So, besides voting (it's too late), What can we do?

[Swammerdami]

Yeah, the budget doesn't zero out Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Nowhere near enough grandmas on the ice floe.

As explained in this video, SSA was understaffed, and running on antiquated computer systems (due to Congress's refusal to fund) even before the Musk Madness began. Now the SSA Commisioner has resigned; his replacement has resigned; HER replacement is a known fraudster(?); and so on. Offices are being closed; employees are discouraged or even quitting; a 12% employee cut is underway; the office maintaining SSA websites is shuttered. New applications WILL be delayed; telephone queries will NOT be answered. And so on. The rich are NOT dependent on these programs, so Trump and Musk will smirk at any problems.

Glitches WILL happen, so some checks will NOT arrive. Restitutions WILL be delayed, if an error is acknowledged at all.

SSA overhead is 0.5% or so -- less than almost any other organization -- so the layoffs were deliberately and maliciously targeted, rather than any sincere attempt at efficiency.

My own SocSec is paid into a special account which USG can withdraw from, so as a precaution I intend to start emptying that account once every two months.

 

[RVonse]

Unless money is earned in exchange for services or goods that we care about, it is has to inflate. Increasing the supply of dollars without making any more goods is inflation. Surely we can agree that far.

1) No. Inflation is when it's not for goods and services. Whether we care about them is irrelevant.

Just so I can understand and clarify what you are really saying here. You don't think inflation has anything to do with the goods and services we buy? That the government gives us their official narrative whether inflation is present and/or how much?

I can think of a good recent example, my sons birthday is March 12 and I always put on a pizza party to celebrate him. Last year the tab on the pizza and hot wings were $90 and this year the exact same food total was $160. Same order from the same pizza house. The actual food was deja vu but the bill was anything but. $90 would simply not buy as much food as it did just last year.

If that is not inflation, what would you call this? Everyone else has more paper in their pocket (created by the fed) but no one is making any more goods, so the price has to go higher.

And if my desire to consume pizza (goods) is completely irrelevant to you or the cash I have to spend....maybe its the cash itself that is starting to become irrelevant? Maybe in couple more years I should just try to barter and trade route? Take some useless electronic computer crap laying in my closet and see if the pizza store will trade that for the food?

 

[RVonse]

Yeah, the budget doesn't zero out Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Nowhere near enough grandmas on the ice floe.

As explained in this video, SSA was understaffed, and running on antiquated computer systems (due to Congress's refusal to fund) even before the Musk Madness began. Now the SSA Commisioner has resigned; his replacement has resigned; HER replacement is a known fraudster(?); and so on. Offices are being closed; employees are discouraged or even quitting; a 12% employee cut is underway; the office maintaining SSA websites is shuttered. New applications WILL be delayed; telephone queries will NOT be answered. And so on. The rich are NOT dependent on these programs, so Trump and Musk will smirk at any problems.

Glitches WILL happen, so some checks will NOT arrive. Restitutions WILL be delayed, if an error is acknowledged at all.

SSA overhead is 0.5% or so -- less than almost any other organization -- so the layoffs were deliberately and maliciously targeted, rather than any sincere attempt at efficiency.

My own SocSec is paid into a special account which USG can withdraw from, so as a precaution I intend to start emptying that account once every two months.

I'm worse off than you are because I still work at 67 and not because I have to. I see a big nightmare if and when I begin to start drawing my social security Ill be lucky to find someone just to get it started. At least you are active on the computer rolls. And at least you can say you have collected something back from it so far before it falls apart.

And it will fall apart with or without Musk's help.

 

[TSwizzle]

So what CAN we do?

"The resistance" has your back!

