Reply With Quote
Because it's duly noted & stated that you must report any SS over payment immediately.
is it fraud when the SSA makes a mistake and overpays you?
Trumplandia says yes
On March 7, the Social Security Administration also announced that people who inadvertently get too large a check through no fault of their own will lose 100 percent of their benefits.
Because it's duly noted & stated that you must report any SS over payment immediately.
SSA is already well administered, improper payments are about 1%
Y'all been propagandized
I agree. This action can & will only fortify existing rules & regulations.
Y'all ain't reforming it, you're wrecking it
Nonsense.
You're not paying attention
The workforce is getting chainsawed and the public facing offices are being closed -- buildings literally shut down
Good.
(We) haven't been able to go in (there) since COVID. By phone call only.
we git AI for that now
good luck
Amen to that salutation. I'll need it.
Just remember, old horse; you & I agree on AI. And what's the other one we agree on?
https://www.wsj.com/economy/consumer...evels-ab32d5d5I am slated to start getting my SS in September after waiting until the end of the window. The promised amount will be a substantial part of my retirement income. Ditto for my better half who will retire at the end of June. It better be there. I have paid into the system with every paycheck since I was 15 years old in the summer of 1971.
Since the arrival of a team from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, Social Security is in a far more precarious place than has been widely understood, according to Leland Dudek, the acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration. “I don’t want the system to collapse,” Dudek said in a closed-door meeting last week, according to a recording obtained by ProPublica. He also said that it “would be catastrophic for the people in our country” if DOGE were to make changes at his agency that were as sweeping as those at USAID, the Treasury Department and elsewhere.https://www.propublica.org/article/r...cial-security?Throughout the meeting, Dudek made alarming statements about the perils facing the Social Security system, but he did so in an oddly informal, discursive manner. It left several participants baffled as to the ultimate fate of the nation’s largest and most popular social program, one that serves 73 million Americans. “Are we going to break something?” Dudek asked at one point, referring to what DOGE has been doing with Social Security data. “I don’t know.”
But then he said, in a more reassuring tone: “They’re learning. Let people learn. They’re going to make mistakes.”
Dudek denies dead people over 110 yo are receiving benefits
Dudek also more than once dismissed Trump’s claims about Social Security fraud, which the president amplified just hours after Dudek’s meeting in a speech to Congress in which he implied that millions of probably-dead people over the age of 100 are receiving Social Security benefits. There are indeed 110-year-old and older people in one of the Social Security databases that the DOGE team has been looking at, Dudek said, but those people are “not in pay status” — they’re not actually being paid benefits. “These are records we never bothered with,” he explained.
- "Prove it."
- "Shane" - "Shane"
BlackRock was Trump's COVID relief administrator
Privatizing SS and exposing beneficiaries to fees, fraud and market risk is on the table
https://www.pionline.com/washington/...arry-fink-says
Hopefully it gets privatized someday. Make it a mandated individual retirement plan instead of a ponzi wealth transfer scheme.
Chile has had that for 40 years and it hasn't fixed anything, the companies have made more than the pensioners, the replacement rate is less than half of the promised 80% of salary, and these failings have required several attempts at fixing it including raising the salary percentage, government subsidy for special cases, etc etc but its still a flaming pile of . People actively avoid putting money there, despite a solid roi, the system is designed to leech you with hidden fees, the companies regularly suffer losses in their conservative accounts, they'll calculate your life expectancy to 120 years and pay out as little as legally possible and then some
There's a reason some things are best managed by the government... But some people just want to see the world burn
That's not a mandated individual retirement plan
Even more fraud, waste and abuse that way tbh
Right, make sure that anyone that's worked hard on minimum wage their whole life doesn't touch one of your nickels.
Ned Johnson is alive
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...plenty-to-say/
The wealth transfer of SS is from young to old, not rich to poor
and no one works hard for minimum wage their whole life
Make sure it stays that way.
Pretty sure I've seen old custodians and 80 year old Walmart greeters. I'll change it to "minimum standard of living wage" if that helps you
chicken ID requirements, mass firing and and closing public facing offices will have the same practical effect as cancelling people's benefits
https://popular.info/p/exclusive-mem...ils-trump-planAn SSA source told Popular Information that there are "no significant concerns about fraud at intake" because no benefits are being distributed. And there are already multiple layers of iden y verification in place before a claim is approved. The source said they believe the new ID verification steps are an effort to "create additional hurdles to filing claims and overwhelm the system."
The memo acknowledges that the policy changes would create increased "challenges for vulnerable populations." This seems to concede that many elderly and disabled people are physically unable to travel to an in-person office. It is unclear how these populations will be able to receive benefits at all.
The combination of fewer workers, fewer offices, and a massive increase in the demand for in-person services could sabotage the Social Security system — effectively denying many Americans the benefits they are due.
All of this is directly acknowledged in the Diaz memo. The memo predicts "service disruption," "operational strain," and "budget shortfalls." It also says preventing people who cannot use the internet or travel to an in-person office from receiving benefits could result in "legal challenges and congressional scrutiny."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
