For most people over their lifetimes they get a much lower rate of return from Social Security than they would get from an private investments that they would make. The New York Times would claim that those people benefit from Social Security simply because they got money from the program. But if the program were cut, wouldn't it be fair to assume that the taxes that you were paying into the program would also be cut? If both programs and the taxes for those programs were to be cut, many people getting the "benefits" of the programs would be better off.
- Name: John Lott
- Location: Virginia, United States
My commentary on a broad array of economics and crime related issues.
Crime Prevention Research Center
Copyright 2005 by John R. Lott, Jr. All rights reserved
More Books of Mine
Reviews of Freedomnomics
Other Web sites
- Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law owns company given $...
- Howard Stern and staff interview Obama Supporters
- New book by Donald Boudreaux : "Hypocrites & Half-...
- Summary of Arguments in University of Texas at Aus...
- Obama on how the working poor can be organized to ...
- Obama: "The vast majority of Americans would like ...
- GM giving massive subsidies to try getting people ...
- Media Bias on Global Warming?: How could that poss...
- How do Multiple Victim Public Shooters Decide Wher...
- What percentile does your income place you at?
Interesting Past Topics
(description of book, downloadable data sets, and discussions of previous controversies)