Krugman opinion: "Yes, he could"

[Dad2three]

Your delusions of grandeur must be a source of great sorrow for you. It must be painful when the world keeps informing you that you're a moron.

Got it Bubba t, all you have is projection...

So you have devolved into pure insults?

I'll take that as an admission of defeat.

Projecting again Bubba? lol

 

[bripat9643]

Got it Bubba t, all you have is projection...

So you have devolved into pure insults?

I'll take that as an admission of defeat.

Projecting again Bubba? lol

Nope. LOL!

 

[freedombecki]

Congress, which has been shutdown by Republicans are in the sewer.

7%? Really?

Love it when you quote that.

But most congress people and senators are returned. So they obviously are doing better than that.....or do you really believe your congressman polls that low in your district ?

Republicans own the house and will take the senate.

7% ? Really ?

You bet.....

Moron.

That has gone from a foregone conclusion to a toss-up!

If the GOP only wins 5 Senate seats the Dems will still hold the majority because Biden is the tie-breaker.

Not if he becomes President.

 

[bripat9643]

NEVER has there been a free market, and no, Uncle Miltie had his experiment in Chile with a REAL dictator and TOTAL failure, for all but the 1%ers that is.... Weird how conservative policy ALWAYS does that....

This stupid argument has been posted at least 10,000 times. Every attempt at pure socialism has resulted in mass starvation and the death of millions. On the other hand, history shows that the closer a nation gets to a free market, that faster the material well-being of its inhabitants increases.

BTW, Chile is hardly a "total failure. It's the wealthiest country in Latin America. Every citizen of Chile should give thanks to Pinochet and Milton Friedman for saving their country from liberalism gone wild.

Weird how conservative economic policy does that.

Got it, false premises, distortions and LIES, the ONLY thing right wingers have.

Western Europe is a real hellhole right?

Chile? Oh NOW, AFTER the Gov't took back Uncle Milties failed policies, lol


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST



Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted. Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story.


Chile: the laboratory test



Chile's Retirees Find Shortfall in Private Plan (AGAIN) rescued by Big Gov't, weird right? lol


January 27, 2005


Nearly 25 years ago, Chile embarked on a sweeping experiment that has since been emulated, in one way or another, in a score of other countries. Rather than finance pensions through a system to which workers, employers and the government all contributed, millions of people began to pay 10 percent of their salaries to private investment accounts that they controlled.

Under the Chilean program - which President Bush has cited as a model for his plans to overhaul Social Security - the promise was that such investments, by helping to spur economic growth and generating higher returns, would deliver monthly pension benefits larger than what the traditional system could offer.

But now that the first generation of workers to depend on the new system is beginning to retire, Chileans are finding that it is falling far short of what was originally advertised under the authoritarian government of Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

For all the program's success in economic terms, the government continues to direct billions of dollars to a safety net for those whose contributions were not large enough to ensure even a minimum pension approaching $140 a month. Many others - because they earned much of their income in the underground economy, are self-employed, or work only seasonally - remain outside the system altogether. Combined, those groups constitute roughly half the Chilean labor force. Only half of workers are captured by the system.

Even many middle-class workers who contributed regularly are finding that their private accounts - burdened with hidden fees that may have soaked up as much as a third of their original investment - are failing to deliver as much in benefits as they would have received if they had stayed in the old system.



lol

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/27/business/worldbusiness/27pension.html

What utter horseshit. The New York Times? Now there's a credible source. I'll bet you had to look high and low to find an article that had bad things to say about Chile's economic performance. The author obviously had to sift through a mountain of positive statistics to find something to complain about:

Chile?s Privatized Social Security Program is 30 Years Old, and Prospering

How well has the system performed? John Tierney, a writer for the New York Times, went to visit Pablo Serra, a former classmate and friend in Santiago a few years ago, and they compared notes on how well their respective retirement programs were doing. Tierney brought along his latest statement from Social Security, while his friend brought up his retirement plan on his computer. It turned out that they both had been contributing about the same amount of money, so the comparison was apt, and startling, said Tierney:

Pablo could retire in 10 years, at age 62, with an annual pension of $55,000. That would be more than triple the $18,000 I can expect from Social Security at that age. OR

Pablo could retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $70,000. That would almost triple the $25,000 pension promised [to me] by Social Security starting a year later, at age 66. OR

Pablo could retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $53,000 and [in addition receive] a one-time cash payment of $223,000.

