Law & Money

Can we all come out ahead?

Most of us who have held jobs at one time or another have contributed to both Social Security and Medicare out of every paycheck. So let me ask you a question.

In fund we trust — not

In my column last month, I wrote about the federal budget deficit and touched on the role Social Security and its so-called trust fund play. I know from a number of groups I’ve spoken to that many of you still trust in that trust fund and feel that Social Security will remain solvent for years as a result of it.

On being misunderstood

I truly look forward to receiving letters and emails from readers. I value your comments and suggestions, and am eager to hear what you think. That’s really how the Beacon has grown and changed over the years: by trying to address the needs and interests of readers and incorporate their recommendations.

Out of your pocket

Even drugs you may never take are costing you money. Yes, that’s the way insurance (and Medicare) are supposed to work: group healthcare coverage averages the costs of the “many well” with those of the “relatively few ill” to come up with a reasonable cost we all pay.

Railing against reform

Social Security is no longer the ‘third rail” of American politics. Legislators no longer touch it and die. At least not instantaneously. But this isn’t the first time Congress has seriously undertaken to change the terms of our social contract with Social Security. Over its history, changes have been considered and made on several occasions to keep the program financially solvent for what was the foreseeable future at the time.

The time is ripe

We’re told the need to address our federal budget deficit (over $14 trillion and growing by $4 billion a day) is about to push us over a “fiscal cliff” that would send us back into recession or worse. Among the many steps Congress is being urged to take to cope with this crisis is the modification of Social Security. Does one have anything to do with the other?