AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
WOULD you pay $2,000 today, to save $10,000 in 15 years' time? That question lies at the heart of the debate about financing Social Security reform.
President Bush's plan to create personal investment accounts for every worker has run into a snag over "transition costs." A transition cost is the price you have to pay to get from point A to point B. Establishing personal accounts will require about $2 trillion in government borrowing over the next 15 years, but once the accounts are in place, the government saves about $10 trillion in future obligations. Any private business with large pension obligations would approve such a refinancing plan in a heartbeat. The debt restructuring would substantially improve the firm's balance sheet, and the stock price would rise to reflect the improved long-term finances--despite the reduction in the firm's current cash flow.
Why doesn't Congress make this rational financial decision? Part of the answer is that government isn't run like a business. In fact, Uncle Sam doesn't use a balance sheet at all. This means that when the feds make promises to pay in the future--as with impending Social Security and Medicare obligations to baby boomers--those payments might as well be invisible to policymakers: They never show up in the accounting books.
Fortunately, Dr. John Templeton, the Pennsylvania-based philanthropist and public-policy entrepreneur, has devised a disarmingly simple method to blow through this government-accounting smokescreen. The Templeton Curve depicts two financial futures for Social Security. The first is the "do nothing" scenario in which we pretend the program is in fine shape and that only minor tinkering is required when ...