Tierney wrote that Pablo said “I’m very happy with my account.” Tierney suggested that, upon retirement, Pablo could not only retire nicely, but be able to buy himself a vacation home at the shore or in the country. Pablo laughed it off, and Tierney wrote: “I’m trying to look on the bright side. Maybe my Social Security check will cover the airfare to visit him.”

According to Investors Business Daily, the average annual rate of return for Chilean workers over the last 30 years has exceeded 9% annually, after inflation, whereas “U. S. Social Security pays a 1% to 2% (theoretical) rate of return, and even less for new workers.”

As expected, the capital accumulated in these privatized accounts have generated substantial growth in Chile’s economy. As noted by Wikipedia, “Chile is one of South America’s most stable and prosperous nations, leading Latin American nations in human development, competitiveness, income per capita, globalization, economic freedom, and low perception of corruption.” [Emphases added.]

High domestic savings and investment rates helped propel Chile’s economy to average growth rates of 8% during the 1990s. The privatized national pension plan (AFP) has encouraged domestic investment and contributed to an estimated total domestic savings rate of approximately 21% of GDP.

Yeah, that pension system sure sucks. Chileans must find getting $70,000/yr instead of the measly $25,000/yr we can expect to get a real cross to bear. And then they have an estate to pass on to their children. What do we pass on to our children? We pass on a mountain of debt so they can work like galley slaves their entire lives to pay it off.

Yeah, that Chilean pension system just blows.

Now consider the economic statistics below. Anyone who claims Chile isn't doing better than every other country in Latin America is either a moron or a liar. I believe you are both.

 

[Political Junky]

Indictment and arrest of Augusto Pinochet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


General Augusto Pinochet was indicted for human rights violations committed in his native Chile by Spanish magistrate Baltasar Garzón on 10 October 1998. He was arrested in London six days later and held for a year and a half before finally being released by the British government in March 2000. Authorized to freely return to Chile, Pinochet was there first indicted by judge Juan Guzmán Tapia, and charged with a number of crimes, before dying on 10 December 2006, without having been convicted in any case. His arrest in London made the front-page of newspapers worldwide as not only did it involve the head of the military dictatorship that ruled Chile between 1973 and 1990, but it was the first time that several European judges applied the principle of universal jurisdiction, declaring themselves competent to judge crimes committed by former heads of state, despite local amnesty laws.

Pinochet came to power in a violent 11 September 1973 coup which deposed Socialist President Salvador Allende. His 17-year regime was responsible for numerous human rights violations, a number of which committed as part of Operation Condor, an illegal effort to suppress political opponents in Chile and abroad in coordination with foreign intelligence agencies. Pinochet was also accused of using his position to pursue personal enrichment through embezzlement of government funds, the illegal drug trade and illegal arms trade. The Rettig Report found that at least 2,279 persons were conclusively murdered by the Chilean government for political reasons during Pinochet's regime, and the Valech Report found that at least 30,000 persons were tortured by the government for political reasons.
<more>

 

[Meathead]

Chile was an absolute economic success story under Pinochet, a South American rarity. He averted the invariable economic catastrophe of the populist and far left Allende.

 

[bripat9643]

Indictment and arrest of Augusto Pinochet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


General Augusto Pinochet was indicted for human rights violations committed in his native Chile by Spanish magistrate Baltasar Garzón on 10 October 1998. He was arrested in London six days later and held for a year and a half before finally being released by the British government in March 2000. Authorized to freely return to Chile, Pinochet was there first indicted by judge Juan Guzmán Tapia, and charged with a number of crimes, before dying on 10 December 2006, without having been convicted in any case. His arrest in London made the front-page of newspapers worldwide as not only did it involve the head of the military dictatorship that ruled Chile between 1973 and 1990, but it was the first time that several European judges applied the principle of universal jurisdiction, declaring themselves competent to judge crimes committed by former heads of state, despite local amnesty laws.

