It is official; I have received the notice that my SSI will be decreased as of Jan. 1. If the state of California had contented itself with merely keeping the SSI at the same level as it has been in 1990, that would have at least been honest.
Yes, not having the money will be hard on me, but what really burns me up is the sneaky, underhanded way that our great state used to divert the benefit of the Social Security cost-of-living increase away from those people it was intended to help and into the state coffers. This was done in the name of austerity.
I wonder how much austerity those who proposed this diversion and those who agreed to it are going to practice in regard to their pensions, pay and, if they are wealthy, their income tax deductions? None I'll bet because there is no way in which they can be forced to practice austerity; it is so much easier just to demand more austerity of those who already have to practice it.
As bad as the policy of laying the burden on the backs of the poor is, it is compounded many times when the burden is increased by diverting the benefit of the funds from those the increase is supposed to help and into the state coffers. I can remember when California would not stoop so low.
JUANITA MATASSA, Santa Ana