I find it disappointing that the Washington City Paper, which, to my knowledge, has never run a substantive article on Social Security before, could not bring anything more to the table than an attack-style interview with José Piñera, the architect of Chilean social security reform (“Questionnaire: José Piñera,” 12/18).

Maybe in future issues, Amanda Ripley could talk to some actual Chileans and ask what they think of their social security system rather than rely on press releases from the “Institute for Public Accuracy” (let me guess, the left’s answer to Reed Irvine’s Accuracy in Media?). It is obvious that opponents of badly needed Social Security reforms are doing everything possible to derail the ideas of Mr. Piñera from taking hold in this country. It’s sad that the City Paper, which could serve a useful role in educating its (generally) younger readership base about the Social Security question, is doing the work of the Gray Panthers and organized labor, who have launched an assault this past year on even modest privatization proposals by Senators Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) and Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.).

As for myself, I am 28 years old and when I retire (at age 67? 70?), the U.S. government’s Social Security reserves will very likely have been depleted by the large cohort of baby boomers. When I read my pay stub every two weeks, I look at the line saying “Social Security Tax” and see money going down the drain. In Chile, I could invest that money for my own retirement. You don’t need to be an economist to see which is a better deal.

Silver Spring, Md.