So the Chilean government disobeyed its own law and the Spanish government violated international law. Ironically Cuba&#8217;s communist caudillo, Fidel Castro, whose firing squads have executed thousands, and whose prisons are notorious for vicious torture of political prisoners, was being feted in Spain at the very same time the warrant was issued for Pinochet.

What's your point? Is this supposed to some kind of argument against the astounding success of Chile's economic miracle?

Pinochet came to power in a violent 11 September 1973 coup which deposed Socialist President Salvador Allende. His 17-year regime was responsible for numerous human rights violations, a number of which committed as part of Operation Condor, an illegal effort to suppress political opponents in Chile and abroad in coordination with foreign intelligence agencies. Pinochet was also accused of using his position to pursue personal enrichment through embezzlement of government funds, the illegal drug trade and illegal arms trade. The Rettig Report found that at least 2,279 persons were conclusively murdered by the Chilean government for political reasons during Pinochet's regime, and the Valech Report found that at least 30,000 persons were tortured by the government for political reasons.
<more>

After Allende shot himself, Chile had to fight a civil war. Marxist urban rebels tried to overthrow Chile&#8217;s government, using bombings, assassinations, kidnapping and guerrilla assaults. Chile, and neighboring Argentina, suffered a reign of terror and faced near anarchy as communist guerillas attempted, in their own words, to &#8216;destroy the capitalist state. &#8216;

Chilean and Argentine security forces were ordered to fight an all-out war against the communist rebels. Terror against terror. In the process, some innocent people were arrested, tortured or disappeared. But most victims were not innocents. They were mainly marxist guerillas and terrorists,or part of the marxist support network, that included students, and marxist clergy and nuns.

The soldiers finally won these bloody wars, restoring peace to Chile and Argentina. Today, thanks to - and because of - victory in these conflicts, Chile and Argentina are proud, prosperous democracies. The soldiers who did the necessary dirty work to make this possible are often accused of crimes, and shunned by society they saved.

The president who commissioned the Valech report is a socialist, by the way, The Rettig Report was commissioned by a President who was a member of the Christian Democrat party, which is allied with the socialist party of Chile. In short, the two reports were commission by Pinochet's political enemies. And, of course, we all know that you can never believe anything a socialist says. They are all pathological liars. The names and the testimony of both reports is all sealed, so there's no way to dispute any of it. These reports are the perfect political smear.

 

[bripat9643]

Chile was an absolute economic success story under Pinochet, a South American rarity. He averted the invariable economic catastrophe of the populist and far left Allende.

Yep. That's why the commies, fellow travelers and useful idiots hate him so much.

 

[Sallow]

Chile was an absolute economic success story under Pinochet, a South American rarity. He averted the invariable economic catastrophe of the populist and far left Allende.

Yep. That's why the commies, fellow travelers and useful idiots hate him so much.

Pinochet was a monster.

 

[Meathead]

Chile was an absolute economic success story under Pinochet, a South American rarity. He averted the invariable economic catastrophe of the populist and far left Allende.

Yep. That's why the commies, fellow travelers and useful idiots hate him so much.

Pinochet was a monster.

He was a monster and a Godsend.

 

[bripat9643]

Chile was an absolute economic success story under Pinochet, a South American rarity. He averted the invariable economic catastrophe of the populist and far left Allende.

It's pretty clear that socialism was a catastrophe for Chile and free enterprise was a godsend. That's a reality that leftists like Dad2three just can't cope with.

 

[bripat9643]

Chile was an absolute economic success story under Pinochet, a South American rarity. He averted the invariable economic catastrophe of the populist and far left Allende.

Yep. That's why the commies, fellow travelers and useful idiots hate him so much.

Pinochet was a monster.

