Dean Baker catches fake journalism at The New York Times:
The NYT appears to be following the pattern of journalism practiced
by the diatribe
against the Danish welfare state that is headlined, "Danes Rethink a
Welfare State Ample to a Fault." There's not much ambiguity in that one.
The piece then proceeds to present a state of statistics that are
grossly misleading and excluding other data points that are highly
relevant.
Washington Post in openly editorializing in its news section.
Today the news section features a
The first paragraphs describe the generosity of the welfare state then we get this ominous warning in the 5th paragraph:
"But Denmark’s long-term outlook is troubling. The population is
aging, and in many regions of the country people without jobs now
outnumber those with them."
oooooh, scary! Yeah people are living longer in Denmark, that's
something that's been happening for a couple of hundred years or so.
Like every other wealthy country people live longer in Denmark than in
the United States. While they are projected to continue to see gains in
life expectancy and further aging of the population, the increase is
actually going to much slower than in the United States.
From 2012 to 2025 the percentage of the Danish population over age 65
is projected to rise from 17.8% to 21.2%, an increase of 3.4 percentage
points. By comparison, in the United States the share of the population
over age 65 is projected
to rise from 13.6% to 18.1%, an increase of 4.5 percentage points over
the same period, from a considerably smaller base. The impact of aging
on the economy and the government budget will clearly be much larger in
the U.S. than Denmark, especially since the government first starts
paying for health care for people after they turn age 65 in the United
States. (Like every other wealthy country, Denmark has national health
insurance.)
The concern that, "in many regions of the country people without jobs
now outnumber those with them," is especially touching. In the United
States we have such a region, it's called the "United States." In March,
143.3 million people were employed out of a total population of 323
million for a ratio of workers to population nationwide of roughly 44.4
percent. In many parts of the country it would be much lower.
The piece then goes on to describe the extent of the Danish welfare
state with its 56 percent top marginal income tax rate, telling readers:
"But few experts here believe that Denmark can long afford the
current perks. So Denmark is retooling itself, tinkering with corporate
tax rates, considering new public sector investments and, for the long
term, trying to wean more people — the young and the old — off
government benefits."
Hmmm, it would be interesting to know what data the experts are looking at.
According to the IMF,
Denmark had a ratio of net debt to GDP at the end of 2012 of 7.6
percent. This compared to 87.8 percent in the United States. Its deficit
in 2012 was 4.3 percent of GDP, but almost all of this was due to the
downturn. The IMF estimated its structural deficit (the deficit the
country would face if the economy was at full employment) at just 1.1
percent of GDP. Furthermore, the country had a huge current account
surplus of 5.3 percent of GDP in 2012, more than $800 billion in the
U.S. economy. This means that Denmark is buying up foreign assets at a
rapid rate. By contrast, the United States has a large current account
deficit.
If there is something unsustainable in this picture, it is not the
sort of data that economists usually look at. Is marijuana legal in
Denmark?
Then we find the real problem is that no one in Denmark is working:
"In 2012, a little over 2.6 million people
between the ages of 15 and 64 were working in Denmark, 47 percent of the
total population and 73 percent of the 15- to 64-year-olds.
"While only about 65 percent of working age
adults are employed in the United States, comparisons are misleading,
since many Danes work short hours and all enjoy perks like long
vacations and lengthy paid maternity leaves, not to speak of a de facto
minimum wage approaching $20 an hour. Danes would rank much lower in
terms of hours worked per year."
So in spite of the generous Danish welfare
state a higher percentage of its working age population works than in
the United States. (Actually Denmark ranks near the top of the world in
employment to population ratios.) Yet, somehow this doesn't really count
because people in Denmark get vacations, work shorter hours, and have a
higher effective minimum wage.
This ranks pretty high in the non sequitur
category, apparently when you want to bash the welfare state, the rules
of logic apparently do not apply. Danes, like most Europeans, have opted
to take much of the gains in productivity growth over the last three
decades in the form of shorter work years rather than higher income.
(One interesting result of this practice is that we have some hope to
save the planet from global warming -- greenhouse gas emissions are
highly correlated with income.) Of course Danes still work about 8
percent more hours on average than hard-working Germans,
according to the OECD. If there is a problem in this picture, the NYT might want to devote a few paragraphs to telling readers what it is.
As far as the $20 an hour effective minimum
wage, isn't the problem of a high minimum wage supposed to be that it
creates unemployment. But the NYT just told us that Denmark has higher
employment rates than the United States. (My brain hurts.)
Okay, we get it. The NYT doesn't like
Denmark's welfare state. It doesn't really have any data to make the
case that Denmark's welfare state is falling apart and leading to all
sorts of bad outcomes, but they can wave their arms really fast and hey,
they are the New York Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment