Charles Lane channels Robert Samuelson in attacking well-to-do seniors who, according to Lane, can and should contribute their “fair share” to resolving the country’s fiscal predicament. Let me say it again: If oldsters pay less than Lane or Samuelson want them to pay, then they are saving more than they otherwise would, which in turn means that when they die, their heirs will receive more. So the younger generation may be paying more now, but they will get back whatever the “secure and fortunate” oldsters don’t need for living expenses. Because they get it back, the difference between what the youngsters pay and the lower amount that Lane wants them to pay can be seen as contributions to their retirement fund. Oldsters may not be potential victims, but neither are the youngsters.