• @Boddhisatva
    link
    414 hours ago

    Trump has refused to say what he’ll do because threatening Social Security during an election would cost him a lot of votes from seniors. On the other hand, now that he has won, Republicans have started freely admitting that Project 2025 is the plan for this administration. Project 2025 has this to say about Social Security.

    Project 2025’s 900-page Mandate for Leadership fails to propose any solutions for Social Security and says, on page 710, that its proposals for the program could not be “covered here in depth.” Notably, that line was co-authored by economist Stephen Moore, who has advocated to slash and privatize Social Security, once calling it a “Ponzi scheme” and encouraging students to burn their Social Security cards. Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, has also gone on record to say the Mandate for Leadership manifesto is just the basis of their plan and “there are parts of the plan that we will not share with the left.” Last month, his organization called for raising the retirement age, and the author of that analysis, Rachel Greszler, is listed as a Project 2025 contributor.

    I would hazard to guess that the incoming administration will, at the very least, try to raise the Full Retirement Age to 69. I will be pleasantly shocked if they don’t try to privatize it as well.

    • @XeroxCool
      link
      61 hour ago

      710 pages into this mandate and they decide they don’t have room to talk about SS?

    • HobbitFoot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 hours ago

      A 2:1 ratio on Social Security age limits wouldn’t affect a lot of his base, so I can see Trump pushing it.

  • @Sgt_choke_n_stroke
    link
    264 hours ago

    He’s promised not to touch it. But this guy’s not gonna fix it either.

    • @lemmylommy
      link
      424 hours ago

      And his promises are not worth very much.

      • @SpaceNoodle
        link
        264 hours ago

        Best policy is to simply assume that he’s going to do the worst possible thing at every juncture.

  • @radix
    link
    English
    124 hours ago

    The conventional wisdom is that Social Security is a so-called “Third Rail” of politics. Nobody is going to touch that and live to tell the tale.

    Of course, we would have had a similar thought about non-controversial stuff like “cooperating with the World Health Organization,” so there are no guarantees, but wholesale restructuring of the program would (hopefully) cause more backlash than any politician wants to deal with.

    The blueprints he’s working from doesn’t say anything about SS by name: https://www.newsweek.com/what-project-2025-could-do-social-security-1923892

    Despite being over 900 pages long and spanning most of the departments of government, including defense, homeland security, agriculture, education and energy, the mandate text does not provide direct policy positions on Social Security or its government agency.

    That’s not to say the program will be entirely unaltered, but that page suggests the extent of the (public) policy proposals seems to be raising the retirement age by a few years. Not great, but nobody seems to be loudly advocating for slashing existing benefits.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      94 hours ago

      Medicaid especially is in trouble. In two different budgets they tried to pull back on funding. Not sure how successful it was but they already tried.

      I once read that 2/3 of Americans are “affected” by Medicaid, not that they use it but that they are related to or are otherwise involved with someone who does. That’s a lot of face eating.

      • The Velour Fog
        link
        7
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        If they or their loved ones lose coverage, They’ll just blame the Democrats, or atheist transgender illegal aliens or something. They aren’t tethered by reality. They can just lay blame on a random boogeyman and sleep peacefully at night.

  • @Jackthelad
    link
    English
    -384 hours ago

    People on Lemmy will tell you it’s going to disappear because orange man wants to kill everyone, or something.

    What is likely to happen is nothing.

    • @DomeGuy
      link
      224 hours ago

      Please understand that “nothing” means the built up surplus runs out and there will be not enough money to pay all benefits.

      The smart and easy fix would be to raise the cap on ss taxes while flattening the “you deserve more money because you made more money when you were working” weirdness.

      Instead, they’ll likely either do nothing and force the dems to fix it in four years, play with benefits to make the poor suffer, or try and replace it with a phased in 401k style stock market scam.

      (that last option, btw, is killing social security.)

    • @WoahWoah
      link
      13
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Yes, nothing, which means not fixing it. Which means it will be depleted in nine years. I guess it depends on how long his mom plans to stay alive.