Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

He is lying and gaslighting. When will you people understand that? He isn't a brilliant tactitian, but rather a rich guy who started on third based and got money from nefarious sources to co-opt existing businesses and ideas. He had little to do with innnovation at PayPal and had less than zero to do with Spacex or Tesla.

Then why is it 'cost prohibitive' to correct data that lists 150+ yo people? Seems like something someone should have fixed a long time ago, or maybe NO ONE EVER NOTICED.

There’s an IG report about it. They noticed. It doesn’t actually matter because they aren’t getting paid.

The social security payment system should be replaced then. This isn't 1980 anymore. Just read the OIG recommendation - they said to fix it, but SSA disagreed.

No. They said fix it and SSA said “with what staff and what funding?” Especially since the vast majority of these numbers are functionally dead. We aren’t cutting checks for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even one fraudulent welfare check is too many. I think we can all agree with that.

Errors and fraud will exist in any system. What percentage do you think is acceptable 1-2%?

Zero.

You willing to pay for all the extra manpower to get there? This has been audited. Below 1%, you spend significantly more money for each correction than you do on improper payments. SSA has enough of a staffing crisis that they could not FORK and most cannot VERA. I was taken off a case load with a year backlog to help on a caseload with an 18 month backlog. We are at our lowest staffing in 50 years— while dealing with Boomers. We. Need. More. Staff. SSA employees move over to this data set (and to be clear, most of the 100+ aren’t getting RSI) and more people die waiting for disability (which can come with the Medicaid they need to treat the disability). Elmo is not in a giving more staff mood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

I don't work there but my impression from the OIG report was that people would have to go in individually to each file to mark someone dead. That pulls that person off other projects and costs money to pay them. Like others have said, Elon should probably take a moment to learn how the system operates before declaring mass fraud.

I hate Elon, but why is this though? I read the report and drew the same conclusion, but it just seems odd that they cannot do a blanket code fix. I am not a programmer though.

The problem is that you can’t just write a script to fix code, you need to validate millions of pieces of underlying data, so you don’t mark Nana as dead when she is not.

Yes, this would involved human verification for millions records. Easily thousands of employees if you want to do this over a short-time period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

He is lying and gaslighting. When will you people understand that? He isn't a brilliant tactitian, but rather a rich guy who started on third based and got money from nefarious sources to co-opt existing businesses and ideas. He had little to do with innnovation at PayPal and had less than zero to do with Spacex or Tesla.

Then why is it 'cost prohibitive' to correct data that lists 150+ yo people? Seems like something someone should have fixed a long time ago, or maybe NO ONE EVER NOTICED.

Per the OIG report, only 2% of people over age 100 are getting pay outs. Some people do live past 100 so they're likely legitimate. If you've ever seen the news, it can be a nightmare if you're accidentally declared dead so there's probably some aversion to marking all of these people dead. The rest of the people are not receiving benefits anyway, and it would cost money to mark them dead in the system, therefore it is cost prohibitive.

it said only 2% of people had earnings history or were getting payments. So the percentage getting payments is actually much lower than this because most of this 2% is actually illegal immigrants using a dead persons social security number and paying social security taxes. A much smaller portion is people over 100 getting benefits. Most of these people are paying taxes, but do not actually get any benefit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

He is lying and gaslighting. When will you people understand that? He isn't a brilliant tactitian, but rather a rich guy who started on third based and got money from nefarious sources to co-opt existing businesses and ideas. He had little to do with innnovation at PayPal and had less than zero to do with Spacex or Tesla.

Then why is it 'cost prohibitive' to correct data that lists 150+ yo people? Seems like something someone should have fixed a long time ago, or maybe NO ONE EVER NOTICED.

Incorrect. Did you read the OIG report people keep linking to?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

I don't work there but my impression from the OIG report was that people would have to go in individually to each file to mark someone dead. That pulls that person off other projects and costs money to pay them. Like others have said, Elon should probably take a moment to learn how the system operates before declaring mass fraud.

I hate Elon, but why is this though? I read the report and drew the same conclusion, but it just seems odd that they cannot do a blanket code fix. I am not a programmer though.

The problem is that you can’t just write a script to fix code, you need to validate millions of pieces of underlying data, so you don’t mark Nana as dead when she is not.

Anonymous wrote:He’s laying the groundwork to halt social security checks with a new conspiracy that tens of millions of beneficiaries are actually dead:

Musk is full of $hit!

In order to bury someone a death certificate is mandatory in every state. Funeral homes will.do nothing without a death certificate. Funeral homes also notify the SSA when someone dies so they can receive the one time death benefit.

Financial institutions may also report deaths
Veterans Administration may also report deaths to the SSA.

States report deaths to the Social Security Administration (SSA) through vital records offices. The SSA uses this information to run its programs and prevent improper payments.

