this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
201 points (99.0% liked)

politics

20577 readers
4602 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
201
'Bloodbath': Social Security Administration Begins Mass Firings | Common Dreams (www.commondreams.org)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by arotrios@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The Social Security Administration, now under the control of an official installed by U.S. President Donald Trump, began the process of gutting whole segments of the agency and firing a huge portion of its already diminished workforce, sparking alarm among advocates who say the move will almost certainly result in benefit delays and disruptions.

The American Prospect, which first reported earlier this week that Acting SSA Commissioner Leland Dudek was weighing staff cuts of up to 50%, obtained an email sent late Thursday indicating that the department has launched an "agency-wide organizational restructuring that will include significant workforce reductions."

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 60 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon "moderation" in government. Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H.L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.
-- President Eisenhower

It seems that this is going to be put to the test.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Their number has grown but they are still stupid.

Not because they can't get away with it. They can, for a while anyway, before the economic chickens come home to roost.

They simply buy into the Ayn Rand notion that the richest actually do all the work... Which is simply not true and you'd have to be stupid to believe.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I don't buy the idea that these people are plain stupid. This fascist dictatorship is corporate led. The proof is in the allocation of funds.

They know their actions will kill the economic mobility of tens of millions, and tens of millions more will be plunged into poverty. They do not care. They are trying to irreparably destroy democracy and all institutions that facilitate effective governance. They wouldn't be inflicting this type of damage on the electorate unless they believed they'd never have to answer to voters, or risk losing power, again.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

They wouldn’t be inflicting this type of damage on the electorate unless they believed they’d never have to answer to voters, or risk losing power, again.

You realize their "AI" currently has real diminishing returns, and even with AI that can replaces some intellectual labor, they mostly do not have enough and consistent enough automation to... actually replace human workers, right?

They're stupid because they think they've already achieved that and they most certainly have not.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

Historically this kind of treatment of lower classes, especially ones that have traditionally had better quality of life, leads to civil unrest.

Just because they believe they'll never lose power again and that they'll successfully murder millions through their policies and that they'll fool some of the people... Once people cannot afford food, things usually spiral out of the control of the ruling classes, however smart they think they are.

If they were smart they would realize how actually lifting up the working class benefits them, too.

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I don't think their "plan" includes AI replacement, at least not as a requirement. They want shit to fail so they can privatize it or buy it when it fails. After that, regulatory capture prevents new competition.

[–] IcedSeraphine@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

I’m expecting this to be a Russian takeover facilitated by the Trump admin and Maga.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not because they can’t get away with it. They can, for a while anyway, before the economic chickens come home to roost.

With most conservatives they don't notice/disapprove of any of these kind of actions until they personally are affected.

I'm thinking through how this will manifest with Social Security. Certainly retirees receiving Social Security will notice first which represents a high percentage of traditional conservative votes. Second will be the adult children (in their 40s and 50s) that learn their living retired parents are affected. Except by then the damage will be done with months or years before the situation will return to where it was prior to trump.

So aging parents are going to be dependent on their adult children's goodwill in funding their retirement. For many adult children in this case they're already economically stressed and don't have the funds to support their aging parents too because they might still be economically supporting their young adult children struggling to find meaningful wage employment in today's job market. We'll see the aging parents tap any equity they have in their real estate to cover their short term expenses. Eventually those reverse mortgages will dry up too and possibly within 5 to 10 years.

Its going to be horrible for everyone except giant investment groups able to buy up the aging parent's homes on the cheap.

[–] Xenobiotic@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You forgot all of the disabled people on SSI. That's all ages.

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

It's about 15 million on SSI or SSDI combined. 70 million receive SS retirement.

Lotta people...

[–] teamevil@lemmy.world 48 points 1 day ago (1 children)

WHY THE HELL AM I PAYING TAXES...I'm not interested in finding Nazi muskrats pet projects. I want the goddamned services we pay for.

[–] blakenong@lemmings.world 12 points 1 day ago

Because you obey like a good peasant, and refuse to rebel unless it is from your sofa.

(Don’t worry, that’s what we are all doing. Patiently waiting until they take over)

[–] LittleRatInALittleHat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Unfortunately they won't leave power until they're dead

[–] iamjackflack@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

Sounds reasonable to me