Perspective is needed in debate on Social Security

Frank Beaty, Las Vegas

Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2011 | 2:03 a.m.

I agree with virtually everything Ken Anderson said in his Sunday letter to the editor about why we cannot allow Social Security funds to be invested with Wall Street.

He was correct in saying Social Security was not meant to be retirees’ sole income, but I would like to add that Social Security was meant to be a safety net for those who, after years of labor, just were not able to provide for their retirement.

More and more we live in a country in which big business feels less inclined to care about workers’ long-term welfare. Insurance companies are quick to try to remove you or limit your care — no matter how long you’ve paid in — if it becomes clear you will need long-term care.

I doubt anyone foresaw that, but I know eliminating poor houses was one aim of Social Security, and these were largely indigent people, many of whom had worked all their lives but were never able to accumulate enough to take them through old age.

The reality is that as conservative policies continue to decimate the middle class, there will once again be many who have no hope, no matter how hard they work, to accumulate money for retirement.