The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Michael Maiello's picture

    Still Can't Quit Brooks

    By Michael Maiello on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 3:25am | Politics

    But I'll be quick about it.

    "The average Medicare couple pays $109,000 into the program and gets $343,000 in benefits out, according to the Urban Institute. This is $234,000 in free money."

    No! No! No! No!  It is not free money.  It is paid, as a tax, over the course of a working life.

    The Monyechimp Compound Interest Calculator will tell you that if a person works 30 years, and pays one thirtieth of $109,000 annually, that they would earn $344,639.70, modestly in excess of what Brooks claims as the ultimate "get," with just an average 6.4% annual return.

    What Brooks calls "free money" is what an investor would call a reasonable "expected rate of return."  So, not a damned thing about it is free.

    I said I'd be brief.

    Better stop.

    Topics: 
    Politics

    Comments

    I would be embarrassed to have to pretend to be that stupid to arrive at a point in favor of a desire to deprive the majority of their retirement. Says a lot when this is the best Brooks can come up with, and even more that his editors let it slide past them.


    by SleepinJeezus on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 9:09am

    • My guess is that these guys are no longer "edited," in the sense that they don't have to pitch their column ideas, they just turn them in.  At best, they're copy-edited for clarity and Times style.  I'd like the think that here at Dag, if I regularly went off the deep-end like this that Wolraich or, more likely Mona, would at least warn me that I was making an ass of myself.

    by Michael Maiello on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 10:30am

    I'd like the think that here at Dag,

    Fuhgeddaboudit. I suspect they'll tell you once "You're a professional, you should know better"

    Me, I'd forgive you, because your a good addition to Dagblog.


    by Resistance on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 11:52am

    Happy New Year, Res. (But, seriously... Mona would tell me.)


    by Michael Maiello on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 12:15pm

    Yes. And the rest of us would point out the stupidity to you. Mr. Day would give you his daily dumb ass award. You would never live it down. LOL

    by trkingmomoe on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 12:20pm

    Potential shame is a powerful motivator.


    by Michael Maiello on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 12:24pm

    Uh uh, Michael; not if it had anything to do with money.  I don't understand money matters at all. 

    You would just have to make an ass of yourself without me.  Sorry.  (Lord knows I've done it alone plenty of times. blush)

    However, even an economics idiot like me can see that Brooks is digging a deep, deep, very deep hole.  How mortifying for him.  And deliciously satisfying for us. (Let's just let him keep on digging.)


    by Ramona on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 8:43pm

    Brooks doesn't only pretend to be stupid, he gets paid to teach others how to pretend to be stupid. Give him some credit for using what he's got.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/the-10-most-pretenti...


    by A Guy Called LULU on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 11:24am

    On further thought, I'm being way too generous to Brooks with this calculation.

    For one thing, it's not inflation adjusted.  So, knock off 2% a year for a 4.5% annual return on this taxed money.

    But, even worse, the money isn't paid out all at once over 30 years.  The real return of around $210,000 is paid out, as needed over another 15-20 years after retirement.

    This is some very expensive "free" money.


    by Michael Maiello on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 11:17am

    Maybe Brooks is trying to get people to ask, "Why not privatize"?

    He takes an absurd position in the hope, you'll analyze the situation, and come over to his deeply held position. 


    by Resistance on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 11:31am

    I laud your brevity, Michael. Brooks is being an ass, and you are not. 


    by acanuck on Thu, 01/03/2013 - 3:56am

    I love your anti-crush on David Brooks. I think I might have a crush on your anti-crush (not on David Brooks, you understand--on your not-crush on David Brooks). I don't read anything he writes because I think he's an idiot. I just love reading what you write about the fact that he is.


    by Orlando on Sun, 01/06/2013 - 10:26am