Social Security Administration in the process of possibly cutting 50% of the Agency's Employees

[Samori Toure]

Social Security Administration could cut up to 50% of its workforce

The Social Security Administration is preparing to lay off at least 7,000 people from its workforce of 60,000 — and the final reduction in force number could be as high as 50%, according to two people familiar with the agency’s plans who are not authorized to speak publicly.

apnews.com

 

[the cac mamba]

well, this is it

if there's one thing republican voters won't give trump a pass on, even more than guns, it's fukking with social security. this is the ultimate test of whether trump and elon are right about these federal jobs....or they'll face pitchforks

 

[Samori Toure]

well, this is the ultimate test

if there's one thing republican voters won't give trump a pass on, even more than guns, it's fukking with social security. this is the ultimate test of whether trump and elon are right about these federal jobs....or they'll face pitchforks

It is easier to steal the money if less employees are watching it.

 

[Dad]

Prayers to my fed brehs.

This fat fukk fires govt workers and then does this

 

[the cac mamba]

It is easier to steal the money if less employees are watching it.

there's nothing to steal from, from social security. it's a bankrupt ponzi scheme

when social security started out, it paid out at 65, life expectancy was 68, and 40 workers/retiree were paying into it

now, it still pays out at 65, but life expectancy is 80, and 3 workers/retiree are paying into it. it's the biggest political/fiscal time bomb in this country

 

[Samori Toure]

there's nothing to steal from, from social security. it's a bankrupt ponzi scheme

when social security started out, it paid out at 65, life expectancy was 68, and 40 workers per retiree were paying into it

now, it pays out at 65, life expectancy is 80, and it's 3 workers per retiree are paying into it

They have current contributions coming from employees and employers all the time. They also make distributions to payees and they have have contractors. There is plenty of money to steal.

 

[DrBanneker]

there's nothing to steal from, from social security. it's a bankrupt ponzi scheme

when social security started out, it paid out at 65, life expectancy was 68, and 40 workers/retiree were paying into it

now, it still pays out at 65, but life expectancy is 80, and 3 workers/retiree are paying into it. it's the biggest political/fiscal time bomb in this country

There is hundreds of billions if not trillions in that fund. Just because it probably won't meet its obligations doesn't mean the coffers are empty.

 

[the cac mamba]

They have current contributions coming from employees and employers all the time. They also make distributions to payees and they have have contractors. There is plenty of money to steal.

There is hundreds of billions if not trillions in that fund. Just because it probably won't meet its obligations doesn't mean the coffers are empty.

there's plenty of places for trump and elon to steal from, without being dumb enough to get caught stealing from social security

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

there's nothing to steal from, from social security. it's a bankrupt ponzi scheme

when social security started out, it paid out at 65, life expectancy was 68, and 40 workers/retiree were paying into it

now, it still pays out at 65, but life expectancy is 80, and 3 workers/retiree are paying into it. it's the biggest political/fiscal time bomb in this country

This is the kind of idiot a lot of you continue to engage honestly with. They're trying to conflate Social Security with a fraudulent investment scam because they either don't know what a Ponzi scheme is or they're counting on you not knowing. They ignore that Social Security's funding challenges exist because Congress raided the trust fund to pay for wars and tax cuts for the rich, not because the program itself is unsustainable. They throw out outdated worker-to-retiree ratios like the program hasn't already been adjusted multiple times to account for demographic shifts. This is just reheated Reagan-era fear porn designed to mislead you.

These are the same people who celebrate these programs being sabotaged on purpose, then cry that they don't work.

 

[Samori Toure]

This is the kind of idiot a lot of you continue to engage honestly with. They're trying to conflate Social Security with a fraudulent investment scam because they either don't know what a Ponzi scheme is or they're counting on you not knowing. They ignore that Social Security's funding challenges exist because Congress raided the trust fund to pay for wars and tax cuts for the rich, not because the program itself is unsustainable. They throw out outdated worker-to-retiree ratios like the program hasn't already been adjusted multiple times to account for demographic shifts. This is just reheated Reagan-era fear porn designed to mislead you.

These are the same people who celebrate these programs being sabotaged on purpose, then cry that they don't work.

I won't argue with folks about stuff like that, because if they don't understand that Social Security is essentially self funded by employee and employer contributions then we are already in trouble. The people don't control the actuarial process behind the scenes, but the actual funding is from the people. Congress borrows the money, but it is the money of the people.

 

[2 Up 2 Down]

there's nothing to steal from, from social security. it's a bankrupt ponzi scheme

when social security started out, it paid out at 65, life expectancy was 68, and 40 workers/retiree were paying into it

now, it still pays out at 65, but life expectancy is 80, and 3 workers/retiree are paying into it. it's the biggest political/fiscal time bomb in this country

Life expectancy is based on childhood/at birth deaths. We have advanced in science and medicine to keep kids alive thus increasing life expectancy.

Social security was and still is vital because of capitalism. The problem which they never fixed was the percentage of what people who make over a certain income puts in

 

[the cac mamba]

Life expectancy is based on childhood/at birth deaths. We have advanced in science and medicine to keep kids alive thus increasing life expectancy.

Social security was and still is vital because of capitalism.

what's your point?

when life expectancy goes from 68 to 80, and the social security age goes from 65 to 65, are you trying to argue that that isn't a change in circumstance?

both parties are openly saying it's fukked in 10 years

 

[2 Up 2 Down]

what's your point?

when life expectancy goes from 68 to 80, and the social security age goes from 65 to 65, are you trying to argue that that isn't a change in circumstance?

both parties are openly saying it's fukked in 10 years

The point is that people weren't dropping like flies at 68.

 

[Samori Toure]

Life expectancy is based on childhood/at birth deaths. We have advanced in science and medicine to keep kids alive thus increasing life expectancy.

Social security was and still is vital because of capitalism. The problem which they never fixed was the percentage of what people who make over a certain income puts in

Exactly all they have to do is raise the income cap which I think is around $160,000.00.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

This is where @the cac mamba gets his talking points.