problem.
Actus. People are doing all kinds of things. Did you read what I wrote, about the free health screenings and so forth?
I can see myself walking up to a black person and saying, “You should eschew crime because it shortens black folks’ life expectancy. Oh, and watch what you eat.” Yeah, that’d go over.
‘I can see myself walking up to a black person and saying, “You should eschew crime because it shortens black folks’ life expectancy. Oh, and watch what you eat.” Yeah, that’d go over.’
I don’t see the point of this example. I do see that arguments that say that the future of black americans is to have a lower life expectancy are an admission that we aren’t going to fix the problem.
OK, I give up.
Actus,
It’s a no win scenario in this argument. My contention most visibly coincides with yours, in that I see that the black mortality rate as the front page, full-type headline, with this “social security cheating blacks” issue somewhere in a tinted box on page 68. Laura does, to her credit, give examples of where “society” is doing something, but she herself doesn’t seem to believe they’re having an effect, and I for one don’t believe these efforts are given the priority status they deserve.
Of course, with me being the cynnic, I
don’t find any surprise at all in a Bush theme burying the lead. That’s par for the course. What is amazing to me, however, is the amount of sermons I receive about “expecting the worst from whites”, or “assuming racism at every turn.”
Well, this discussion is about LIFE AND DEATH, so…maybe I take a little extra scrutiny with my views of the Commander in Chief’s policies.
–Cobra
OK, I’ll try again.
Actus. You are society. What are you doing about the black mortality rate?
OK, I’ll be the only one again to state the obvious. Caring for one’s personal health is the obligation of… who?
The longevity of blacks will increase only when blacks take better care of themselves and engage in fewer self-destructive behaviors.
And, Cobra, you are a good example. Your mental and physical health would improve immediately if you abandoned your racism “scholarship” and instead focused on education and job. The paranoid focus on whites as the party responsible for your failures will have devastatingly negative consequences for your mental and physical health. I guarantee it.
Get a good education and job, and start looking after your own health. Quit blaming others and expecting the government to bail you out. It works. Try it.
‘Actus. You are society. What are you doing about the black mortality rate?’
Vote for politicians who want to do something about it rather than implement policies that depend on and assume the perpetuation of the problem.
I think you still miss my point. I really have no idea what the causes are. I just don’t like the people who want to use the problem for the destruction of social security, rather than use the problem for, well, solving the problem.
Other than that, the things that I like in general are: greater labor rights, increased real wages, and improved access to health care. I think particualrly for the population with high mortality this could be a good thing.
Actus writes:
>>>Other than that, the things that I like in general are: greater labor rights, increased real wages, and improved access to health care. I think particualrly for the population with high mortality this could be a good thing.”
Those positions would label you as an arch-enemy of the modern conservative movement.
–Cobra
Not if he can tell us how we can accomplish them without screwing the economy, taxing ourselves into oblivion, and transforming the U.S. into another sociali$t wasteland.
By the way, I don’t know why helping black people live longer and fixing social security have to be mutually exclusive. It looks like you think conservatives want black people to die earlier so we can accomplish our nefarious goals. That makes about as much sense as voting for a politician who tells you he WANTS to help and sitting back thinking you’ve done your part.
(I had to spell sociali$t that way to get past the comment filter.)
‘By the way, I don’t know why helping black people live longer and fixing social security have to be mutually exclusive’
They’re not. Its just that when privatization is being sold on the basis of the mortality, then its kind of like we’re being told that we want to do something like the former and not fix the latter.