GBO NEWS: NYT Ends, Revamps “New Old Age”; Social Security’s Race, Gender Tax Gap; Age Fellowship Deadline, ‘Selma’ & More
GENERATIONS BEAT ONLINE NEWS
E-News of the Journalists Network on Generations
January 20, 2015 — Volume 15, Number 2
Editor’s Note: GBO News, e-news of the Journalists Network on Generation publishes alerts for journalists, producers and authors covering generational issues. Send your news of important stories or books (by you and others), fellowships, awards or pertinent kvetches to GBO News Editor Paul Kleyman. You can subscribe to GBONews.org at no charge simply by sending a request to Paul with your name, address, phone number and editorial affiliation or note that you freelance. You’ll receive the table of contents as e-mail, just click through to the full issue at www.gbonews.org.
IN THIS ISSUE: Tax the Rich Candidates.
1. GEN BEATLES NEWS: New York Times Ends “New Old Age” Blog, and Starts Newer “New Old Age.”
2. EYES ON THE PRIZE: Columbia University’s Age Boom Academy Journalism Fellowship Application Deadline Feb. 6.
3. FISCAL REFORM SCHOOL: Race, Gender & Social Security Tax Study–Social Security Tax Gap Widest on Race, Gender
4. THE BOOKMOBILE: Spring Chicken: How to Stay Young Forever (Or Die Trying), by Bill Gifford; *** Diversity Explosion: How New Racial Demographics Are Remaking America by William H. Frey; *** Preventing Hospital Infections (that kill 75,000 Americans a year) by Robert W. Stock and colleagues.
5. END NOTE AT -30- Don’t Miss “Selma”
1. GEN BEATLES NEWS
***New York Times Ends “New Old Age” Blog, Starts Newer “New Old Age”: Tuesday’s NYT “Science Times” section includes Paula Span’s first “New Old Age” print column, but the news isn’t all good. The paper, in a financial funk causing it recently to announce 100 editorial buyouts/layoffs, has ended the “New Old Age” blog, much to consternation of readers. “Disappointed” is the prevailing reader response in nearly 130 comments, almost universally expressing dismay about the decision.
The blog’s principal writer, Span e-mailed GBONews.org that instead of the previous ongoing Web presence, she “will write two columns a month, also to be called ‘New Old Age,’ on aging and caregiving.” They will appear on alternate Tuesdays on newsprint and online in the paper’s “Health” section, starting with her Jan. 20 look at “a provocative variation on advance directives.”
Span, who will also continue teaching journalism at Columbia University, explained in her final post, (Jan. 9), “The blog, founded in 2008 by Jane Gross and anchored by me since 2009, has explored aging and caregiving from a variety of perspectives: medical decision-making, housing and long-term care, government policies, the latest geriatrics research, end-of-life choices, the personal rewards and headaches of caring for aging loved ones.”
What distinguished postings by her, sometimes Gross and other contributors, Span continued, was that “people who had walked the walk chimed in to agree or debate with the writer, offered information and suggestions (and the occasional jibe) to other readers, told their own stories. We have been a kind of online support group, one it has been a pleasure and an honor to facilitate.”
Span, author of the family caregiving book, When the Time Comes (Grand Central Life & Style, 2009), added, “As The Times refocuses its resources for a new media age, we will lose some of the camaraderie and continuity that comes from gathering here several times a week.”
Readership devotion—not a word used lightly here—is evident in comments such as, “This is a ridiculous decision. Please reconsider,” from “Jane in Austria.”
“Marina in Southern California” acknowledged that “deeply sad as I am to see this blog end . . . the NYT is in business” and evidently found “the costs of supporting this online community are too high.” However, she stressed, “Although it is true that anyone can start a blog, one reason NYT blogs are so rich is that the principal bloggers are journalists (or in any event, experienced writers). Guest blog entries are excellent because the principal blogger is still in charge of selecting the authors. And, significantly, all comments are screened, which keeps the level of discourse intelligent, respectful and relevant. There are other blogs on aging and caregiving and certainly many of them contain valuable information, plus hyperlinks, but it is not easy to attain NYT’s consistent quality. Nor do these other blogs have the number of readers/commenters the NYT has.”