More than a dozen Democratic women wore pink in protest. When Trump entered, the Democrat Melanie Stansbury held up a sign that said, “This is NOT Normal,” until the Republican Lance Gooden grabbed the sign out of her hand and tossed it in the air. Once Trump got going, several Democrats held up round black signs that said, “Protect veterans”, “Save Medicaid” and “Musk steals”, and when flipped around, the signs said “False” on the back, so they could factcheck Trump instantly (those arms must have got tired). Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib began with a piece of paper on which “That’s a lie” was handwritten but later upgraded to a mini-white board that said at various points: “That’s a lie!”, “You cut cancer research”, “What about the immigrants that worked for you?”, and “Cut Elon, NOT Social Security.” As the night wore on, several Democrats walked out in protest, some revealing shirts that read “Resist” on the back. One shirt said, “No kings live here”; another said, “President Musk”.

They had given hope to the resistance and shown the world what they are against. Now can they show the world what they are for?

Teh Gruaniad

Stirring stuff.

 

[Axulus]

I recently contacted a local immigrant rights and services organization to volunteer and see what they recommend I do to help. Hope to hear back from them soon.

 

[Swammerdami]

There are LOTS of simple financial transactions with fees of 0.2% or more, not even counting "hidden" fees. In this context the low administrative expenses of SSA, now down to 0.5% of total outgo, are a brilliant success! The delivery of SocSec checks is NOT a simple financial transaction: Eligibility has to be confirmed for one thing, back checks are issued as needed, and so on. For comparison, the figure averaged 1.2% during the Reagan years, and was 2.3% in 1958.

Dealing with SocSec bureaucracy may be annoying, but dealing with private companies is often annoying. All in all, the 0.5% overhead of SocSec represents EFFICIENCY. That figure is the average across ALL payments managed by SSA; the number is slightly lower even than that if only OASI (the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund) is considered.

And Musk intends to fire 20% of SSA personnel. WHY is he doing that, @RVonse ? If the 20% fired were doing absolutely NOTHING then I suppose the already low 0.5% administrative cost would reduce to just 0.4%. Is that the idea?

I'm worse off than you are because I still work at 67 and not because I have to. I see a big nightmare if and when I begin to start drawing my social security Ill be lucky to find someone just to get it started. At least you are active on the computer rolls. And at least you can say you have collected something back from it so far before it falls apart.

And it will fall apart with or without Musk's help.

I am baffled. To take your words literally. you worry that you may have trouble initiating your SocSec in future, despite being legally entitled to it. Is that correct? "Will fall apart with or without Musk's help." WHAT do you think you're talking about? The firings are likely to affect you -- even just a few weeks into Musk's makeover, there is anecdotal evidence of increased snafu's due to chaos. The only question is whether causing such chaos is DELIBERATE, or just a result of Musk/DOGE stupidity.

Is the "problem" you worry about that your SocSec will be paid with "fake money" instead of "real money"? I push a few buttons on an ATM machine and walk away with genuine-looking banknotes. It may be "fake" money in your opinion but people here seem delighted to accept it.

Musk is deliberately trying to sabotage systems like SSA. (If not, then what is the purpose of firing 20% of SSA personnel?) Although you brag "not because I have to" you foresee "a big nightmare" and will "be lucky to find someone just to get it started." If I take your words at face value, you should want SSA to hire MORE people. I am baffled.

- - - - - - - - - - -

I hope it's not rude to say that some of your views seem ill-considered. You blame "Democratic lies", rather than Trump-Musk malfeasance, for some government woes. I asked you to read some articles and opinions that might challenge your thinking. Can you point to SPECIFIC lies in any of those articles you've read so far?

 

[unapologetic]

their political elite who would normally represent them responsibly fail because they become corrupted and no longer trustworthy.

And you think Rump is trustworthy??
How many lies can he tell before you realize HE CAN NOT BE TRUSTED. Not at all.
Is he truthful only when he says what you already believe? How christian of you.

 

[Tigers!]

with about 90 million voters not voting in the last election is there any urgency given to getting those non-voters to vote. More voters would give (hopefully) much less tight election results and have more engagement.
Are their organisations to try to do this in the US, either state or federal?

 

[Politesse]

with about 90 million voters not voting in the last election is there any urgency given to getting those non-voters to vote. More voters would give (hopefully) much less tight election results and have more engagement.
Are their organisations to try to do this in the US, either state or federal?

