A capitalist society must be especially careful to cultivate a culture of caring, if for no other reasons than to avoid disenfranchising its weaker members and seeding an attitude of callous disregard for the less able. America should keep this in mind when considering drastic changes to Social Security.

An excessively selfish “every man for himself” attitude on the part of those who would profit from abolishing Social Security seems to be fueling the debate about privatization. For one thing, the investment community is motivated to get more money into the private sector, so they enthusiastically endorse privatization. Proponents ignore the fact that it hasn’t served individual retirees or society well in countries like Chile and Britain, where it instead led to higher costs than ever when the government had to rescue retirees from failed individual plans.

In fact, the gloom and doom surrounding Social Security’s future is exaggerated. According to the latest forecasts, there will be enough money to manage Social Security without shortfalls for approximately the next 30 years.

Bernard Wasow, of the Century Foundation writes that “Social Security is stronger than it has been at any time in its history...since 1983, the Social Security trust fund reserves have risen from essentially zero to more than $1.6 trillion...achieved primarily by a slight increase in payroll tax and a gradual increase in retirement age.”

Those who oppose privatization express a concern for preserving the dignity of elders, as well as for preserving this instrument of social solidarity itself. How would expecting people to take responsibility for their own retirement portfolio threaten the dignity of the elderly?

Robert Binstock, a professor of aging, health, and society at Case Western Reserve University, estimates that 1/5 of the population possess the financial literacy needed to manage their own retirement funds. Studies have shown that those who have opted for defined contribution plans over an employer managed pension plan have not made sufficient financial gains by the time of their retirement and must often continue working to supplement their income.

to “Can You Afford to Retire?” a FRONTLINE special, “the idea that we should all be financial experts is a crazy idea.” Although some companies have already begun training employees to manage 401K plans--for example, National Semiconductor has achieved more than 90 percent participation in their 401K plan by providing tools, training, and resources to help employees succeed--many of the 40 percent of workers enrolled in such plans are still on their own. The average account balance is $29,000, a fraction of what will be required to enjoy security and live with dignity. And considering that half of American workers are not covered by any kind of plan, the continuing need for Social Security is evident.

Nevertheless, many people express resentment that they might be expected to work longer than originally planned to offset a possible Social Security funding shortfall. Others feel it would be unfair to increase the cap on taxable Social Security income from $90K to $150K, even though earners in the higher income brackets have more sources of non-taxable income than those earning under $90K. After all, society proudly equates the accumulation of money and material goods with professional success and promotes competition over cooperation. This fosters a “winner takes all” mentality. Americans not only need a new paradigm of aging; we need a new paradigm of work, one in which a sense of meaningful contribution accompanies monetary reward.

America’s response to the Social Security question will send a powerful message to citizens of all ages. It can say unequivocally that one’s value as an abstraction-manipulated-by-policymakers is calculated by the amount of money one pumps into the economy. Or it can say that intrinsically worthy human beings are infinitely creative and diversely original, especially when the opportunity to find a humane solution to a social problem presents itself.

Over the past few years, there has been much talk about the perils of living in a world where advances in technology far exceed moral progress, yet policymakers still fail to recognize opportunities to act on humanistic ideals. The ideals embodied in a nation’s policies and institutions are internalized by its citizens and create its collective character. America’s Social Security issue provides the perfect chance to select traits--ideals-- that will build instead of erode our national character.