Annie in Vermont commented, “Over the past year, as my elderly father has slowly declined, it has seemed that you were just one step ahead of us on our journey, dropping breadcrumbs of advice, wisdom, news and resources to lead us through.”
Scanning through recent “New Old Age” posts – most of them full and well-sourced columns –readers can see pieces by Span on how one model nursing home sensitively remembers residents who have died (Jan. 7); an approach to diabetes prevention “that works” (Dec. 26); a review of the now Oscar-nominated movie Still Alice, complimenting the film, but questioning why Hollywood persists in casting women “with remarkable cheekbones when they’re lining up actors to play characters with dementia,” and noting that foreign-made films on the subject “have been more honest” (Dec. 19). Besides contributions by Gross, who most recently reflected on the need to be honest with oneself in drafting and updating one’s will (Dec. 29), Judy Graham examined new findings on treating COPD (Oct. 13).
Graham, a regular “New Old Age” contributor for the past couple of years, concluded her work on the blog in the fall with the paper’s decision. She is working on a book about health and aging.
If the Tuesday “Science Times” isn’t thumping on your stoop, readers can follow Span’s newest “New Old Age” at nytimes.com/health. And she will link to her stories via her Twitter account, @paula_span, and Facebook author page. As she noted hopefully, “The conversation will continue.”
2. EYES ON THE PRIZE
*** Columbia University’s Age Boom Academy for reporters set a Feb. 6 application deadline for the for its three-day training program to be held in New York City in June. Selected journalists will receive a most-expenses-paid trip to the seminar, in which journalists will hear some of the top experts in gerontology and geriatric medicine. Speakers will discuss current trends in health, social and economic issues facing the aging population. In its 15 years, nearly 200 journalists have participated in one or more of the annual programs.
The 2015 theme, “Global Aging: Danger Ahead?” according to their website, “will focus on the dramatic demographic changes around the world. In almost every country apart from sub-Saharan Africa and East Timor, fertility rates are dropping, longevity is increasing, and the proportion of older adults in the population is steadily on the rise.”
Although, it continues, this population trend “has been evident for over a decade, myths about it persist. We are convening international experts to help journalists get beyond these myths in their reporting by sharing scientific data in sessions about chronic disease, urbanization, social structures and demographic forecasting.”
Dates for the training program are June 11-13, 2015. Applicants can be from any new medium (print, on air and online). This year’s program will arrange and provide up to two nights of hotel stay during the Academy for fellows. The program will also cover economy travel. Although meals will be provided at the conference, chosen reporters are asked to cover local transportation, meals outside the conference, and any incidentals. The online application is at http://ageboom.columbia.edu.
Pulitzer Prize-winning author Robert N. Butler, MD, and his International Longevity Center started the Age Boom Academy in 2000, following several years of development with the late journalist Mal Schechter. (Journalists attended two pre-Academy events in 1995 and 1997.) Butler, who died in 2010, was the first director of the National Institute on Aging and later founded the nation’s first full geriatrics department at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. The Age Boom Academy program also got a big assist from former New York Times Magazine Editor Jack Rosenthal, when he then headed the NYT Company Foundation. He continues to be a primary supporter of the Academy. The Age Boom Academy is now a joint program of the Columbia’s Robert N. Butler Aging Center and the Columbia Journalism School.
Butler had always loved journalism and spent his senior year at Columbia, 1948-49, as editor of the student newspaper, The Spectator, when he “freshman reporters” included Larry Grossman, who would become the head of PBS and also NBC News, and Max Frankel, of the NYT.
3. FISCAL REFORM SCHOOL: Race, Gender & Social Security Tax
As President Obama prepares to deliver his State of the Union message setting the 2016 election theme as “Tax the .01%,” how many GBONews.org readers on this Jan. 20, have already paid your Social Security payroll/self-employment tax for the year?
Most journalists, of course, dig in for our 6.2% (12.4% including the employer’s contribution) through Dec. 31, 2015. But some people cough up their share far earlier. A new analysis from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) provides a striking reminder that those of us paying the full freight—that is, are taxed up the current limit of $118,500 on wages–are actually paying our contribution later than the upper crust, who get an effective federal discount.
