I'm working with a new progressive group here in Madison, WI on reframing issues so they reflect progressive values, as advocated by George Lakoff. Social security is a flagship progressive issue, but up until now we've just reacted to whatever the Republicans are spewing out this week instead of using it to demonstrate our fundamental values. The questions at the end are intended to help people focus on values, on why we support social security in the first place.
Comments, suggestions greatly appreciated!
Social Security:
The Golden Rule in Action
The elderly, the young, the sick and the disabled: How we treat the most vulnerable members of society reveals who we are and what we value. That's why the debate over social security is first and foremost a debate about values, about who we are as a people and what kind of society we want to live in.
Social Security:
The Golden Rule in Action
The elderly, the young, the sick and the disabled: How we treat the most vulnerable members of society reveals who we are and what we value. That's why the debate over social security is first and foremost a debate about values, about who we are as a people and what kind of society we want to live in.
At its very heart, "social security" means that we all join together (that's the social) to guarantee a minimum standard of living for the elderly and the disabled (that's the security). The social security system harnesses the power of today's working people to guarantee a decent standard of living for today's elderly. It's the Golden Rule in action: taking care of the elderly today as we would like to be taken care of as we grow older in our time.
Often, the statistics and facts wielded by both sides obscure the fundamental issue. We can understand much of the debate over "social security" just by considering its opposite: "individual risk." Conservative opponents of social security are not interested in "strengthening," "preserving," or "enhancing" the social security system: their goal is to replace it with one based on individual risk. They envision a system in which private accounts based on volatile financial markets have a central role and guaranteed benefits are reduced to a bare minimum, eventually falling below poverty level. They want to replace the "Golden Rule" of social security with the "Sink or Swim" of private accounts and individual risk.
Don't be fooled by the Republican spin-machine and its false promises of a free lunch: we can't have increased returns without increased risks. The only free lunch in Bush's plan to privatize social security will be eaten by Wall St. investment firms: these well-funded backers of the Bush plan will get a tremendous windfall from privatization. The lion's share of the "higher returns" Bush touts will be consumed by administrative costs or used to fatten the profit margins of big investment firms. This is not about strengthening the social security system: it's about letting investment firms do for the social security system what Enron did for California electricity markets.
We can't let the overwhelming success of social security in reducing poverty among the elderly lead us into complacency: we must never forget how easy it is for the elderly to sink into poverty, and how scary, painful and humiliating it is once they get there. For millions of elderly Americans the safety net provided by social security is the only thing that prevents them from falling into an ugly and degrading life of poverty. We can't let the false promise of "free lunch" private accounts tempt us into gambling with our future security. We can't let Republican scare tactics trick us into trading social security for individual self-interest and individual risk.
The social security system has weathered hard economic times in the past, in fact, it was born of hard times. The structure of the social security system expresses our deepest values as a society, that caring for the elderly and the disabled is everyone's responsibility. That's why we can't get rid of the social and keep the security because the security comes from the social, from our shared commitment to care for those who can no longer care for themselves. How can we best ensure that every member of our increasingly elderly society lives with dignity and security? By preserving the legacy of social security for future generations.
Social Security: Thinking it Through
1) What kind of life do you envision for your parents, yourself, even your children, in the later years? What will we all need to thrive as we grow older? Try to be specific and think of as many things as possible.
2) The elderly are predicted to live longer and become a larger fraction of the population over time. How can we ensure that the elderly are able to fully participate in and contribute to society?
3) To what extent is care for the elderly a societal responsibility? To what extent is it a private responsibility? Which needs can best be met and services provided by large public organizations? By private providers? By family member and loved ones?
4) What historical conditions led to the creation of the social security system in 1935? How likely are those conditions to recur?
5) How does the social security system reflect our shared values? How has the social security system impacted your life?