Thomas Cassidy, an economist at Stony Brook University, is quite clear on his views concerning Social Security and the rationale for "not watering it down for future generations of American workers," as well as the need to keep the Social Security Disability benefits program intact and uncompromised. He says there is "no alternative" between adding money to the program's Trust Fund to sustain it or engaging in actions that weaken it, and he argues forcefully in favor of the former strategy, for the following reasons.

Social Security benefits are "the foundation of income for nearly all retiree households," as reported by the Government Accountability Office. This has become true in an ever-increasing way as pensions have grown extremely rare in the American workplace. Without shoring up the program, it is virtually ensured that millions of aged Americans and those with disabilities who have faithfully paid into the system over their entire working lives will suffer great economic loss, with many of them living at or below the poverty line.

Social Security is an investment made by workers and, given the volatility of the stock market, a worker's sole source of stable retirement and disability income that has been earned through participation in tax withholding. People pay into the system to qualify for the benefits, so manipulating them is, in Cassidy's words, "a crafty way of saying they would pay more for less."

American workers are decidedly unified in their view that Social Security is a two-way street, that is, that they have strong expectations that the government will honor its pledge after taking money from them. Recent polls indicate that fully 65 percent of workers oppose any cuts to the program.

Cassidy says we simply must make it sustainable, given workers' faithful contributions to it and its critical importance to retirees and persons suffering with disabilities.

Related Resource: Albany Times Union, "We need Social Security" Aug. 11, 2011