A Captive to Social Security Propaganda

Last week, I called the Social Security Administration regarding my approaching retirement. I was appalled while waiting in the phone queue to hear over and over again the message you quoted in your Jan. 16 article (“Critics See Social Security Warnings as Scare Tactics”). It seemed clear to me that it was propaganda for the Bush administration’s proposals. I cannot express my anger strongly enough. Taxpayer money is being used to produce propaganda through a supposedly neutral government agency to promote the administration’s ideology, with no reference to other points of view!

I encourage The Times to pursue these sorts of stories with the utmost vigor. I would like to see this issue of using taxpayer money for administration propaganda on Page 1, not Page 32.

Linda de Vries

Whittier

*

Rather than changing Social Security to allow stock market investments, why not just eliminate the earnings cap? Doing this would allow all-year-long contributions to the Social Security system, which is in need of additional funding. I am sure that the political parties would cry foul -- that it is raising taxes -- but it would certainly be fair to all and not pinpointing just the rich or just the poor.

Randy Smith

San Juan Capistrano

*

Let me get this straight. Bush wants to take some of the money collected and return it to individuals so they can invest it themselves to get a higher rate of return (8% average in the stock market?).

Why doesn’t the government invest in the stock market all of the money collected to get an 8% return (instead of 1% to 2%) and reduce the amount of Social Security contributions by perhaps 80% while making the program solvent? Could it be that it’s too risky for the government (but not for the relatively unsophisticated taxpayer)? But then, his plan would be a windfall for his fat-cat buddies in Wall Street, no?

John J. Posta Jr.

Westlake Village