On Feb. 11, “volunteer IT consultant” Elon Musk appeared at an Oval Office event to discuss the findings of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency. Among other claims, Musk said that a “cursory examination of Social Security” revealed that people who are clearly dead may be receiving social security benefits.
“We’ve got people in there that are 150 years old,” Musk said “Now, do you know anyone who’s 150? I don’t, OK… I think they’re probably dead, is my guess, or they should be very famous, one of the two.”
In a later post on X, Musk provided some numbers and joked, “Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security.”
Like many hot-button political issues, almost everyone is wrong about this one. Musk isn’t pulling numbers out of his ass; he isn’t lying about clearly dead people being listed as alive by social security. But he hasn’t uncovered any waste or fraud, either.
Did Musk’s number come from not understanding computer programming?
Soon after Musk’s press event, online folks were speculating that Musk’s “150-year-old” number was the result of not understanding how databases are programmed. They’re (probably) wrong. This X post explaining the theory has been viewed over 300,000 times:
While it would be funny if this was true, it can’t be proven and seems unlikely to me. Musk seemed to be pulling a “shocking” number out of the air, but his figures are roughly in keeping with the data in previous audits of the social security system. There really are a lot of records of people who were born more 150 years ago but who are not listed as dead in the social security database. But this isn’t something Musk uncovered and it isn’t an indication of fraud or waste.
Are 150-year-olds listed as alive by social security?
According to the census bureau, there were only 86,000 people alive in the US in 2023 who were over 100 years old. But these “numberholders who exceeded maximum reasonable life expectancies” (as the government calls them) don’t seem to be collecting social security benefits.
What is “death,” anyway?
The social security system’s database, Numident, is huge and complicated. While the Numident does keep track of people’s deaths, its purpose is to “administer its programs“—it’s not “a comprehensive accounting of all deaths in the country.” Ultimately, the database’s “living dead” are trapped in perpetual paperwork limbo because “the individuals died decades ago—before the use of electronic death reporting,” or so independent auditors concluded. It’s a paperwork problem that doesn’t necessarily lead to fraud or waste.
Did Elon Musk identify widespread fraud in the social security administration?
He did not. This is not a smoking gun. Despite the nation’s roughly 20 million only-alive-on-paper elders, the Social Security Administration sends benefits to around 44,000 people who are over 100, which is in keeping with the number of super-oldsters who actually live in the nation, according to the census. In fact, a 2015 report found 6.5 million active Social Security numbers for people over the age of 112, but only 13 of them were being used to receive benefits—turns out there are much better ways of defrauding social security than collecting a dead ancestor’s monthly check for $22.54—the payment a 150-year-old would receive.
Ultimately, Musk has not uncovered fraud or waste. He didn’t uncover anything. He brought this issue to people’s attention, but the bottom line is, social security “vampires” are a clerical problem we’ve known about for a long time that has already been addressed and doesn’t appear to be that big of a problem.
The truth about social security is not very sexy
Another social security audit—we actually do these regularly—published in 2015 stated that 6.5 million people on the Numident database were listed as older than 112. Benefits were sent to 266 beneficiaries (most of them were probably under the age of 112, despite what the database said—things get messy when dealing with paperwork from the early 20th century).
To be fair, the 2015 audit and the one conducted in 2023 reached roughly the same conclusion as Musk: We should probably fix this. “Death information missing from the Numident and the DMF hampers both SSA and Government-wide efforts to prevent and detect fraud and misuse,” concluded the 2023 audit. So why don’t we fix it?
What is “government waste,” anyway?
The government doesn’t just check “yes” in the field for “is this person dead?” for people who were born more than 120 years ago because, according to the SSA, adding “presumed dead” to records in the Numident system would be “costly to implement, would be of little benefit to the agency, would largely duplicate information already available to data exchange consumers and would create cost for the states and other data exchange partners.” In contradiction to the conclusion that Musk and co. reached, the SSA thinks it would be more wasteful to fix the problem than to just leave it alone: The Treasury Department already has anyone over a certain age on its Do Not Pay List anyway, so they’re just letting the files not list a death date because that’s free.
This articles is written by : Nermeen Nabil Khear Abdelmalak
All rights reserved to : USAGOLDMIES . www.usagoldmines.com
You can Enjoy surfing our website categories and read more content in many fields you may like .
Why USAGoldMines ?
USAGoldMines is a comprehensive website offering the latest in financial, crypto, and technical news. With specialized sections for each category, it provides readers with up-to-date market insights, investment trends, and technological advancements, making it a valuable resource for investors and enthusiasts in the fast-paced financial world.
By Nermeen Nabil Khear 