The editorial (Herald, Aug. 26) claimed the Social Security program is "unquestioned in value." I question that statement.
First, the reason farm workers and domestic employees weren't included in the program wasn't union opposition; it was racism. Because farm workers and domestic employees were overwhelmingly black (especially in the South), the program institutionalized and intensified racism and segregation.
Second, Social Security is one of the reasons the U.S. government is so indebted. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the program's costs have grown from 2.5 percent of gross domestic product in 1962 to
4.3 percent this year, and are projected to rise as high as 6.2 percent unless benefits are cut or taxes raised. Considering only these two aspects of the program, it is understandable why many people think another big government program isn't a good idea.
Proponents of increased social spending should try to improve their suggested policies rather than assume their value is "unquestioned."
Jordan Gazit, Durango