S4 had two letters to the editor published this week.  The first letter appeared in the Daily Sundial, a campus newspaper in California that printed an article unfairly attacking recess appointee Andrew Biggs.  Here is an excerpt:

The Social Security Administration does an excellent job of scoring reform proposals and predicting funding shortfalls, and there is no indication that any reports have been mathematically incorrect.

On the contrary, we should pay more attention to the work that comes out of the SSA. One professor in your article is on record suggesting that raising the cap on payroll taxes would solve Social Security's funding problem, but this simply isn't so. Eliminating the cap entirely would push the funding shortfalls currently forecast to begin in 2017 back to only 2025, a meager gain for such a huge tax increase.

The second letter is in the Miami Herald.  Here is part of the response to an opinion piece which suggested that we should be happy the Social Security trustees pushed back the trust fund exhaustion date one year:

One extra year of life in the Social Security trust fund is no cause for celebration. The mistake Fields makes is to look at the extra year of life (which is subject to revision when the trustees revisit Social Security again in 2008) and completely forget that there is a problem that needs to be addressed.

...[I]t is unfair to suggest that politicians do not understand that people are ''owed'' their Social Security money. Indeed, it is exactly because no generation should be unfairly burdened by Social Security that some in Washington have worked hard toward fundamental reform.