What did Obama really mean at the Iowa dinner when he spoke of the need to tell the truth about Social Security? Is he really hinting at a more Republican position? The main obstacle to the Social Security fund is age discrimination. When employers lie and say that they have to compete for "talent," rather than hiring American workers over 45 who have excellent skills and qualifications, the Social Security fund becomes depleted. People between 50 and 65 should be in their golden years, earining their highest levels in leadership positions and contributing to the retirement fund. In jobs not requiring physical labor, there are many workers who desire to continue even beyhond the age of 65. There are people going to school in their 50s and desiring to start a new career. However, age discrimination is rampant. Women with Ph.D.s in physics or architecture degrees or M.B.A.s have no choice except substitute teaching. There are many people who want to work and who would prefer to delay taking out Social Security benefits, but they do not have that choice. So I would like to know exactly what Obama has in mind. Is he implying the easy way out, asking people to accept a cut in coverage, or is he willing to fight the battle in favor of American workers and lead a restructuring of the way work is allocated to people? The age of the welfare queen is over. What we have no is a massive number of unemployed people ages 50-65 who could be productive, but instead are waiting out the years until Social Security and Medicare start.