logo
If Congress doesn't save Social Security, you'll pay more than $6,800 a year instead

If Congress doesn't save Social Security, you'll pay more than $6,800 a year instead

USA Today21-04-2025
If Congress doesn't save Social Security, you'll pay more than $6,800 a year instead | Opinion What would the average American need to do to make up for the Trump administration's proposed changes to Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance? Save a whole lot more – and spend more, too.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
DOGE sets sights on cutting waste from Social Security Administration
Social security is the latest target of the Department of Government Efficiency's push to significantly cut down government spending.
Fox - 32 Chicago
For nearly 100 years, the United States has maintained one of the world's more successful models of social insurance, protecting Americans from the death of a spouse or parent, disability and old age – essentially the risk of outliving one's savings.
These are things most of us fear regardless of our means, and – despite the rhetoric – these are not welfare programs. Americans pay into them, and without Social Security, we all will bear more risks that will directly impact our wallets, and potentially the high quality of life we have become accustomed to since its creation.
This is why touching Social Security has been viewed as a 'third rail' for decades, and it remains a primary point of contention at the charged town halls across the nation recently.
Opinion: If you're not scared about Social Security, you should be
Social Security keeps thousands out of poverty
You may not think of it when you look at a paystub, but the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) line is doing some serious heavy lifting when it comes to many Americans' financial security. It is a premium that offers coverage from the risks that come from not being able to work.
When we outlive our ability to work, lose a spouse, become disabled or have a dependent with a disability, Social Security programs provide benefits.
Take our poll: It's been nearly 100 days of Trump. Do you think we're better off? | Opinion Forum
Across America, the old age and survivors' insurance programs reduce the Supplemental Poverty Measure among those ages 65 and older by 33 percentage points, meaning without Social Security, more than 19.5 million adults would have to survive on incomes below the poverty line (less than $16,000 for a single person in 2025).
Among all Americans, Social Security lifts 27.6 million people above the poverty line.
Given the decline of defined benefit pensions, most workers today will have to rely on personal savings. With no guarantee of benefits for life, workers face greater risks of outliving their savings or a major downturn in the market. Social Security mitigates these risks.
What would the average American need to do to make up for large changes to OASDI?
We offer some estimates below, but the answer is straightforward: Save a whole lot more and spend a whole lot more for private insurance coverage.
We also must prepare for the state to bear more of the costs of having more people in deeper poverty in our communities.
Here's how Americans would fare without Social Security
This is how the impact breaks down in specific areas:
Retirement. Without any legislative action by Congress, Social Security will have insufficient funds to provide for retirees by 2033. Based on actuarial projections, benefits will have to be cut by 21% immediately. The program will not be "broke" or have "nothing for future retirees." But benefit amounts will be reduced for current and future retirees. The average worker in the U.S. receives about $1,900 per month. This implies a need for current and future retirees to come up with $4,800 per year to maintain the earning power of today's Social Security benefits. Seniors will have to cut expenses, use up more savings and rely more on financial support from family members.
Without any legislative action by Congress, Social Security will have insufficient funds to provide for retirees by 2033. Based on actuarial projections, benefits will have to be cut by 21% immediately. The program will not be "broke" or have "nothing for future retirees." But benefit amounts will be reduced for current and future retirees. The average worker in the U.S. receives about $1,900 per month. This implies a need for current and future retirees to come up with $4,800 per year to maintain the earning power of today's Social Security benefits. Seniors will have to cut expenses, use up more savings and rely more on financial support from family members. Disability. For the 161 million workers in the U.S., the chance of developing a disability is not small; in fact, a quarter of today's 20-year-olds will experience a disability before retirement. For an average 40-year-old male, replacing Social Security disability insurance with private coverage would cost roughly $1,200 per year. An estimated 40% of workers have limited disability insurance through an employer, but this coverage offers less protection than Social Security. Moreover, private disability insurers screen applicants, charging some workers more or even denying coverage altogether. Coverage is likely to cost much more than $1,200 per year for some workers – if it is available at all. Social Security provides with the same benefit levels and rules for all workers.