Wrong. He was a patriot fighting traitors to save his country from communism. Allende and those who supported him were the monsters.

 

[Sallow]

Yep. That's why the commies, fellow travelers and useful idiots hate him so much.

Pinochet was a monster.

He was a monster and a Godsend.

Lovely.

So you believe god sends bloodthirsty monsters to torture and kill people?

That's a great little religion you have there..alrighty.

 

[Sallow]

Yep. That's why the commies, fellow travelers and useful idiots hate him so much.

Pinochet was a monster.

Wrong. He was a patriot fighting traitors to save his country from communism. Allende and those who supported him were the monsters.

Allende was the victor in Democratic elections.

It was not the business of the United States to interfere with the internal workings of Chile and put Pinochet into power.

That..was a crime.

 

[Meathead]

Pinochet was a monster.

He was a monster and a Godsend.

Lovely.

So you believe god sends bloodthirsty monsters to torture and kill people?

That's a great little religion you have there..alrighty.

He created gays like you, sp where does that leave us?

 

[bripat9643]

Pinochet was a monster.

He was a monster and a Godsend.

Lovely.

So you believe god sends bloodthirsty monsters to torture and kill people?

That's a great little religion you have there..alrighty.

I have no problem with killing communist traitors, just as you have no problem with killing citizens of the Confederacy. FDR killed millions of Germans during WW II. Do you have a problem with that?

 

[bripat9643]

Pinochet was a monster.

Wrong. He was a patriot fighting traitors to save his country from communism. Allende and those who supported him were the monsters.

Allende was the victor in Democratic elections.

It was not the business of the United States to interfere with the internal workings of Chile and put Pinochet into power.

That..was a crime.

The USA had nothing to do with it. That's a myth perpetrated by communists and fellow travellers. Allende won a bare plurality in a three way election. He then proceeded to hand over his country to Cuban communist agents. The people begged Pinochet to remove Allende from power.

Furthermore, how does any of this prove that Pinochet's economic program didn't have a positive result? The bottom line is that Chile is the economic Cinderella of Latin America, and free market economics is the reason.

I know commies like you just can't deal with that.

 

[The Rabbi]

Your delusions of grandeur must be a source of great sorrow for you. It must be painful when the world keeps informing you that you're a moron.

Got it Bubba t, all you have is projection...

So you have devolved into pure insults?

I'll take that as an admission of defeat.

Dad23Mom25 has nothing. Another intellectual poseur pretending to have knowledge but when called on it resorts to Wiki and other sources he looked up in 5 minutes. When he starts spouting pure unadulterated nonsense you know you've drilled down to the core. And at that point he is best ignored as simply a waste of time.

 

[The Rabbi]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/o...e-and-climate-president-obamas-big-deals.html

You should judge leaders by their achievements, not their press, and in terms of policy substance Mr. Obama is having a seriously good year. In fact, there’s a very good chance that 2014 will go down in the record books as one of those years when America took a major turn in the right direction.

First, health reform is now a reality — and despite a shambolic start, it’s looking like a big success story. Remember how nobody was going to sign up? First-year enrollments came in above projections. Remember how people who signed up weren’t actually going to pay their premiums? The vast majority have.

We don’t yet have a full picture of the impact of reform on the previously uninsured, but all the information we do have indicates major progress. Surveys, like the monthly survey by Gallup, show a sharp drop in the percentage of Americans reporting themselves as uninsured. States that expanded Medicaid and actively promoted the new exchanges have done especially well — for example, a new survey of Minnesota shows a 40 percent drop in the number of uninsured residents....


....Then there’s climate policy. The Obama administration’s new rules on power plants won’t be enough in themselves to save the planet, but they’re a real start — and are by far the most important environmental initiative since the Clean Air Act. I’d add that this is an issue on which Mr. Obama is showing some real passion.

Oh, and financial reform, although it’s much weaker than it should have been, is real — just ask all those Wall Street types who, enraged by the new limits on their wheeling and dealing, have turned their backs on the Democrats.