This is a major bone of contention between the parties; if you've heard a Republican talk about "ballot harvesting", this what they mean, any kind of outreach to non-voters and occasional voters is seen as an attempt to cheat and sway the election against them. There are, nonetheless, many "Get Out the Vote" efforts both governmental and non-governmental, and the Democrats have attempted many times to advance laws that might expand voter participation, such as weekend voting, early voting, mail in voting, and the declaration of election day as a formal holiday.

 

[unapologetic]

is there any urgency given to getting those non-voters to vote.

Well I felt the urgency. And I saw more advertising than usual, aimed at getting people off their ass. ('vote this time, my beautiful christians, and you won't need to do it again')
The Rump campaign urged mail-in voting. And we all know he would have contested those votes if he lost.
I rarely voted before 2017. I've voted every election since.
I'm expecting record turnouts for the rest of this decade.

 

[TomC]

with about 90 million voters not voting in the last election is there any urgency given to getting those non-voters to vote. More voters would give (hopefully) much less tight election results and have more engagement.
Are their organisations to try to do this in the US, either state or federal?

This is a major bone of contention between the parties; if you've heard a Republican talk about "ballot harvesting", this what they mean, any kind of outreach to non-voters and occasional voters is seen as an attempt to cheat and sway the election against them. There are, nonetheless, many "Get Out the Vote" efforts both governmental and non-governmental, and the Democrats have attempted many times to advance laws that might expand voter participation, such as weekend voting, early voting, mail in voting, and the declaration of election day as a formal holiday.

For what it's worth,
The reasons for this situation lie largely in our antiquated election process, that has been honed for over a century to benefit professional partisan politicians.

For decades now, the eligible voters have leaned blue by a substantial margin. It's roughly a 60-40 advantage for the Democrats. So the Republicans are forced to rely on voter suppression, gerrymandering, and the Electoral College to remain in power. But that's easy because so many of the bluer voters are in low turnout demographics.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

There's a bit of chicken-and-egg that has developed over the years. Are our great urban centers underserved because they have low voter turnout? Or do they have low voter turnout because they are strategically underserved? It's quite likely that both are true to an extent.

Suburban voters are baffled as to why anyone would need time off work to vote, or a mail-in option to circumvent voting day, because people who live in "good ZIP codes" have never had to stand in a six hour long line to vote. Rural voters wonder aloud why any young person would not know how to vote, because they are taught about the mechanics of voting early in life, either by their parents or at school. Doesn't "everyone know" how to register and vote?

Voters who have always been privileged by our unequal voting system have a paranoid fear that changing anything will result in the destruction of their way of life. Not without reason. It might. Non-voters in marginalized neighborhoods and demographic groups feel draining apathy about participating in a supposedly democratic system that pointedly ignores their concerns for reasons of bipartisan national politics whether they vote or not. Not without reason. It will. But, both of those understandable but unsustainable emotional biases contribute to a rolling political crisis.

When I beg my students to register and vote, they give me the exact same look one would give to a Macy's cashier trying to sell one a credit card with one's next perfume purchase. Our entire system is endangered by common disinterest in participatory democracy.

 

[KCFlyer]

I'm expecting record turnouts for the rest of this decade.

YOu are pretty optimistic if you think there will be a presidential election to vote in for 2028

 

[unapologetic]

because they are taught about the mechanics of voting early in life, either by their parents or at school.

In my small town we were given a 'Civics' course in 8th grade. The teacher happened to be a member of the town council.

 

[Politesse]

Captured the youth vote, did they?

 

[Politesse]

I'm expecting record turnouts for the rest of this decade.

YOu are pretty optimistic if you think there will be a presidential election to vote in for 2028

Oh, there will be a vote. But ponder the implications of an administration that -very openly and publically - does not feel compelled to acknowledge the authority of any US Court or law enforcement agency. What rules could possibly be enforced to keep this election fair? For Trump to be on the ballot at all will be blatantly unconstiturional, so if we get that far at all, the notion of votes getting fairly counted will be a cruel joke for the aware.