When this law was passed, I had no idea it would be something that was actually to my significant benefit. Then I was laid off and it became a "retirement-saver", so to speak. When I feel guilty about it, I remind myself it's helping me stay retired so someone who needs the job more can have it.
Do I think people in my situation really need the goodies I should be able to get (and even more so with Indian status)? No, not really. But I spent 30 years in the working world putting in a LOT more than I ever took out, and I never complained much because I figured at some point, there would be something that felt unfair to others but worked to my benefit. This is such a thing.
In reality, this isn't that much different than managing income to stay below specific tax brackets, or to be eligible for contributing to an IRA, or any number of other things. Managing income based on AGI thresholds for taxes and benefits isn't new at all.
As I heard someone say elsewhere, human nature is to identify NOT with the Prodigal Son who blew his fortune and was welcomed back with open arms, but to the brother who worked hard, stayed with his dad and wondered why he wasn't being celebrated. Yet if we think about it, we've probably not *always* been the brother. We just remember it a lot more when we are, tending not to think about benefits we get that exceed what we personally paid for them.