Security unfunded? No!

John Goodwin (Letters, Nov. 9) is worried about "unfunded upcoming entitlement deficit exceeding 45 trillion dollars." He has been misinformed by a well-funded campaign to destroy Social Security.

There is no reason that Social Security, or Medicare, should ever be "unfunded." Social Security is just you putting aside enough money to pay for your own retirement. The money is insured by the government mostly against inflation, but it is not a "government expense." Future retirees may expect to live a lot longer. It would be reasonable for them to save a little more. The good news is that those people will also be making a lot more money than we are. The bottom line will amount to about 20 dollars more per week saved out of about 300 dollars more per week in income.

Medicare is similar: more money needed to pay for more expensive medical care, but out of a much bigger paycheck.

The Big Liars take this extra spending and multiply it by 200 million taxpayers and seventy-five years in order to come up with their "45 Trillion Dollars," call it unfunded because we don't need to start paying for it until the bills actually come in, and ignore the fact that we will have a lot more money to pay for it with… roughly one thousand trillion dollars over the same time.

They also ignore the fact that you will have to pay for your retirement and medical care anyway The "entitlement tax" will be the only way you can guarantee that you will have the money.

Dale Coberly, Corvallis

The change you'll see

It's going to be interesting to hear Nancy Long's "Aaaaahhhh …" (Letters, Nov. 9) followed by an expletive when she finds she should have been listening to what was behind that beautiful smile and stentorian baritone. She will find they have elected a Chicago thug who picked another Chicago thug, Rahm Emanuel, to be his chief of staff.

If she had been listening she would have heard a leftist liberal who promised to change the country. As a socialist he promised to cut spending for the military in time of war, cut the missile defense, bring the troops (and the war) home, give illegals free medical aid, Social Security, driver's licenses, and spend billions on African relief, and other bizarre country-destroying programs.

You want to see the country change? You are going to get your chance!

But then it will be too late.

John Penrod, Lebanon

A debate of fallacies

Recent letters have called attention, once more, to the polarizing topic of abortion.

Now, in this tumult of opinions with which representatives of the rival factions have long been inflaming the populace, the opposing sides have alike been guilty of the commission of certain logical fallacies.

First, there is the Argument from Umbrage, which holds that the mere taking of offense at a proposition is sufficient to repudiate it. If, for instance, there is offense taken at some stated viewpoint regarding abortion, that very taking of offense is construed to be at once a refutation of the viewpoint and a validation of its opposite. We have reached the stage where to call an idea "insulting" or "outrageous" transforms the idea, as if by incantation, into a scandalous affront. The rampant demagoguery prevailing on all sides of the abortion issue is, therefore, not to be wondered at.

Secondly, we have the Argument from Incredulity, according to which mere disbelief in an assertion is sufficient to nullify it. If, for example, one registers disbelief at the presentation of data relative to abortion laws, that very disbelief assures them both that the presented data is invalid and that the opposing data is not. Now, to flippantly dismiss an idea as "nonsense" or "deceit" is seen as a self-justified dismissal, the production of no further evidence being requisite.

Finally, there is the Argument from False Dichotomy, whereby it is thought that abortion must either be justified under all circumstances or under no circumstances whatever.

Kevin Taylor, Corvallis

You, too, can survive

October was National Breast Cancer Month. This is to encourage all women to go in for your annual physical. That is how my breast cancer was detected almost 26 years ago. Yes, I am a 26-year survivor. You can be a survivor, too, when it's caught early enough.

If you are unable to afford a mammogram or screening for cervical cancer, please call 1-877-255-7070 toll-free. This program will provide both, if you qualify.

Please don't hesitate. It's your life.

Pat Moon, Albany

Make initiatives wait

The Sunday editorial on Nov. 2 had a hypothetical governor saying to voters who passed an initiative needing funding, but lacking it: "So as much as we'd like to do what the voters want us to do, you can't do something with nothing, so we're not going to do it." Great idea!

But why put it on the lonely governor? Why not have the legislature pass a law stating that measures passed requiring funding - but without the means incorporated in the adopted measure - will have to wait for enactment until an initiative containing the funding mechanism is adopted? Or do it with another initiative petition?

We could call it the "hot potato" law - or if you're a Republican, the "hot potatoe" law.

We could then have a place where such initiatives go to wait for funding. Eventually we might have to put a time limit for how long they wait. Some problems might just solve themselves while waiting.

Robert G. Gourley, Corvallis

SUNDAY LETTERS should be e-mailed to news@dhonline.com with "Sunday Letter" on the subject line. Letters are subject to editing for length and conformance to newspaper style.