Named after economist Robert Samuelson, who, along with the Concord Coalition, is fighting the Glorious War on Social Security. It's inspired by the Friedman Unit, named after NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who predicted for several years running that the "next six months" will be critical in Iraq. So what's a Samuelson Unit?
The length of time it takes for the Social Security Trust Fund to go bankrupt. As Atrios puts it:
Well, another year and not much has changed. Last year they said Social Security could pay full scheduled benefits without any program changes until 2040, and now it's 2041.
During the Clinton era, the Samuelson varied between 32-36 years. Are we starting to see a pattern yet? And remember, that the Bush economy isn't exactly hot stuff. So here's the unit conversion table for you:
1 Samuelson Unit = 68 Friedman Units = 34 years
Of all of the economic things to worry about, Social Security ain't it (like I said).
- Log in to post comments
There used to be a "time until fusion power becomes feasible". This used to be 25years, but unlike the Samuelson is not time invariant. It seems to have doubled in the last 25 years.
But, the flat wall-mounted TV is here! Progress!
But, the flat wall-mounted TV is here! Progress!
Perhaps we could attempt to measure technological progress by the exact proportion of gadgets featured in "the Jetsons" which actually now exist.
Ooh, and also changing government tax receipts as the economy goes up and down, and estimates of those receipts. Aren't those figured into the projections? So if the economy does better than expected it gets put off a bit, and vice versa.
Ah, this was supposed to go to the post above it, sorry.
Noturus,
You're right, but given the robustness of the tax base used (wage income under $90k), the estimates are relatively constant (as the graph shows). Unlike Medicare, the stability of the program largely rests on the stability of the payouts. The point is that Social Security isn't going to go bust, barring a sustained collapse (a couple of decades) of the U.S. economy.
It would be interesting to know what the relationship of the Samuelson unit has in relation to a unit I proposed, the Stossel, a unit to measure media whoring. Since the allged journalist it's named after has to measure 1, I'd thought that others could only achieve a fractional value. But, watching cabloid TV proved that a 1 is not only possible, but frequently met. Though never exceeded.
the flat wall-mounted TV is here! Progress!
Perhaps we could attempt to measure technological progress by the exact proportion of gadgets featured in "the Jetsons" which actually now exist..
Ooh, and also changing government tax receipts as the economy goes up and down, and estimates of those receipts. Aren't those figured into the projections? So if the economy does better than expected it gets put off a bit, and vice versa