Krugman passes math, flunks poli sci

Krugman is too smart not to realize that social security is a fatally flawed system; a poorly designed entitlement program endangered by shifting demographics. He's also too smart to ignore the benefits of a private (or at least partly private) system in which people have the choice of investing the money they set aside for social security in the way they see fit--moving social security from a failing entitlement to a growing personal asset. But while he is smart enough to rightly point out the difficulty getting from here (social security's current state) to there (a sound system incorporating private accounts) he doesn't seem to apply any of his prodigious intellect to creative thinking about how this difficulty may be solved. His solution? It's unclear by this piece, but one supposes that it is to just keep the failing system limping along.

We can get from here to there. It may not mean moving as fast as the privatizers want, or as slow as the statists want, but it can happen and we ought to get working on it. (Consider, for example, that the massive amount of tax-deferred retirement accounts--such as 401(k)s--is in fact a huge deferred asset that is currently ignored by budget planners and could be used by the government to wean us off the flawed system.) But Krugman and the Democrats don't seem to want to even think about substantive reform of social security. Could it be that they fear losing their favorite political tactic: scare the seniors?