So I open up The New York Times this morning to find heartening news from op-ed columnist Timothy Egan:
There is a very simple way to make Medicare whole through the end of this century, far less complicated, and more of a bargain in the long run than the bizarre Ryan plan.
That’s a relief! I’ve been reading for most of my adult life about how complicated our medical economy has become, and how difficult it will be to meet the challenge of rising costs and longer lifespans. Deeply learned people have studied the problem for decades. Frankly, I was beginning to worry. So it’s good to know that a “very simple” solution has been found to solve the problem not only for me, but also for my children.
Not only is the solution simple—“raise taxes”—it will also be painless, which is nice because I have often heard that it will require a great deal of shared sacrifice. Not so. We only need to pay “a little extra.”
But now I’m confused, because I just came across this, also from The New York Times:
In other words, whatever amount you paid on your federal income tax return this year would need to be 61 percent more, now and forever, to pay all the Social Security and Medicare benefits that have been promised over and above the payroll tax.
I don’t know much about math, but I do know enough about counting votes to say that passing a 61% across–the-board income tax hike is not now—nor will it be in the foreseeable future—“very simple.” Alas, this problem of retiree health care and pensions, which perplexes not just American society, but all advanced economies, may require more than a two-word answer.
UPDATE: Here is a splendid example of why I never wanted to blog. Blogging is a craft all its own, and I’m not good at it. Andrew Sullivan, on the other hand, is a master blogger. Notice how he not only beat me to this post by a mile, he also made his point more sharply and concisely.
