$1.4 trillion paid to 68 million social security recipients. If DOGE crashes the Social Security system, will the GOP be out of power for a decade?

My mom is always worrying “Will the social security trust fund run out of money before I die?” (It’s odd to worry about that, but NOT about dying, mom). But this week Mom should start worrying that the trust fund survives, but the Social Security computers die. See the link below.

It’s notoriously difficult to meddle with software that your team didn’t originally write. It's exponentially more dangerous when you’re mucking around with Social Security code, written over decades by people who are now dead. And which has next to no documentation left behind by the deceased contractors. Now a bunch of DOGE whiz kids are scratching their heads and trying to figure out what they did wrong every time they insert a new line of code, and the website crashes.

There are around 60 million lines of social security code. On average, it takes an hour to write a single line new code or alter an old one. Let that sink in. 60-million-man hours for DOGE to achieve its fantasy of completely rewriting all the social security software. That’s 30,000 man-years, at 40 hours a week, 50 weeks per year. If DOGE put 1,000 programmers to work on this, it could be finished in 30 years. Check my math, brainiacs.

People are calling the social security toll free lines because the website is down. And because they read on some internet site that DOGE is stealing their personal data from the SS computers. Heads up boomers – DOGE already has everything about you from Woodlawn’s Social Security mainframes. And your IRS stuff. And your military service records. And your fingerprints. And your vaccination records. And there’s nothing you can do about it, so stop calling the 800 number to ask meandering, befuddled questions.

The real fun is going to start the day those monthly social security checks get delayed by a systems crash. The direct deposit customers will notice it within a day or two. Anyone still relying on the USPS may take a bit longer to catch on.

How many months of late deposits will it take for DOGE to sink GOP prospects of winning an election again in our lifetimes? Probably not just one event. But if this happens 2 or more times GOP goose is cooked.

Trump is too busy playing golf to figure this out. Republicans in the house and senate are too pusillanimous to demand a meeting with him and force the issue. Who knows what’s going on in Musk’s brain? Elon just sold X/Twitter to himself, which is certain to be some sort of clever tax dodge that the media hasn’t caught onto yet.

I’m not telling mom any of this stuff. If she worried her benefits were going to be late, she’d probably join one of those street theater performances democrats have cooked up with their pre-printed protest signs. Street theater because Democrats lack any Senate or House power, or any real strategy. The democrats could do was score a guest spot on “The View” for Senator Cory Booker, right after he ended his 25-hour filibuster stunt, and changed his adult diaper (he took no bathroom breaks).

Cory, I get it. You decided to show voters that the democrat party is still drawing breath even though its comatose and unresponsive to the world. Good luck with your 2028 presidential quest. But Senator Booker, I have to tell you: nobody wants to vote for a guy who wears adult diapers. Or who sends out the social security checks late.

I’m just sayin’ . . .

DOGE Goons Cause Major Crash to Social Security Site

How much does the US spend on Social Security? Is it sustainable? | USAFacts

The State of Social Security's Information Technology | Office of the Inspector General

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Avectoijesuismoi · 36-40 Best Comment

The Social Security system is at some point going to become unsustainable in the US and every other country that has one.

There are some main reasons for it
1. There simply is not enough people that are contributing to it or people that are able to contribute to it. Saying let's get the rich to pay more is fantasy world there are not enough of those to prop the system up, even if you taxed them 70 % of their earnings it won't make sufficient funding, for every Musk there are probably 100 000 if not more on social security of some sort or other. Th equation doesn't work you cannot expect one very small section of society to provide the funding for everyone that is on social
2. As time progresses there are more and more people that are becoming reliant on the system, in some cases where they have lost their job because due to progress their job has become no longer necessary and it is going to continue that way there will be less and less people needed in virtually every sector.
3. The world's population has expanded to the point where there are simply too many for it to be sustainable in virtually everyway including producing enough food to feed them and that is set to continue and get worse. Part of that is the average age of how long people live for has increased, and also some that would have died without current medical knowledge and abilities.
4. Some of the population have become out and out scroungers that expect others to keep them just because they believe it is their right to have that, and even if you offered them a 1000 jobs they wouldn't take any because it would not be suitable for some or other reason for them to take a job and get off their backside and go do it.
5. Migrants seeing that there is an opportunity to come to a country and get freebies ie Economic Migrants.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@Avectoijesuismoi good reply. I've marked this "best".

Social Security's problem is the same with many government programs. Two fold:

1 - an entitlement is notoriously difficult to rein in. people become dependent on it, Think of student loans, food banks, section 8 housing, subsidized Amtrak rail, Medicare, etc.

2 - the government is also notoriously bad at stopping fraud and abuse. civil servants who are "gatekeepers" to a benefit have almost no incentive to turn away applicants who don't meet the eligibility rules. especially if those applicants are cousins, neighbors, friends from college, connected to local politicians, etc.

i have zero problems with legitiimate economic migrants. Just show us the following:

A - a valid identification

B - a crime free personal history (no felony convictions)

C - you're not a spy from China or Russia or wherever

D - you speak English good enough to hold a job

E - you have some sort of legitimate skill, and won't immediately become a ward of the state.

Legitimate skills include nursing, engineering, airline pilot/air traffic controller, sports/entertainment superstar, software coding, etc.

we probably should minimize approvals to people who declare their career interest in lawn mowing, dishwashing, and crop harvesting, although some of these applicants do ocassionally go on to become self supporting entrepreneurs in their fields. But most of them end up being permanently depending on receiving more government benefits than they generate in tax revenue.

Avectoijesuismoi · 36-40

@SusanInFlorida Thank you for best answer. We are both saying basically the same thing
I agree migration is a useful tool to get people that fit the criteria of skills that a country needs where both they and the country they come into benefit.
But no country needs some else's criminals nor do they need individuals that are coming because the government will give them money, housing etc.