Summary
An internal Social Security Administration memo from March 13 reveals plans to require internet identity verification for phone benefit claims, forcing those unable to use online systems to visit physical offices.
The memo, authored by acting Deputy Commissioner Doris Diaz, estimates 75,000-85,000 people would need in-person visits despite month-long wait times and office closures.
This change would severely impact the 40% of beneficiaries who rely on phone service.
Meanwhile, the agency is cutting 7,000 employees (12% of staff) and closing offices. The memo acknowledges these changes will cause “service disruption,” “operational strain,” and “budget shortfalls.”
Oh for fuck’s sake. Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. Would people stop with that bullshit already?
No one said it was.
Can you read?
The literally said
Not by technical definition perhaps but it is an unsustainable system.
There are better systems out there like Singapore’s mandatory savings policy.
Go to YouTube and search for “Sam Seder Social Security”, and then realize why he’s making this face at you right now.
You mean the person who literally proves my point that it is unsustainable as it is right now?
He literally states that the trust fund is going to run out in the 2030s and gives wealth disparity as the reason. I agree and it is a problem that can be fixed, all you have to do is to remove the cap, of course the MAGAites is not going to slightly raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans and they aren’t going to create a reasonable replacement (like Singapore CPF).
Let’s give you the benefit of the doubt. What is it that’s unsustainable with social security?
Benefits increase GDP growth, cushions impact on performance of market upheavals, increases political stability, reduces poverty, increases health and productivity and of course increases happiness.
It would seem to me that it’s a sound investment for both economic, societal, moral and selfish reasons. Please tell me where my analysis or the data doesn’t support my conclusion.
My understanding (not op) is the most unsustainable thing is that the cap for payments doesn’t adjust for inflation, meaning the rich don’t pay as much as they used to. If we don’t fix that, one day payments will be cut to around 80 percent of what they are. Not world ending, but something that would be easily fixable if we weren’t ruled by sociopaths preaching sociopathy as the new religion.
Why doesn’t the working class, the larger of the two, simply not eat the owning class?
Jokes aside; seems to me the problem is that policy is set on feelings rather than reality, and then the argument of “not sustainable” gets irrelevant (which is why the policy carries on even though demonstrably wrong).That I can understand, cutting off one’s nose to spite the face kinda deal. But if you’re spiteful, it might be a reasonable (although not rational) choice.
If you’re looking for efficient and/or rational policy, you need more mature representatives, simple as.
Yes, Social Security has problems right now that are not impossible to overcome.
The main reason why Social Security is unsustainable is because population growth is slowing down. In a few decades from now, there will be more old people than young people.
Even with the current demographic situation, people are getting less than what they pay in.
Singapore’s CPF meanwhile is sustainable but Social Security is not unfixable.
The reason why Social Security is unsustainable is because population growth is slowing down. In a few decades from now, there will be more old people than young people.
Even with the current demographic situation, people are getting less than what they pay in.
The program is expected to begin running deficits every year starting in 2037.
Singapore’s CPF meanwhile is sustainable although Social Security is not unfixable.
An unsustainable system that has been in use since 1937?
I don’t think you know the meaning of words.
Righties are masters of hypocrisy and doublethink
As a firm believer of Market Socialism, I don’t really consider myself right wing.
Yes
The reason why Social Security is unsustainable is because population growth is slowing down. In a few decades from now, there will be more old people than young people.
Even with the current demographic situation, people are getting less than what they pay in.
It is expected to start creating deficits in 2037.
Singapore’s CPF meanwhile is sustainable although Social Security is not unfixable either.
Singapore’s CPF is garbage and has far more (and far more obvious) problems than Social Security. The only truly sustainable social safety net is universal basic income and universal healthcare. Anything else is just a bandaid.
Having said that… if the bandaid is all you currently have available, then don’t fucking rip it off.
Agreed on UBI and Universal Healthcare.
its been working for longer than your mother has.
The reason why Social Security is unsustainable is because population growth is slowing down. In a few decades from now, there will be more old people than young people.
Even with the current demographic situation, people are getting less than what they pay in.
It is expected to start creating deficits in 2037.
Social Security is not unfixable.