About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

Special Elections
- Strafford 03Bob Perry
- Hills 03Peter Leishman

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Social Security: If You Can't Kill The Program, Screw The People

by: fake consultant

Thu Mar 03, 2011 at 12:45:02 PM EST


(Not a specifically New Hampshire focus in this - but since we elected Guinta, Bass, and Ayotte we have a special responsibility to watch the Social Security system they are committed to ending. - promoted by elwood)

There's a lot of ways to be petty and cheap and stupid, and a lot of ways to stick it to a program you don't like, and by extension, the clients of that program...and this week the House Republicans have embarked on an effort to combine the two into one petty, cheap, and stupid way to stick it to the clients of Social Security and the workers who administer the program.

They're going to sell it to you, if they can, as a way to "lower the deficit", or words similar...but what this is really about is making the actual Social Security program work less well-because, after all, if a program is popular today, the best way to make it less so is to apply a bit of "treat 'em like their cars were impounded" to every interaction customers have with the system.

And what better way to make sure that happens...then to aggressively demoralize everyone who works down at the ol' Social Security office?

fake consultant :: Social Security: If You Can't Kill The Program, Screw The People
The foot less prompt to seek the morning dew,
The heart less bounding at emotion new,
And hope, once crushed, less quick to spring again.

--From "Thyrsis", by Matthew Arnold

So here's the deal, short and sweet: Social Security is amazingly efficient at running an annuity and income support program, both at the same time; in fact, in 2009 the Social Security Administration Old-Age and Survivors' Benefit Program took in not quite $700 billion and disbursed $564 billion, writing checks to and serving millions of customers at the same time...and they did this with administrative expenses of about $3.4 billion-and that's just about .6% of the distributions, all of this according to the Report of the Social Security Trustees for 2009.

In the private sector, companies who provide annuities have administrative costs that range from 50% to 500% higher. (Of course, Social Security doesn't have to pay sales commissions.)

The Social Security folks are similarly frugal with the Disability Insurance Program (expenses run 2.3% of distributions), and if you combine the two the total is .9%.

Nonetheless, the plan from the House Republicans, who want to return to balanced budgets right now, if they are to be believed, is to cut $1.7 billion of those administrative costs from a budget of just under $12 billion in the remaining 7 months of the fiscal year, and, according to the involved union, that means in those next 7 months workers will have to take three weeks worth of furlough days to make that work.

If my quick math is correct it means they hope to close the office about 10% of the time while expecting the same amount of work to be done, which is probably not going to happen.

The likely end result will be callers who can't get through without more of a struggle, checks that may or may not get out on time, an angry workforce, and a general result that equals more and more people saying "Social Security sucks"-and if you ask me, that's the real goal of this effort: to make Social Security unpopular, thus setting the stage for more cuts to come later.

And just to put all this in perspective, we today give subsidies totaling about $4 billion a year to oil companies, apparently because gold-plated caviar is really, really, expensive, and the same budget-conscious House Republicans...every single one of 'em...voted to protect that subsidy just a couple of days ago.

Social Security workers were out yesterday handing out leaflets to describe what's going on, although as far as I know the leaflets didn't say that this is just one more part of a giant plan that's already raising its ugly head in places like Wisconsin and Indiana and Ohio and New Jersey: start a war against one group of American workers by claiming they're not "real" workers or that they're "special, extra-privileged" workers...and try to drag down all workers in the process.

A cut like this is a shot at these workers, and, by extension, all workers who might, you know, like a raise some day-and it's also a shot at you, or your parents, or your grandparents, who will eventually have to deal with the results of all the cutting.

But in the end, it's important to look at the bright side: the gold-plated caviar market will still be protected, thanks to that $4 billion a year in cash we're donating to oil companies-and if I had to guess, BP's senior management will not be looking at longer wait times the next time they call Louie Gohmert or Joe Barton or any one of a few dozen other Members who evidently represent Big Oil first...and Americans last.

FULL DISCLOSURE: This post was written with the support of the CAF State Blogger's Network Project.
Poll
social security needs...
...longer wait times
...a disgruntled workforce
...fewer hours to do the same work
...to be sacrificed for oil subsidies
...to go suck an egg

Results

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
after taking shots at state workers... (0.00 / 0)
...why not move up to federal workers?

i guess.

--we are making enemies faster than we can kill them


"Run government like a business" (4.00 / 1)
As fc notes, Social Security has always had a much lower administrative burden on its participants than typical private programs.

I'm pretty sure that the executives at Goldman Sachs don't tell their children, "Go into public service, as a Social Security office worker. That's where the BIG bucks are!"


Most American businesses go bankrupt. That is, they (4.00 / 1)
default on their obligations.  Conservative politicians get into government because they're averse to fulfilling obligations in the first place.  Then they discover that they're actually supposed to manage public assets when they're part of a public corporation, an institution that's organized for the express purpose of not failing.  Many of these politicians simply don't know how to cope.  
Of course, if we continue to let them turn elections into popularity contests, their incompetence won't be discussed.

[ Parent ]
i'm not so sure... (0.00 / 0)
...about that whole "defaulting on obligations" thing.

the vast majority of businesses in this country are basically one-person start-ups, and when those go down, it's often because the thing just kind of fades out.

i'll give you a good example: The Girlfriend started a jewelery business, in the hopes of getting out of nursing, but she was never able to "grow" the business into a full-time thing while also working as a nurse, and as a result her business neither went bankrupt nor has it "blossomed": instead, it's just kind of slowly fading away.

when she eventually stops, she'll have no obligations to default upon, as her inventory was paid for in cash.

that's not uncommon: carpenters own their tools, caterers often do, too...and how many day care operations are run out of private homes?

tons of gift shops and restaurants and little retail operations and construction businesses choose to just shut down when things appear unsustainable rather than go bankrupt, and lots of other "service" businesses do the same: i know someone who quit being a self-employed landscaper to go to work at nordstrom, to give but one example.

but here's the thing: what if you were elected to congress, thinking that your business was to administer government in trust for your constituents...and what you discovered was that the real business you are running is your own re-election campaign...and that you have to do this full-time?

that seems to be the trap that catches many in legislative life, and it seems like the eternal need to raise money is behind a lot of the bad decisions that all-too-many legislators...and executives, for that matter...seem to make.

--we are making enemies faster than we can kill them


[ Parent ]
in both chile and argentina... (0.00 / 0)
...where privatization has already been tried, it was advertising and sales commissions that ended up being the "killer" for investors: expenses eat up about half of investment gains in those countries, and i have no reason to believe that wouldn't be the case here as well.

--we are making enemies faster than we can kill them

[ Parent ]
I have been very impressed (4.00 / 1)
with the personal service I have received from Social Security and Medicare in my transition to retirement.  While paperwork processing tends to be slow, my interactions at offices and on the phone have been excellent examples of customer service, and believe me, I know, because I worked in a customer service environment for 12 years, at a firm where customer service was job 1.  
There were a number of glitches, some of them my fault, in the process, but we are safely transitioned into retirement.  Yesterday I got a call from Medicare following up on some unpaid claims.  I was surprised and impressed again.

i get the impression... (0.00 / 0)
...that the goal here is to make you like the system less, on the theory that if you like the people less, you'll like the program less--and i have to say that destroying a really good program just so that you can destroy it and then profit off the ashes is about as sad as it gets.

--we are making enemies faster than we can kill them

[ Parent ]

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox