For the Jan. 21 issue.
Bush has courage, wisdom to address Social Security
To the editor:
Regarding the letters from Sheila and Howard Schneider, Delia Pitts and Bernard Wright ("Social Security plan means benefit cuts for everyone," "Bush begins to attack retirees’ benefits," and "Bush’s Social Security will hurt ballooning deficit," all from Jan. 14), who must have all gotten the same fax and talking points from the DNC, they seem to believe that there is a lock box for Social Security, they have their own accounts and it is the be-all and end-all for their futures.
In reality, according to all reports, by 2018, Social Security will be paying out more than it takes in and by 2042, the Social Security trustees estimate the system will be bankrupt.
When Franklin Roosevelt signed Social Security into law in 1935, the depths of the Depression, it was designed for a different world one where life expectancy was about 60 years. Social Security was supposed to be a safety net and a way to get older, higher paid workers out of the workforce and make way for younger workers, who needed jobs and at a lesser pay.
When the program was new, there were about 41 workers paying into the system for every one taking out. Today that number is 3 to one. When those entering the workforce today turn 65, estimates are it will be less than 2:1. Social Security is a pay-as-you-go program and we can’t go on much longer under this system. There are those who think they have a Social Security account they draw from and that’s not so. The system is also unfair to those who have paid in all their lives and die before retirement age. Nothing is given to the family, save a few hundred dollars. This also must be changed
For years, Social Security has been called the third rail of politics and no one wanted to touch it. However, President George W. Bush sees the problem and knows that we can’t wait until we reach that crisis point we must begin to save a system now.
One of the plans under study is a Thrift Savings Plan that allows workers to invest in safe, guaranteed stocks, bonds and securities. Chancy? No that’s the plan the federal workers are now using.
President Bush and the Congress have a golden opportunity to modernize Social Security and make it permanently solvent through personal retirement accounts. By allowing workers to start putting about half of their Social Security payroll tax into these accounts, they will have enough to pay the current retirees. The youngsters beginning their working lives now, will have about 45 years to invest for their futures.
By the way, the increased tax on Social Security was a gift from the Clinton administration.
As far as means testing, why should Warren Buffet be excluded from collecting Social Security (as it stands now) after having paid into it all those years? Or is it like that old saying: "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs." Who said that? I think it was Karl Marx.
East Windsor
Twin Rivers needs to explain charitable contributions
To the editor:
I believe that certain statements made by Homeowners Association President Scott Pohl at the Jan. 13 Twin Rivers board meeting are contradictory to the budget and the budget narrative. I believe that we are owed an explanation as to what expenses we are budgeting for and what monies we are spending versus what is shown on the budget.
I believe it is also incumbent upon the board to advise whether or not some of our expenditures are authorized by our governing documents and whether or not the IRS authorizes certain deductions.
Several years ago, the board said there is nothing hidden in the budget, that each line item has a description and if the reader is unsure as to what the description involves, there is always the budget narrative to which one can refer.
For the last several years, there had been an item in the amenities budget titled "Contribution Expenses." The budget narrative explains that line item by stating "Contribution Expense-Contributions and support to local sports teams and charitable funds."
I believe that the IRS rules dictate that charitable funds need not just be alms to poor people. Charitable contributions can also be to houses of worship, the Girl Scouts and the Boy Scouts, and so on. The IRS rules also dictate that to be deductible an organization receiving contributions must be a qualified organization. Furthermore the IRS rules dictate that the donor get letters of acknowledgement to substantiate contributions. Additionally, the IRS does not allow deductions for political action committees, civic leagues, sports clubs and the Chamber of Commerce.
For the past several years, I believe that Twin Rivers has declared a deduction on its federal tax returns of several thousand dollars.
At the January board meeting, I asked to see the letters of acknowledgement for charitable contributions and was advised that we do not give monies to charity and there are no letters of acknowledgement. If we are not making charitable donations (as defined by the IRS) then where is our money really being spent? At the very least, the Budget Committee owes us an explanation as to why the budget narrative claims contributions to charitable funds and why Mr. Pohl commented that we make no charitable contributions.
In the past, the State of New Jersey did an audit on Twin Rivers and assessed Twin Rivers for about $35,000 for what the board euphemistically called unpaid sales tax and interest only (but they won’t let anyone see the results of the tax audit). In light of the past state tax audit, I believe it is incumbent upon the board to advise whether or not the organizations we contribute to are qualified organizations as defined by the IRS or whether or not we have letters of acknowledgement from organizations to which we contribute money.
I would hate to think that we could be vulnerable to a federal tax audit as well. Therefore, an explanation is in order.
East Windsor