The CEPR report also shows how the U.S. wealth gap widens the closer one climbs toward the 1%, leaving more and more women and ethnic taxpayers behind.
In fact, most Americans end up paying into Social Security at a higher percentage of our earnings than the privileged few. For instance, according to CEPR’s number crunchers. People bringing in twice the $118,500 cap – or $237,000 per year – “pay the Social Security tax on only half of their earnings, so they no longer pay it after July 1st.” And those who rake in over $1.2 million dollars annually finish their Social Security tax obligation by Feb. 6, just in time to drop by Godiva and Tiffany’s for Valentine’s Day, although with not much love from the average taxpayer.
“In other words, workers who earn $118,500 or less per year pay a higher Social Security payroll tax rate than those who make more,” say CEPR’s economists Nicole Woo, Cherrie Bucknor and John Schmitt.
The three economists used the U.S. Census Bureau’s latest (2013) data from the American Community Survey to determine how many workers would be affected if the cap on the Social Security payroll were raised or phased out entirely.
CEPR notes that proposed legislation in the last Congress by Democratic Sens. Tom Harkin (newly retired) and Mark Begich (just involuntarily retired by voters) along with some wishful House members would raze the income ceiling over five to 10 years.
“Social Security Administration’s Chief Actuary estimated that the payroll tax cap sections of these proposals would reduce the program’s long-term shortfall by between 70% and 80%,” says the report. The analysis also looks at the effect of other proposals to not eliminate, but instead lift the cap to $250,000 of $400,000. Calculations for $250,000 are similar to a proposal by another former senator, Barack Obama, during his 2008 presidential campaign. “They were projected to eliminate about 80 percent of the long-range shortfall,” says the analysis.
The study found that the richest 6.1% of workers would pay more if the cap were scrapped. Only the top 1.5% and 0.7% would be affected if the tax were applied to earnings over $250,000 and $400,000, respectively.
According to this analysis, just over 9 million U.S. workers earn – not counting unearned income, such as from stocks – more than the $118,500 taxable limit. Overall that’s 6.1 percent of Americans. Among them is a higher percentage of whites (7.4%, or 7.2 million people), and 10% of Asian workers (1 million). After that, only 2.4% of Latino taxpayers (381,000), and 2.3% (383,000) of African Americans have those deeper pockets.
If the Social Security ceiling were elevated to income of up to $400,000, merely 0.2% of black (28,000 people) and Latino (37,000 taxpayers) would have their wallets lighten by the payroll tax up to that earnings level—compared with 2% of white (1.9 million) and Asian (nearly 185,000) earners.
Men, of course, bite off the lion’s share of the big bucks with 6.9 million U.S. male workers (8.8 percent) making $118,500 or better, versus 2.1 million (3.1%) of gals working up the wage scale. The study also includes calculations according to age group.
In addition, CEPR breaks down figures by state. Curiously, while California holds the largest number of people earning over the current $118,500 cap—almost 1.5 million workers (8.4%)—the District of Columbia houses the biggest proportion at 15.6 percent (about 54,000 up-scalers living in the Nation’s Capital). Next comes New Jersey at 10.7%, of almost 460,00 people, perhaps because Gov. Christie won’t let them so many potential campaign donors get out across the George Washington Bridge.
The CEPR crew explains, “The Social Security Trust Fund was set up to help pre-fund the retirement of the baby boomer generation, and according to trustees of the Social Security program it currently has about $2.8 trillion, held in Treasury bonds, and will continue to grow over the next few years to about $2.9 trillion. However, in about 2033 these funds will be drawn down and, if no changes are made, beneficiaries then will receive about 75 percent of scheduled benefits.”
Although the long-term shortfall is not insignificant, the actual “gap between what the program will be able to pay after 2033, unless Congress makes adjustments, and benefits currently obligated “is estimated to be about 1% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) over the next 75 years.”
Those given the misimpression that Social Security payments will be unsustainable, devouring more and more of the nation’s resources, should be aware that by 2035, when the youngest boomer’s surpass age 70, the program’s spending will reach it’s highest level of United States GDP—6.16% per year — up from about 5% today. Then it will drop slightly over the following 50 years. That’s according to the 2014 report of the Social Security Trustees. That’s what the federal deficit hawks are screaming about—6 percent of GDP to secure the retirement life of the nation—6 percent.