Again musk is full of $hit!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

People that work with social security data regularly know how it works. He hasn't taken the time to bother understanding it and is effectively acting like an armchair quarterback. He doesn't know what he is talking about.

People who work with SSA databases also know that some are outdated. By about 40 years. Yes, we need a more modern system that isn’t held together by chewing gum and paper straws. But Congress won’t appropriate the funds to update SSA systems. You think Mr. “Cut 80%” is going to recommend funding to update SSA systems? Me neither— so Elmo needs to learn COBOL and take the time to learn SSAs systems before popping off. And learning complex outdated systems takes a lot of time.

Friends on various social.media platforma are already reporting decreases in their Social security and SSDI payments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad to hear it. Cut the fat.

+200000

What's gonna get cut is yours and your parents benefits that you pay for, to give tax breaks to Elon and Trump. Simple as that.

This is what they are setting up for. Enjoy!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it turns out that 10% or more of social security payments are fraudulent, wouldn’t canceling these payments massively strengthen the staying power of social security for the rest of us?

You think 10% of 1.5 trillion paid out each year is fraud? Prove it.

SSA audits pure overpayments at less than 1%— most recently .75%. 1/3 to 1/2 of overpayments are clawed back. The rest went to people with zero assets, but we will eventually garnish their RSI checks.

Anonymous wrote:Glad to hear it. Cut the fat.

+200000

Anonymous wrote:Even one fraudulent welfare check is too many. I think we can all agree with that.

First, Retirement isn’t welfare. It’s an entitlement you paid for by working.

And if you want want a zero percent error rate, you can’t cut SSA staffing and the budget below 1980s levels while we deal with baby boomers retiring. It takes time, manpower and decent software— not running on on COBOL— to check on tens of millions of people. Some of our databases haven’t been updated with new software in 40+ years. That’s a Congress problem. We can’t by software if they don’t appropriate the funds. Plus, this isn’t just a SSA issue. Treasury is also responsible for gathering this data.

SSA tries to maintain a 1% error rate. And most years does. I think last year was about .75%. And SSA does a decent job recovering overpayments and has toughened up on getting overpayments back the last couple of years. But, you can’t get blood from a stone. And we are so understaffed we were not FORK eligible and are not or VERA eligible (unlike, say, nuclear weapons monitors and ATC). You want 0% to be 1%— staff us up. And realize that it costs more in manpower to ferret out the .75%— sending people to nursing homes to verify that 105 years are still alive— than it does to overpay. The price of perfect is multiples of the price or really good.

Also, SSA s systems are strange, incredibly outdated, pull this data from multiple places and sometimes use unknown fields and use data from multiple databases. As an example, if an exact birthday is not known (born at home 80 years ago) the number is set to 150 years ago (in this case 1875).

TL; DR— the data isn’t saying what Elon thinks it is. Which is why you don’t parachute. 20 year olds with no background in our programs in to run a couple queries and play gotcha.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/feb/17/are-150-year-old-americans-receiving-social-securi/

Glad to hear it. Cut the fat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody looking at these numbers for more than 10 min with a critical thinking hat on should know these are just the number of SS accounts currently active. But Elon misrepresents this as the number of people in each age bracket who are currently receiving payments, so everyone in the comments and even Faux News is OMG there's massive fraud!

However, OIG already did a report on this several years ago in which they concluded the cost associated with marking the dead people as dead was cost prohibitive as only a few age 100+ were actually receiving any benefits. The people in question either died decades ago and were not reported, or had been issued multiple SS numbers and only one was marked as deceased.

https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf

Wait, what? The cost of correcting a DATA TABLE is 'cost prohibitive'? What kind of Rube Goldberg machine are they running over there!

I'm beginning to understand the other thing Musk tweeted:

"The logic flow diagram for the Social Security system looks INSANE. No one person actually knows how it works. The payment files that move between Social Security and Treasury have significant inconsistencies that are not reconciled. It’s wild," Musk declared in a post on X.

I don't work there but my impression from the OIG report was that people would have to go in individually to each file to mark someone dead. That pulls that person off other projects and costs money to pay them. Like others have said, Elon should probably take a moment to learn how the system operates before declaring mass fraud.

This. It isn't worth the time to make the fix because it doesn't impact the operations of the systems. At some point currently or in the future, the systems will be upgraded from the COBAL environment to something newer, so why not use the regular federal procurement process to guide the requirements and implementation?

A terrible excuse!

Why? Do you want to pay people at a rate of $150 an hour to delete/update individual tables for data that otherwise has zero impact on the integrity of the system? If the goal is to save money, then why have that as an expenditure?

They would first have to figure out the actual death dates for each of these people. Otherwise the data in the table would just be made up.