Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity


Recap: The Congressional Budget Office says that policy decisions will affect the size of the federal deficit; health-care reform appears to be gaining in the polls; and I'm looking for evidence of Eric Cantor's wonkish ways.


1) Russ Feingold explains his vote against financial regulation.

2) I meant to say more about this David Leonhardt column.

3) Speaking of Leonhardt, my White House sources sound more like his White House sources than like Brad DeLong's White House sources.

4) Unintended consequences meet opt-out 401(k)s.

5) I'll be on Larry Kudlow's CNBC show tonight. I think we're talking stimulus, but it's not exactly clear.

Recipe of the day: It's "Top Chef" night, so here's how to make last week's winning carnitas tacos.

By Ezra Klein  |  June 30, 2010; 6:23 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Research desk responds: How does the achievement gap vary by state?
Next: Wonkbook: House passes FinReg; unemployment insurance fails; CBO makes the case for stimulus


Good luck on Kudlow's show. Chances are its probably about how President Obama is hellbent on destroying our business elites, the superior members of society that contribute so much to the world... yeah good luck!

Posted by: doctorrobert | June 30, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

--"health-care reform appears to be gaining in the polls"--

That's so important. We want the rubes approving as their lives are slowly ruined.

Posted by: msoja | June 30, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

I'm surprised liberals are concerned about the slightly lower match rate for opt-out 401(k)s.

It slightly hurts exisitng savers and greatly benefits those who wouldn't have opted-in under the previous regime. Retirement savings for those already in the system are 96.5% of previous levels (assuming the typical person saves to the match limit and the match is 100%), and those who are newly in the system are now building a retirement account with 6%, 7%, 8% of their income each year. The new entrants will be significantly better off as they reach retirement.

Since the program greatly helps the irresponsible while slightly hurting the responsible, I'd almost expect conservatives to be more upset, although the fact that more people are saving for their own retirement surely outweighs that concern.

Anyway, it's not a surprise match rates are a bit lower. You can't suggest employers enact a policy which is designed to increase employee utilization of corporate benefits and expect that per capita benefits won't be pressured - there's no free lunch.

Posted by: justin84 | July 1, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company