Your door.

Editor,

"Not affecting people close to retirement" is the sweetener that actors aiming axes at Social Security include in their pitch to make it easier to swallow.

Here's a question for you: If protecting today's retirees and near-retirees is so important that they merit the "not affecting" disclaimer, what makes future retirees any less vulnerable to the damage cuts to Social Security benefits would do to them?

Old people in 10 or 20 or 50 years are not going to be any more able to live on less than "not affected" old people are today.

Taking aim at benefits to balance Social Security's books in the future is an example of the philosophy of "cuts" to balance a budget. Bad for people who need the program to live a decent life.

Aiming at funding to balance future books is an example of the philosophy of "revenue," which looks to individuals who are able to pay -- in most cases quite easily and completely without pain -- to balance a budget.

Raise the payroll tax earnings cap from $110,000 to something reasonable, or do away with it altogether. Problem solved.

In case the few people in the USA who make millions of dollars a year, either via the labor of others or by churning financial instruments in secondary markets, haven't noticed: you are members of the human race, being part of which entails certain social costs.

The easiest and most civilized way to pay those costs is with money.

Keep on holding out, and history will eventually come knocking on your door.

Re: "Act Now to Prevent Future Debt" (1/2/2013)