The CEPR report is titled “Who Would Pay More if the Social Security Payroll Tax Cap Were Raised or Scrapped?” For a detailed overview of the issues, see the new book, Social Security Works! by Nancy J. Altman and Eric R. Kingson. Review copies are available from Julie McCarroll at the New Press, 212.564.4406, jmccarroll@thenewpress.com.
4. THE BOOKMOBILE
*** Spring Chicken: How to Stay Young Forever (Or Die Trying), by Bill Gifford, is officially out in March by Grand Central/Hachette books and just got an enthusiastic mouthful from Publisher’s Week (PW) as a “full-throttle, high-energy ride through the latest research, popular mythology and ancient wisdom on aging and lifespan–from wrinkles and baldness down to the innermost workings of cells–that examines how human beings might be able to live longer, healthier lives.”
PW goes on that Gifford, a longtime contributor to Outside Magazine, the New Republic, New York Times and many others, “separates the wheat from the chaff as he exposes hoaxes and scams foisted upon an aging society, and arms readers with the best possible advice on what to do, what not to do, and what life-changing treatments may be right around the corner. A mixture of deep reporting, fascinating science, and prescriptive takeaway, this is a brilliant examination of a universal obsession: what can be done about getting old?” GBO Newsies can reach Gifford at bill.gifford@gmail.com. Request press review copies from Linda A. Duggins;, 212-364-1424; linda.duggins@hbgusa.com.
*** Diversity Explosion: How New Racial Demographics Are Remaking America by oft-quoted Brookings Institution Senior Fellow William H. Frey was published in November by Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution Press.
Frey’s first chapter, available now online, notes, “America reached an important milestone in 2011. That occurred when, for the first time in the history of the country, more minority babies than white babies were born in a year.” He continues, “This milestone signals the beginning of a transformation from the mostly white baby boom culture that dominated the nation during the last half of the 20th century to the more globalized, multiracial country that the United States is becoming.”
While the book is far more expansive than aging, the effect of growing population of largely white boomers in contract to the mainly ethnic younger cohorts in the United states ripples though Frey’s analysis of the American future. He stresses, “Rather than being feared, America’s new diversity—poised to reinvigorate the country at a time when other developed nations are facing advanced aging and population loss—can be celebrated.”
He goes on, “The aging of the white population is a primary reason why racial churning is beginning at younger ages.” Since 2000, the number of white youth has declined in the U.S., a trend to continue as those youth age. “The long-term scenario for whites is one of lower fertility and increased aging. This means that the younger population will lead the way toward the nation’s diversity surge.”
Fry asserts that this diversity surge is creating a “cultural generation gap” between the diverse youth population and the growing, older, still predominantly white population. It’s a gap that often reflects “negative attitudes among many older whites toward immigration, new minority growth, and big government programs that cater to the real economic and educational needs of America’s younger, more diverse population.”
But Frey clarifies, “The gap is not a result of racist attitudes per se. It reflects the social distance between minority youth and an older population that does not feel a personal connection with young adults and children who are not “their” children and grandchildren.
He concludes, “Yet the future well-being of seniors and the nation as a whole depends on the ability of today’s youth to succeed in tomorrow’s labor force.”
*** Preventing Hospital Infections, from Oxford University Press, “is the first to focus on the human dimension” of a hospital scourge that kills 75,000 Americans a year, more than double to annual number of U.S. auto deaths. Behavioral changes by doctors and nurses could prevent up to 70 percent of hospital infections, the boo says. Coauthored by former New York Times editor and age-beat columnist Robert W. Stock and University of Michigan researchers Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH, and Sarah L. Krein, PhD, RN, the book shows that although efforts to cut hospital infections in recent years have been partially effective, a major reason that such campaigns have fallen short, “is the unwillingness of some nurses and physicians to support the desired new behaviors.” The authors developed strategies “to win the clinicians over.” Reporters can request a media review copy at the Oxford USA website.