Put it all together, and Mr. Obama is looking like a very consequential president indeed. There were huge missed opportunities early in his administration — inadequate stimulus, the failure to offer significant relief to distressed homeowners. Also, he wasted years in pursuit of a Grand Bargain on the budget that, aside from turning out to be impossible, would have moved America in the wrong direction. But in his second term he is making good on the promise of real change for the better. So why all the bad press?

Part of the answer may be Mr. Obama’s relatively low approval rating. But this mainly reflects political polarization — strong approval from Democrats but universal opposition from Republicans — which is more a sign of the times than a problem with the president. Anyway, you’re supposed to judge presidents by what they do, not by fickle public opinion...

----------------------------------------------------------------------


I suspect that history is going to smile upon this president, when all is said and done.

Now, feel free to discuss. I suspect that some of you will probably scream. Carry on.

Yes, and history will also record that Obama did it in spite of a do-nothing Congress which vowed to defeat him in ever endeavor.

Highest rate of government dependency. Highest debt to gdp ratio. Worst economic performance post recession.
Yup, he built that.

 

[Dad2three]

This stupid argument has been posted at least 10,000 times. Every attempt at pure socialism has resulted in mass starvation and the death of millions. On the other hand, history shows that the closer a nation gets to a free market, that faster the material well-being of its inhabitants increases.

BTW, Chile is hardly a "total failure. It's the wealthiest country in Latin America. Every citizen of Chile should give thanks to Pinochet and Milton Friedman for saving their country from liberalism gone wild.

Weird how conservative economic policy does that.

Got it, false premises, distortions and LIES, the ONLY thing right wingers have.

Western Europe is a real hellhole right?

Chile? Oh NOW, AFTER the Gov't took back Uncle Milties failed policies, lol


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST



Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted. Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story.


Chile: the laboratory test



Chile's Retirees Find Shortfall in Private Plan (AGAIN) rescued by Big Gov't, weird right? lol


January 27, 2005


Nearly 25 years ago, Chile embarked on a sweeping experiment that has since been emulated, in one way or another, in a score of other countries. Rather than finance pensions through a system to which workers, employers and the government all contributed, millions of people began to pay 10 percent of their salaries to private investment accounts that they controlled.

Under the Chilean program - which President Bush has cited as a model for his plans to overhaul Social Security - the promise was that such investments, by helping to spur economic growth and generating higher returns, would deliver monthly pension benefits larger than what the traditional system could offer.

But now that the first generation of workers to depend on the new system is beginning to retire, Chileans are finding that it is falling far short of what was originally advertised under the authoritarian government of Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

For all the program's success in economic terms, the government continues to direct billions of dollars to a safety net for those whose contributions were not large enough to ensure even a minimum pension approaching $140 a month. Many others - because they earned much of their income in the underground economy, are self-employed, or work only seasonally - remain outside the system altogether. Combined, those groups constitute roughly half the Chilean labor force. Only half of workers are captured by the system.

Even many middle-class workers who contributed regularly are finding that their private accounts - burdened with hidden fees that may have soaked up as much as a third of their original investment - are failing to deliver as much in benefits as they would have received if they had stayed in the old system.



lol

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/27/business/worldbusiness/27pension.html

What utter horseshit. The New York Times? Now there's a credible source. I'll bet you had to look high and low to find an article that had bad things to say about Chile's economic performance. The author obviously had to sift through a mountain of positive statistics to find something to complain about:

Chile?s Privatized Social Security Program is 30 Years Old, and Prospering

How well has the system performed? John Tierney, a writer for the New York Times, went to visit Pablo Serra, a former classmate and friend in Santiago a few years ago, and they compared notes on how well their respective retirement programs were doing. Tierney brought along his latest statement from Social Security, while his friend brought up his retirement plan on his computer. It turned out that they both had been contributing about the same amount of money, so the comparison was apt, and startling, said Tierney:

Pablo could retire in 10 years, at age 62, with an annual pension of $55,000. That would be more than triple the $18,000 I can expect from Social Security at that age. OR

Pablo could retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $70,000. That would almost triple the $25,000 pension promised [to me] by Social Security starting a year later, at age 66. OR

Pablo could retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $53,000 and [in addition receive] a one-time cash payment of $223,000.

