"Social Security is beaking down," claims the Washington Post: Ain't necessarily so

 "Social Security is breaking down," the Washington Post cried out yesterday, and the Democratic National Committee joined in the alarm. "Long waits, waves of calls, website crashes," reads the WaPo subheading. Chaos reigns is the implicit message, all inflicted by Elon Musk.

The WaPo article was an exercise in fear-mongering, intended, I believe, to undermine public support for Elon Musk's efforts to make the federal government more efficient. As one of the millions of older Americans who rely partly on Social Security, I can attest that Social Security is not breaking down.

My wife and I receive our Social Security checks on time every month, and we can easily check our account status on the government's website. What's the problem?

Earlier this month, the Social Security Administration demonstrated its efficiency by the speed with which it implemented the Social Security Fairness Act (SSFA), which Congress passed last December. 

My wife and I are among the 3.2 million retired Americans who contributed to state-sponsored pension plans that did not participate in the Social Security program. Consequently, we were both unfairly penalized when we started drawing our Social Security benefits. 

The Social Security Fairness Act canceled those penalties, and the Social Security Administration distributed our refund checks earlier this month, depositing them directly into our checking accounts. Next month, my wife and I will be receiving our enhanced benefits. 

I was pleasantly surprised by the SSA's alacrity in implementing the SSFA, which was apparently accomplished with a reduced staff.

Some Americans have occasionally been irritated when dealing with the SSA's bureaucracy. Still, I doubt that their frustration was any greater than that of many Americans who stand in line at the Post Office during the Christmas season. All in all, the Social Security Administration probably functions as well or better than other federal agencies.

That is not to say that the Social Security program is without problems. As many commentators have pointed out, the SSA faces a massive funding shortfall in the coming years because Americans are living longer than they did when the Roosevelt administration created the program in 1935.  Sooner or later, Congress will need to find new sources of revenue to support the program.

Nevertheless, the Social Security program is not breaking down, and it was irresponsible for Washington Post reporters to suggest otherwise. 

Image credit: Right at Home

Andy's Custard is Dead to Me: Reflections on the Decline of the American Work Culture

 My hometown had an old-fashioned Dairy Queen when I was a kid, one of those vintage establishments that required customers to stand on the sidewalk and direct their food orders to a soda jerk through an open window.

Anadarko's Dairy Queen sold "soft serve," not real ice cream, but delicious nevertheless.  A small soft-serve cone only cost a nickel, which fit my childhood budget. If I was broke, I could always find at least three empty soda bottles I could redeem for two cents at the grocery store. And voila! I had the scratch to get a soft-serve cone.

My local Dairy Queen only sold two food items: a chili dog, which cost fifteen cents, and a footlong chili dog, which cost a quarter. The footlong came encased in a paper wrapper with a printed ruler attesting that the footlong chili dog was indeed twelve inches long. Truth in advertising!

My favorite food item at the Anadarko DQ was the soft-serve chocolate malt. A chocolate milkshake cost twenty-five cents during my childhood years, but the malt was pricey--thirty cents!

The extra nickel was worth it, however, because the tablespoon of powdered malt transformed an ordinary milkshake into the nectar of the gods.

Growing up, I consumed a couple hundred soft-serve chocolate malts, and I don't recall the soda jerk ever getting my order wrong. The powdered malt and chocolate syrup were always in the drink I ordered.

Now, chocolate malts cost a lot more than thirty cents. Andy's Custard, which I once patronized, charged me $6.95 (including sales tax) for a malt about the same size as the malts I slurped at the Anadarko Dairy Queen a half-century ago. 

I didn't begrudge the cost because Andy's custard is premium quality. Nevertheless, I insist that my seven-dollar malt includes malt flavoring.

The server at Andy's gets my order right about 60 percent of the time. Other times, however, I get a chocolate milkshake, not a chocolate malt.

This is unacceptable to me. When I pay seven dollars for a chocolate malt, I want a chocolate malt.

I do not mean to single out Andy's Custard. My experience there is similar to my experience in all kinds of fast-food establishments. Too often, the person who takes my order has a faraway look, and I know he or she is not listening to me. I'm distracting my server from TikTok or a text message conversation about last night's keg party.

Same phenomenon in the grocery store. I was in Albertson's a while back, and the cashier was having a personal conversation on his hands-free cell phone. He never acknowledged my presence or paused his phone chatter. I was a distraction from his social life.

