📋 Acting Social Security Chief Talks About Spending Cuts (AARP Article)

[SpringIsHereVA]

FROM THE ARTICLE: Acting Social Security Chief Says Agency Moves Will ‘Prioritize Customer Service’.

Dudek addresses spending cuts, office closures, data privacy fears in response to AARP members’ concerns.

By Andy Markowitz, AARP.

Published March 06, 2025.

The acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA) told AARP this week that the agency is committed to improving customer service as it moves quickly to cut costs and reduce its workforce.

“We are identifying efficiencies and reducing costs, with a renewed focus on mission-critical work,” Leland Dudek wrote March 4, answering questions posed by AARP in a letter to the SSA last month. “These steps prioritize customer service by streamlining redundant layers of management, reducing non-mission critical work and potential reassignment of employees to customer service positions."

USE THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE ARTICLE: https://www.aarp.org/social-security/ssa-prioritizes-customer-service/

[CarmenE673098]

You can't improve Customer Service when you are firing Customer Service employees and God knows who else. It is absurd that a Billionaire foreigner is on the way to destroying our hard earned retirement funds.

We get our finances set, and now because people (unknowingly) voted against their own interests we all will suffer. When they think the time is right they will start to lower our existing payment amounts. 

^8 million voters receive Social Security and Medicare. If you want to save it you need to vote against the Party that is destroying it. Firing the workers that make sure we get paid like clockwork is the sign that they want to destroy Social Security. 

This isn't about ideology it is about our financial survival. 

[GailL1]

@CarmenE673098 

Becoming efficient and stopping waste, fraud and abuse doesn’t have anything to do with the Social Security benefits to which you are entitled from your years of work.

Wait til 2032 - 2035 when the Trust Fund is scheduled to be unable to meet the needs of the benefits and there is an automatic cut of about 20% that is built into the law when the dollar value of the Trust Fund reaches a certain dollar amount.

SSA.gov- A SUMMARY OF THE 2024 ANNUAL REPORTS Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees A MESS... 

From the link ~ 

Based on our best estimates, this year's reports show that:

• The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund will be able to pay 100 percent of total scheduled benefits until 2033, unchanged from last year's report. At that time, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 79 percent of scheduled benefits.

.. . . . Lawmakers have many options for changes that would reduce or eliminate the long-term financing shortfalls. Taking action sooner rather than later will allow consideration of a broader range of solutions and provide more time to phase in changes so that the public has adequate time to prepare.

By the Trustees: (signed by the Trustees from the previous Administration)

Janet Yellen,
   Secretary of the Treasury,  and Managing Trustee of the Trust Funds.

Xavier Becerra,
   Secretary of Health and Human Services, and Trustee.

Julie A. Su,
   Acting Secretary of Labor, and Trustee.

read more at the link ~ 

[CarmenE673098]

The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund will be able to pay 100 percent of total scheduled benefits until 2033, unchanged from last year's report. At that time, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 79 percent of scheduled benefits."

This says to me that half the members of Congress want SS to "Die on The Vine" rather than make adjustments so retirees that aren't wealthy can afford to pay bills. 

I was happy to pay for "the Greatest Generation" to get a check from SS. I don't see what the big problem is for workers now to have the payroll tax increased a very small amount to keep SS viable for all of us. 

[BalbonisMoleskine]

Just because you were happy to pay for "the Greatest Generation" to get a check from SS doesn't mean that workers now are willing to have their payroll tax increased a very small amount to keep SS viable for all of us. What they pay in FICA could be saved and invested so when they're ready to retire, they're not in a bind like you.  

[Tonster521]

@BalbonisMoleskine As you probably know, FICA contributions are not correlated to SS Benefits. If SS Benefits were based on FICA paid, SS Benefits would be at least 30% or more lower. SS Benefits are a percentage of Average Indexed Monthly Earnings over about 35 years. That means a person's earnings are indexed or increased for inflation without a corresponding FICA tax for such increases. Some of a person's earnings early in their career may be increased 400% or more depending on inflation. This is difficult to beat even if investing in equities such as the S & P 500, etc. The other issue is whether employers would be required to contribute; and, if so, would employer money be invested the same way as employee money. Another factor to consider is the amount of allocation that would be apportioned to Old Age (aka Retirement), Spousal, Survivor (spouse and/or children) as well as Disability Income. The current allocation is 5.3% to OAS and .9% to DI. I excluded Medicare which is another issue. I am providing a link that indicates the current allocation in aggregate.   https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/HowAreSocialSecurity.htm#:~:text=Social%20Security%20is%20... was unable to find the allocation for Spousal and Survivor in the OAS allocation. The questions that are applicable are the cost for Spousal and the cost for Survivor (including children). I do not have an actuary opinion, but I would guess those benefits use about 1.0% for Survivor and .3% for Spousal leaving only about 4% for Old Age (aka Retirement). Currently, the single folks subsidize the married, the lower income subsidize the higher income, and the early deceased subsidize the living (mortality credits). All of the above changes when you use individual accounts. There are many factors to consider.