5. END NOTE AT -30-
Don’t Miss “Selma”
This editor wants to thank those who sent such kind responses to my 50-year reminiscence about my involvement in the 1965 Selma-to-Montgomery march and later return southward as a civil rights worker. I was able last weekend to see Ava DuVernay’s brilliant and deeply moving depiction of that Spring’s events. Not that anyone asked for my review, but my assessment is that there may be factual errors—all minor and most only arguably problematic—and I found that DuVernay never missteps when it comes to the truth.
The complaint by well-meaning loyalists of President Lyndon B. Johnson that Martin Luther King, Jr., is erroneously shown having to drag LBJ’s reluctant corpus toward introducing the Voting Rights Act is simply wrong. Anyone who knows anything about LBJ is aware of his aggressive, glad-handing, manipulative style as the consummate power broker. That’s a quality some have said they’d liked to have seen more evident in the leadership approach of President Obama. LBJ and King were monumentally at odds a times, but the film also shows the president not only delivering his ground-breaking “We shall overcome” speech, but also calling down, and in no uncertain, profane terms, Alabama Gov. George Wallace for his belligerent racism.
Insiders can split hairs about what Johnson meant in a phone call anyone can hear today, but I felt that DuVernay (and the fine, understated performance of actor Tom Wilkinson as the larger-than-the-Capitol-dome LBJ) set the conflict well within the range of believability in his relationship with King.
Disagreement is inevitable regarding a motion picture made so close to one of our most tender historical nerves, but “Selma” is far from being director Alan Parker’s 1988 travesty, “Mississippi Burning.” That unforgiveable distortion presented two FBI-agent movie stars saving the nonviolent movement as explosively as a Hollywood pyrotechnic crew can accomplish.
Like any storyteller, factual or dramatic, “Selma’s” DuVernay had to make choices. Journalists have to make editorial decisions every day about who to quote or paraphrase for what emphasis. A filmmaker or historical novelists has more “poetic” leeway, of course. Rather than frame what I found to be Coretta’s understated, but deeply discomfiting confrontation with her husband over his infidelity, DuVernay might have instead shot a different scene. For instance, King historian, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Taylor Branch,documented one in which James Bevel stunned the preachers by urging them to confess their transgressions to their wives. King worried that none of the ministers in his leadership council except perhaps one would jeopardize his family with such confessions. Branch’s three-volume biography contains hundreds of scenes a filmmaker could chose from.
The choices DuVernay did make, and with considerably artistry, enveloped this filmgoer in a place and time where I was, briefly, a half-century ago. Brave people were ever taking stands for what they believed was right. They would alternately argue philosophy, then bickering over politics and strategy. Lovers were made and betrayed. Friendships were forged and broken. Losses were sung out in cars and chapels, yet, wept upon most privately. I left the movie theater last Saturday evening feeling that this filmmaker and her star, actor David Oyelowo, had created a richly intimate experience from a history and personality most can imagine only enshrined at the mountain top.
As David Carr wrote in his Monday NYT media column of the Oscar “snub,” denying nominations both to DuVernay and Oyelowo, “Long after the last blubbering actor has been played off the stage while thanking his or her makeup assistant at the Oscars, we will still have ‘Selma.’”
–Paul Kleyman
If you have technical problems receiving issues of GBO News or if you’d like to be removed from the list, simply auto-reply to this e-mail of GBO News, or phone me at 415-503-4170 ext. 133 (e-mail: pkleyman@newamericamedia.org). GBO News especially thanks Sandy Close of New America Media, and our cyber-guru, Kevin Chan.
The Journalists Network on Generations (JNG), founded in 1993, publishes Generations Beat Online with in-kind support from New America Media (NAM). JNG provides information and networking opportunities for journalists covering generational issues, but not those representing services, products or lobbying agendas. NAM is an online, nonprofit news service reaching 3,000 ethnic media outlets in the United States. GBO News readers are invited to visit the NAM website, and click on the Ethnic Elders section logo on the right side. Opinions expressed in GBO do not represent those of NAM. Copyright 2015, JNG. For more information contact GBO Editor Paul Kleyman.
To subscribe of unsubscribe, or if you have technical problems receiving issues of GBO or if you’d like to be removed from the list, e-mail me at pkleyman@newamericamedia.org or phone me at 415-503-4170 ext. 133.
-
Joanna Biggar