COVID wrecked the American work ethic. When the federal government began paying people more not to work than to show up and do something useful, people asked themselves why they should exert themselves just to have money in their pockets. Just send me a check!

This new attitude hurts our whole society. When I order a chocolate malt, it's no big deal if the Andy's Custard worker gives me a milkshake. It's more serious, however, when the Social Security Administration tells the American people it can't say for sure when it will implement the directives of the Social Security Fairness Act.

Take this job and shove it! Elon Musk tries to prune the federal bureaucracy

 Take this job and shove it

I ain't working here no more.

Sung by Johnny Paycheck

America's budget deficit is on track to hit $1.9 trillion, which will be added to the nation's accumulated national debt of $36 trillion. 

Elon Musk, chief of President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is moving savagely to prune the federal workforce, which he urgently needs to do.  

He began by offering buyouts to entice federal employees to resign--a classic corporate tactic to trim payroll costs. So far, roughly 75,000 people have accepted the offer, a tiny percentage of the nation's 2.3 million federal workers.

Unfortunately, the employees who accepted the offer include some of the nation's most efficient bureaucrats. That's because the people who left federal service have job skills that can transfer to the private sector.

Most civil servants are hanging on to their federal jobs despite a pointed invitation to leave.  These include those who don't have the skills or experience to find employment outside the DC swamp. They will dig in at least long enough to reach retirement age.

DOGE will be forced to fire thousands of government workers to trim the workforce. Many will file lawsuits challenging DOGE's authority to make the government more efficient. They'll also avail themselves of the elaborate civil service regulations that protect their constitutional right to due process.

In short, it will be months or even years before the federal workforce shrinks. Meanwhile, the primary beneficiaries of the DOGE initiative will be lawyers--lots and lots of lawyers.

In the near future, we are likely to see the passive-aggressive nature of the federal civil service rear its ugly head as the apparatchiks of the DC swamp begin a work slowdown. We can't fulfill our duties, the bureaucrats will moan, because the workforce has been slashed by a "Nazi nepo baby."

Indeed, we are already seeing worksite sabotage in the Social Security Administration. Senior SSA administrators say it will be more than a year before they implement the directives of the Social Security Fairness Act, which is intended to benefit retirees who have been unfairly penalized. 

Why? They're understaffed.

Take number. A federal bureaucrat will assist you sometime in the next century.

Congress Passes the Social Security Fairness Act: Will This Reform Force Nancy Pelosi to Cut Back on Foreign Travel?

 Congress adopted the Social Security Fairness Act on Saturday. This legislation eliminates the penalty millions of public employees experience if they belong to a pension plan that does not participate in the Social Security system.

This reform will benefit school teachers in at least 15 states. In Louisiana, for example, school districts don't make Social Security contributions for their employees. Teachers are poorly paid, and many take part-time or summer jobs to supplement their income.

Even though teachers make Social Security contributions on their second jobs, their Social Security benefits are reduced solely because their primary employer is not in the Social Security system. The American Federation of Teachers estimates that 1.2 million school employees are penalized by this unfair exclusion.

This reform legislation will allow these teachers to receive the Social Security benefits they deserve when they reach retirement age and enable them to retire without becoming impoverished. 

The Social Security Fairness Act passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, and the question arises: Why did it take so long?

Fiscal conservatives in Congress fought the legislation because the cost would further strain the already financially strapped Social Security program. Indeed, according to the Congressional Budget Office, this reform will cost an estimated $196 billion over ten years.

So what? President Biden blew through twice as much money when he forgave $180 billion in student loans over his four-year term and spent another $180 billion on the Ukraine war. I don't hear many people squawking about those expenditures.

This is the new reality. Retired Americans living on fixed incomes are being squeezed by inflation. Forty percent of older Americans depend solely on Social Security to fund their retirement, and the average monthly benefit is only about $2,000.

Surely, we can all agree that modestly enhancing Social Security benefits for retired teachers is a good use of public money. If this reform forces the federal government to economize, there will undoubtedly be some wasteful expenditures that can be eliminated.

For example, perhaps it's time to end American support for the Ukraine war and for Nancy Pelosi to cut back on foreign travel in private jets.

Nancy Pelosi in Japan. Did she fly coach?