To the editor: There’s already a cap on Social Safety advantages, one thing columnist Michael Hiltzik doesn’t trouble to elucidate (“A proposed new ‘repair’ for Social Safety that harms staff and protects the wealthy,” April 2). The present cap on advantages for a employee who retires at age 70 is $5,181 monthly, or $62,172 per yr. That’s $124,344 for a pair. What the Committee for a Accountable Federal Funds is proposing can be a 20% lower for retirees receiving the utmost. After that lower, what different cuts would CRFB begin selling?
Many individuals don’t have vital retirement assets apart from Social Safety. You possibly can say they need to have saved different cash for retirement, however there are all types of causes it doesn’t at all times occur. If the thought is that individuals ought to save extra, how about elevating the caps on contributions to IRAs and 401(okay)s? After all, that might imply much less tax cash going into federal coffers.
The CRFB appears to assume that $30,000 or $40,000 is sufficient to maintain folks “out of poverty.” The place within the U.S. is that true at the moment? Definitely not California.
I labored by a number of will increase within the quantity of revenue payroll taxes have been utilized to. I’m no billionaire, however I needed Social Safety to be financially viable — not only for me, however for others as nicely. None of us profit by lowering our neighbors to poverty.
I didn’t work my tail off for 46 years to dwell my last years simply “out of poverty.” Retirement must be greater than eat, sleep and go to the physician.
June Ailin Sewell, Marina del Rey
..
To the editor: Hiltzik nails it once more. His column displays clearly what many people have been asking for years: “Why is there a cap on contributing to Social Safety?”
Occam’s razor applies right here: The only answer is normally the proper one. Get rid of or not less than increase the cap on contributions to reflect inflation and the profit most of us paid into for nearly 50 years to proceed to maintain meals on the desk for us seniors.
John Winkelman, Rancho Mission Viejo
