Summary
Former Social Security Commissioner Martin O’Malley warns that staffing and funding cuts under Elon Musk could cause Social Security payments to halt within 30 to 90 days.
The SSA is reducing its workforce and closing offices, prompting concerns from Democrats, who accuse the Trump administration of trying to dismantle the program.
O’Malley predicts a major political backlash if payments are interrupted.
Meanwhile, leadership changes at SSA have added further instability, with no confirmed commissioner in place.
Why would retired old people suddenly riot? They will call their social security rep and wait for hours on hold while they watch Jeopardy and cable news that tells them rioting is bad and only criminals do that.
Between Social Security Insurance and Supplemental Income, there’s about 70 million recipients (holy wow - just shy of 20% of the U.S. population). Most of them are elderly, sure - but not all, and not all of those elderly will be infirm.
The way I see it is if these checks don’t come in April, we’ll start to see protests as the winter weather fades into spring.
I think a lot of folks feel disempowered by the system. Voting doesn’t work. And even when voting does work, the political parties seem to have their own agenda that is divorced from their purported constituents, their promises, and even reality. (Purported, because we know that voters are just the vehicle, but money is the fuel under our current system. The constituents they claim to have are not the constituents they serve.) Beyond that, they’re slapping felony convictions onto college kids who protested a genocide. Even if you want to soften the language, they were protesting violence in a nonviolent way, and they are going to have their entire lives impacted by criminal charges for expressing their ‘right’ to freedom of speech. Add in that a lot of folks are trapped in media bubbles and don’t even realize there are problems, or if they realize there are problems, they don’t really recognize their severity. And as we’ve repeatedly seen, Trump does not see justice, and there are no advocates for democracy or the rule of law. The only person that a lot of people felt was ‘on their side’ was Luigi Mangione, and failing attempts to paint him as a terrorist, the media has done their best to quash coverage of him to erase him from the national consciousness. The deck is clearly stacked in every which way.
So I mean, the consequences are dire, the impact of Trump’s actions are not yet being felt broadly or acutely enough yet, and it’s frankly kind of shitty outside, so no one wants to go stand in freezing temps, cold rain, or ceaseless winds for no gain, and incredible peril. I hate to serve up excuses, but I think the situation will have to get much worse before people are driven to action.
Oh, we are definitely getting protests. But, will we see riots? Will we see people taking control of their workplaces? Will people start growing their own food and shopping at farmer’s markets instead of grocery chains? The only people who have the ability to dismantle the vestiges of power that control them are the people themselves.
The imagery is compelling.
Elderly people slowly starving while watching game shows and calling an anonymous entity in the hope of salvation. Reminds me of a certain movie, though that one wasn’t even about politics, just addiction. One could argue that many people are addicted to outrage, misinformation, fear and hate today - maybe it’s not such a difference in the end.
I don’t know specifically about elderly people, but I have heard it said that historically, people who cannot afford to eat have a higher chance of overthrowing their government.
And so it is often in a government’s interest to have some sort of social programs that provide food security.
Historically, there have been riots during the Great Depression where people raided grocery stores. But, hey, homeless people and poor single parents have been doing this for years and are called criminals for doing so.
These people will need to be okay with being considered criminals if they truly wish to riot and change things, but they’ve spent decades voting to put people who do those things in jail.
Because many of their children and grandchildren would pick up the slack.
People are already struggling just to get by. Imagine suddenly having to house, feed, and/or care for an elderly person on top of that.
More than one i would bet in a lot of cases. If it 100% dries up between me and my partner we may have to help up to 6 or more people between parents, grandparents, and aunts/uncles.
I mean, I guess if the only people who ever rioted were those personally affected you’d be right. Not really able to see it that way, myself.
Sorry, but you should. Historically, the only people who have ever rioted were people who were directly affected by said issues. If they can successfully be convinced that Daddy Government is going to fix everything while demonizing the actual protestors on the streets, you get decades of stagnation.
I’d love for you show me any counter examples in history.
If I mention the Floyd protests are we going to start splitting hairs about what makes a protest vs a riot?