[BalbonisMoleskine]

Thanks for making my point. It's past time for SS benefits to be based on FICA paid. The 30% savings would help make the system sustainable, which it is not when people receive far more than they paid in: https://taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/lifetime-social-security-benefits-and-taxes-2023-update

[Tonster521]

@BalbonisMoleskine If SS Benefits were based on just FICA contributions, many Beneficiaries will be receiving benefit amounts below the poverty level. My guess is that the loss to Beneficiaries would be in the range of about 30%.So, a Beneficiary receiving approximately $1,600/month based on the current PIA formula would receive only $1,120/month because indexing would no longer be available. However, a savvy saver/investor can make up some or all of that shortfall by market returns and/or working/contributing for longer than 35 years which is the earnings requirement in the current PIA  formula. Many folks are not able to obtain market returns for even short periods of time. It has been my experience that many will not even try for returns better than what a FDIC insured bank offers. I would guess that 2/3 or more of the folks are risk adverse and the fear of loss affects their investment decisions. The other 1/3 or less enjoy the gain more than the fear of loss. So, those folks will probably make up any shortfall and then some. 

The SS Program is a social insurance program created in the 1930's to keep folks above the poverty level after they could no longer work due to their age, hence, Old Age Benefits (aka retirement benefits). The SS Program is not a retirement plan. It includes coverage for Old Age, Disability and Survivor (death). The SS Program has been amended various times and has added additional benefits at times with no direct method for funding such additional benefits (i.e., elimination of WEP and GPO, etc.). In summary, eliminating the current PIA and replacing it with a FICA contribution formula will cause more hardship for the lower compensated folks. Many will end up below the poverty level which the SS Program has for the most part eliminated.  

[BalbonisMoleskine]

For generations, the SSA, AARP and others have been practically jumping up and down screaming that SS is not intended to be one's sole or even primary source of income in retirement. People who ignore both that advice and the trend in the ratio of workers to retirees do so at their peril.

[Tonster521]

@BalbonisMoleskine I believe most folks are aware that they need to save for retirement. Whether it is working with an employer that provides a defined benefit pension, 401 K, 403 B, 457, Simple IRA, etc. in addition to SS Benefits. Or saving in a Traditional or Roth IRA on their own. All of the above are doable if one is employed by certain organizations or has the wherewithal to save on their own. Unfortunately, many folks do not have any of the above. Some are dealt a bad hand, some have lifestyle issues, some lack skills/knowledge, and so on. The tragedy is that some simply don't care. The SS Program at least provides some income to keep food on the table, clothes on your back, and in most cases a roof over your head. The SS Program is not a retirement plan and never will be. It has been called a social insurance program. We have no equity in the SS Program. It is a monthly payment when we attain a certain age or become disabled. In some cases, it provides a Spousal payment for Spouses that did not attain a Worker Benefit/payment. And, in some cases, it provides payments for a Spouse and/or Children upon death. Certain rules must be met in order to receive a SS Benefit. The SS Program looks more like a welfare plan (ERISA definition) than a retirement plan.I suppose that Congress can reinvent the wheel and carve out the Disability and Survivor provisions and create a stand alone Old Age benefit. However, that would take creativity and agreement among Congress which, in my opinion, is not there and will not be there in the near future. So, the best approach is for Congress to continue to increase revenue whether increases to FICA and/or reduction of benefits via continuing to tax SS benefits. Remember, the only folks complaining about paying income tax on their SS benefits are folks that have other income. The majority of folks do not pay income taxes on their SS Benefits because their income does not exceed the thresholds. 

[GAKKIEZ]

@BalbonisMoleskine Many current workers appear to want to reduce the amount they pay in FICA but too many fail to actually save and invest for retirement. This was true of many older workers that failed to save and invest as retirement plans were introduced with tax advantages for doing so.

We're seeing lots of younger workers spending rather than saving now because they don't see the potential of ever owning a home. Many don't seem to think they'll ever need a retirement plan.

[BalbonisMoleskine]

Sure. And that's their choice. But that shouldn't prevent others from having the ability to save and invest what otherwise would go to FICA.

[GailL1]

@CarmenE673098 

Simply put - they don’t want to pay more just like current beneficiaries don’t want to pay taxes on benefits which funds the Trust Fund too.  

