To the editor: I strongly disagree with Veronique de Rugy’s proposed strategy to Social Safety (“This next batch of elected senators will decide the fate of Social Security,” July 16). As a libertarian economist related to pro-free-market organizations such because the Mercatus Middle, she advocates reforms that, in my opinion, would weaken one in every of America’s most profitable anti-poverty applications.
Relatively than reducing advantages, I consider Congress ought to think about a three-part strategy to strengthen Social Safety:
Protect the contributions of law-abiding immigrant staff. Many immigrants who work, pay payroll taxes and contribute to Social Safety and Medicare may never be eligible to collect benefits themselves. Their payroll tax contributions assist strengthen these applications and needs to be acknowledged as a part of the answer.
Elevate the revenue ceiling topic of Social Safety taxes and require employers to contribute a higher share on high-income wages. At a time when many companies can afford multimillion-dollar government compensation packages, asking larger earners and employers to contribute extra is an inexpensive means to enhance this system’s long-term funds.
Restrict advantages for the wealthiest retirees. People with annual incomes exceeding $500,000 may have their Social Safety advantages absolutely taxed, with these tax revenues devoted on to the Social Safety belief fund. Social Safety was created to supply retirement safety, to not complement the incomes of billionaires.
Lastly, Congress ought to set up a really bipartisan, unbiased fee to guage reforms based mostly on proof fairly than ideology. Its mission needs to be to strengthen and lengthen the solvency of Social Safety — not undermine a program that has protected generations of Individuals because it was signed into regulation on Aug. 14, 1935.
Lawrence Rogers, Studio Metropolis
..
To the editor: The creator is right in writing that Individuals 65 and older profit disproportionately from Social Safety advantages, that Individuals 35-44 pay a big share of the tax and that Social Safety advantages ought to give attention to poverty prevention.
Sadly, the creator feels that present and future retirees ought to make all the sacrifices to repair Social Safety. I like to recommend that every one Individuals vote to elect a U.S. senator who vows to finish the cap on payroll taxes. The creator avers that this may make up for 58% of the income shortfall. It’s time for all Individuals to take part in a sensible resolution to the Social Safety downside.
George Ljubenkov, San Pedro
