KillZone
11-13-2005, 11:45 AM
I found this interesting. Democrats won’t like some of it and Republicans won’t like some of it. I think it sheds some light on how politicians use statistics to push their agenda (both Democrats and Republicans).
http://www.livejournal.com/users/_roisindubh_/864778.html
BUSH:
At a public forum back in January, Pres. Bush made much of an Administration estimate that the Social Security system faces a future shortfall of $11 trillion. That sounds terrifying--until you realize that this mega-figure projects the future of Social Security not over a generation or so, but into infinity. The nonpartisan American Academy of Actuaries has called such projections worse than useless, and "likely to mislead anyone lacking technical expertise" into thinking the system is in worse shape than it is.
LIBERALS:
But liberals have some statistical explaining to do too. Last winter, the activist group Moveon.org ran an ad implying that Bush would cut Social Security benefits by 46%. The ad ignored Bush's repeated assurance that he would not cut benefits or anyone at or near retirement - and, indeed, the 46% figure referred to the projected growth of benefits for retirees some 75 years down the road. It also ignored estimates that, if we do nothing to fix Social Security, by mid-century benefits will have to be cut by around a quarter anyway.
Over the years, I have become convinced that people in both parties tell whatever it takes to get elected. That seems to me to be the main goal of them all. I wish I were not so jaded, yet I am.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/_roisindubh_/864778.html
BUSH:
At a public forum back in January, Pres. Bush made much of an Administration estimate that the Social Security system faces a future shortfall of $11 trillion. That sounds terrifying--until you realize that this mega-figure projects the future of Social Security not over a generation or so, but into infinity. The nonpartisan American Academy of Actuaries has called such projections worse than useless, and "likely to mislead anyone lacking technical expertise" into thinking the system is in worse shape than it is.
LIBERALS:
But liberals have some statistical explaining to do too. Last winter, the activist group Moveon.org ran an ad implying that Bush would cut Social Security benefits by 46%. The ad ignored Bush's repeated assurance that he would not cut benefits or anyone at or near retirement - and, indeed, the 46% figure referred to the projected growth of benefits for retirees some 75 years down the road. It also ignored estimates that, if we do nothing to fix Social Security, by mid-century benefits will have to be cut by around a quarter anyway.
Over the years, I have become convinced that people in both parties tell whatever it takes to get elected. That seems to me to be the main goal of them all. I wish I were not so jaded, yet I am.