The new generations have their own problems with housing, family and the American dream.  

If we tax more,  they pay more, they want a benefits from it - even if it is adjusted with a benefits formula adjustment - thus raising the payroll tax cap isn’t a real fix.  More would have to be done.

Plus many in Congress want to give more benefits - or bigger benefits.  

Congress loses their job if they go against their constituents - so if those constituents don’t want to pay more but Congress says they have to pay more - Congress loses their job.  

There have been 100’s of different proposals but nobody can agree - each side has their talking points - and we, the victims, just sit and wait.  This warning by the Social Security Trustees, whomever they might be of whichever Party, has been basically the same since at least 2010.  

[CarmenE673098]

SS has worked for my Parents very well, and now for me very well. What makes you think that SSA is full of waste other than speculation and political propaganda?

If you really care about SS being there for us, our spouses, or future working people after they retire, you should try to keep SSA from the clutches of Elon Musk. 

You think Tesla, X, or any of his other companies don't have waste? I worked for several Fortune 500 companies  there is always going to be waste. 

The workers at SSA have worked for us to receive the benefits we've earned. We should defend them against people that just want to clear expenses to pay for a tax cut for Millionaires. 

[GailL1]

@CarmenE673098 

It isn’t just the benefit program - that has a Trust Fund - the waste, fraud and abuse is coming from fraudsters and overpayments.

SSA.gov- FRAUD 

Social Security benefits - Old Age Retirement including Spousal, Survivors and Social Security Disability - all come out of a Trust Fund - the Trust Fund is funded by payroll taxes, taxes on Social Security benefits and by interest payments from those special treasuries where any money not used to pay current benefits sits.  That reserve is dwindling and will be depleted around 2033 when all we have to pay benefits is the money that those currently working are paying in + the taxes on benefits.  

That is not enough to pay the full benefits come about 2033 - so there is an autonomic measure that will cut benefits so that the Trust Fund never goes into negative ground.  

SSA.gov - Trust Fund Data 1057 - 2024 

look at the amount the Trust Fund is changing since 2021 - a negative number that is getting bigger every year - this represents the amount of reserve that we are using up just to pay benefits.  THE TRUST FUNDS HAVE TO BE FIXED - more income, less benefits - SOMETHING or we all lose.

This has nothing to do with Msuk, DOGE or Trump - it is a problem for all of us.

Their efforts are dealing more with the 37 TRILLION dollars that our country is in debt.  

• Why should we pay rent for government agencies when we have government buildings sitting idled in the general area.
• Are government employees working efficiently?  Do we have too many inner depts.  
• Government needs to keep down waste, fraud and abuse - including any overpayments.  CRS Report - 10/31/2024 - Overpayments in the Social Security Administration’s Programs: In Brief 
• Are systems outdated to work efficiently

You see I don’t know but I do think it should be looked into and measured somehow - More than any place else, government has a responsibility to us to be efficient, stop waste, fraud and abuse - because if they don’t the [whatever]program will suffer and people depending on it too.

Being self-employed for most of my working career, we had to keep down waste of whatever type so yes, private businesses do stay on top of it because their profits depend on it.  Not just waste either - inefficiencies too.

[CarmenE673098]

Sorry, That's 68 million votes. That's an overwhelming voting block.

[BalbonisMoleskine]

Like AARP, that voting block simply doesn't have the clout that many assume and hope. If it did, the tax on SS benefits would have been indexed to inflation long ago or repealed altogether. 

[GailL1]

The tax on benefits is doing just as it was intended to do - meaning to bring in more and more money to the Trust Fund as people reach the amount that is taxed.  IOW, the makers of this funding method wanted more and more people to fall within its limit - not less and less as indexing it to inflation would do.  The reason being that this tax on benefits helps to fund the Trust Funds.

[BalbonisMoleskine]

Correct. It's like the AMT, which was created to target only a couple hundred people. Over the decades, it expanded deep into the middle class, partly because of bracket creep but more so because the ever expanding array of middle class tax cuts had to be offset by the AMT clawback.

[GailL1]

@BalbonisMoleskine 

Yes, esp. when a funding mechanism for a non-discretionary program like Social Security is founded, it needs that money and they want it to be more and more, not less and less.  because the Trust Fund relies on it for funding along with any other routes.  

So if we get rid of taxation on benefits, we will have to up the % rate of employee/employer withholding tax because that and the interest the Trust Fund gets from the special treasuries where any reserve is held are the only other funding mechanisms for the Trust Fund and the reserve is being depleted now so the interest we get from that is dwindling.