Q: I just watched a documentary on PBS about the growing national debt. One of the points made in the program is that at some time in the future we are going to have to come to grips with the issue of Social Security. That got me into an argument with a neighbor. He claims that no radical changes are needed to keep Social Security solvent. But I seem to recall a column you wrote last year that listed some major proposals for Social Security reform. Could you please provide that information again?

A: It is actually a version of a column I've been writing at least once a year for the past 10 years or so. And that just hints at how long we as a nation have been putting off dealing with Social Security's long-range financing problems.

Simply put, Social Security must eventually be reformed to deal with the demographic time bomb represented by aging baby boomers. The system works perfectly at a ratio of three taxpayers to each Social Security beneficiary. (That's where we are now.) But once all the boomers retire and move from the taxpayer side of the Social Security pipeline to the beneficiary side, we will be at a two-to-one ratio.

And Social Security, AS IT'S CURRENTLY STRUCTURED, simply does not work at a ratio of only two taxpayers supporting each Social Security recipient.

So, how can we restructure Social Security?

Listed below are eight realistic proposals for reforming Social Security, with a very brief argument for and against each one. They are divided into two sections: proposals for cutting benefits and those for raising taxes. Next to each is a number expressed as a percentage. The numbers indicate the portion of Social Security's long-range deficit that would be wiped out if the proposal became law. So, if you can find solutions totaling 100 percent or more, you have successfully reformed Social Security!

CUT BENEFITS

Raise the retirement age to 70 by 2030 -- a 68 percent fix

Good idea: People are living longer, healthier lives.

Bad idea: Would you really want to work until you're 70? Employers will be faced with higher health care costs for older workers.

Reduce COLAs paid to Social Security beneficiaries by 0.5 percent -- a 37 percent fix

-- Good idea: Economists believe the current formula overstates inflation for seniors.

-- Bad idea: No senior believes this! Besides, COLA reductions are cumulative. The longer you live, the more you will suffer financially.

Reduce benefits by 5 percent for all future retirees -- a 26 percent fix

-- Good idea: All retirees should share responsibility for shoring up Social Security.

-- Bad idea: Lower income beneficiaries could not afford the reduction.

Means test: reduce benefits to people making $45,000 or more -- an 85 percent fix

-- Good idea: Ensures Social Security paid only to people who need it the most.

-- Bad idea: Would turn Social Security into a welfare program.

RAISE REVENUES Continued...