Tierney wrote that Pablo said “I’m very happy with my account.” Tierney suggested that, upon retirement, Pablo could not only retire nicely, but be able to buy himself a vacation home at the shore or in the country. Pablo laughed it off, and Tierney wrote: “I’m trying to look on the bright side. Maybe my Social Security check will cover the airfare to visit him.”

According to Investors Business Daily, the average annual rate of return for Chilean workers over the last 30 years has exceeded 9% annually, after inflation, whereas “U. S. Social Security pays a 1% to 2% (theoretical) rate of return, and even less for new workers.”

As expected, the capital accumulated in these privatized accounts have generated substantial growth in Chile’s economy. As noted by Wikipedia, “Chile is one of South America’s most stable and prosperous nations, leading Latin American nations in human development, competitiveness, income per capita, globalization, economic freedom, and low perception of corruption.” [Emphases added.]

High domestic savings and investment rates helped propel Chile’s economy to average growth rates of 8% during the 1990s. The privatized national pension plan (AFP) has encouraged domestic investment and contributed to an estimated total domestic savings rate of approximately 21% of GDP.

Yeah, that pension system sure sucks. Chileans must find getting $70,000/yr instead of the measly $25,000/yr we can expect to get a real cross to bear. And then they have an estate to pass on to their children. What do we pass on to our children? We pass on a mountain of debt so they can work like galley slaves their entire lives to pay it off.

Yeah, that Chilean pension system just blows.

Now consider the economic statistics below. Anyone who claims Chile isn't doing better than every other country in Latin America is either a moron or a liar. I believe you are both.

Yeah, NYT isn'r crediblee *shaking head*

lol


New American? THE BIRCHERS? LOL

Over the years, Chile made some major changes to its capitalization system, such as liberalizing investment rules and increasing the type and number of pension funds that a pension fund management company (AFP) must offer its account holders. However, despite these and other changes, a number of policy challenges remain unresolved including large groups of workers who are not covered and irregular worker participation rates, both of which could lead to inadequate retirement benefits. Also, according to international standards, the administrative fees the AFPs are charging account holders are high and could significantly decrease the size of a worker's pension.

...If no changes were made to the system, most workers with an individual account who retired between 2020 and 2025 would not receive a benefit equal to about 75 percent of their pre-retirement earnings, the goal of the architects of the system.

Chile's Next Generation Pension Reform



Low participation


Although 7.1 million people are enrolled, only 3.8 million are actually able to contribute to their private accounts. The low contribution rate results from the instability of jobs, the frequent need to leave the workforce to care for children, and the lack of disposable income in a country where more than half of the workers earn little in part-time or off-the-books jobs.

Because of its obligation to retirees in the old system and its guarantee to make up the difference if earnings from private accounts left workers short of the minimum pension, the government continues to spend heavily on pensions. Since the privatized system was introduced, government pension expenditures have remained at 6 percent of the national economy. Pension spending makes up more than a quarter of the government budget, about the same as health care and education combined.


Plunged into poverty

Today, workers need $20,000 in their accounts to get the minimum pension — now about $100 a month. Most individual accounts only have $5,000, according to the Santiago-based Economy of Work Program (PET).

Originally, the Chilean government claimed that with private accounts, workers’ retirement benefits would be 70 percent of their salary. In fact, studies show they will get only 40 percent. “The earnings are insufficient to provide people with a dignified pension,” PET Director Carmen Espinoza told PEP.

PEP, July-August 2005: Chile: Social Security Failure. Privatization by bayonet


SO PERCENTAGE OF GDP, THE GOV'T SPENDS THE SAME AMOUNT TODAY SINCE THEY 'PRIVATIZED' IT? LOL


More than 99 percent of Social Security's revenues go toward benefits, and less than 1 percent for overhead. In Chile's system, management fees are around 20 times as high. And that's a typical number for privatized systems.