For the 161 million workers in the U.S., the chance of developing a disability is not small; in fact, a quarter of today's 20-year-olds will experience a disability before retirement. For an average 40-year-old male, replacing Social Security disability insurance with private coverage would cost roughly $1,200 per year. An estimated 40% of workers have limited disability insurance through an employer, but this coverage offers less protection than Social Security. Moreover, private disability insurers screen applicants, charging some workers more or even denying coverage altogether. Coverage is likely to cost much more than $1,200 per year for some workers – if it is available at all. Social Security provides with the same benefit levels and rules for all workers. Survivors' benefits. As of December 2023, there were more than 5.7 million Americans (more than enough to be the 23rd largest state) receiving Social Security benefits due to a deceased spouse, child or parent. For an average 40-year-old male to purchase similar life insurance coverage privately, premiums would be over $500 per year. Of course, this private coverage is subject to medical exams, and policy renewals come with premium increases. While some private industry workers have limited access to life insurance benefits at work, Social Security survivors' benefits are especially important for lower-income workers with children who depend on their earnings.
As of December 2023, there were more than 5.7 million Americans (more than enough to be the 23rd largest state) receiving Social Security benefits due to a deceased spouse, child or parent. For an average 40-year-old male to purchase similar life insurance coverage privately, premiums would be over $500 per year. Of course, this private coverage is subject to medical exams, and policy renewals come with premium increases. While some private industry workers have limited access to life insurance benefits at work, Social Security survivors' benefits are especially important for lower-income workers with children who depend on their earnings. Supplemental Security Income. More than 7.4 million Americans receive more than $63.5 billion in annual payments from SSI. These payments average just over $700 per month for the poorest Americans, including people with disabilities, elderly individuals who had low-paying jobs, and children. If proposals to shift SSI from Social Security to the state occur, the average Wisconsinite would need to contribute $260 per person per year to make up the gap.
In the end, if Social Security retirement benefits are reduced due to legislative inaction, Social Security survivors' and disability benefits are removed, and SSI's support for the poorest seniors and people with lifelong disabilities is terminated or handed off to the state, it will cost the average American more than $6,800 per year in added insurance premiums, increased need for savings and state tax increases.
We estimate that this number is more than $7,000 per year in 12 states (highest in Connecticut at $7,279 per year) and is more than $6,400 in every state (lowest in Montana at $6,474 per year).
This likely far exceeds any reasonable reductions in our payroll taxes, and ignores the costs that family members and communities may take on to support the most economically vulnerable.
The insurance protection that Social Security programs provide has tangible economic benefits. Without these programs, we will all need to reassess our financial plans.
J. Michael Collins is a professor in the School of Human Ecology and the La Follette School of Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is also an associate director at the Institute for Research on Poverty and a member of the National Academy of Social Insurance. Tyler Q. Welch is a PhD candidate in the Wisconsin School of Business' Risk and Insurance department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is also a graduate research fellow at the Institute for Research on Poverty and an associate member of the National Academy of Social Insurance. An earlier version of this column originally appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The spin master in charge of feeding Gaza
The spin master in charge of feeding Gaza

Vox

time19 minutes ago

  • Vox

The spin master in charge of feeding Gaza

The desperate plight of starving Gazans has captured the world's attention. Children are dying of malnutrition. Over 1,000 Palestinians have been killed while attempting to receive aid. The United Nations World Food Program has found that one-third of Gaza's roughly 2.1 million residents are not eating for multiple days in a row. More than 100 international aid organizations — including Doctors Without Borders, Save the Children, and Oxfam — signed a letter last week saying that 'restrictions, delays, and fragmentation under [Israel's] total siege have created chaos, starvation, and death.' And more than 30 countries, including Israel's allies, issued a joint statement earlier this month condemning 'the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.' So who is overseeing this disaster? A public relations professional, the Rev. Johnnie Moore, with little experience in humanitarian aid. Moore is the executive chair of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private group backed by Israel and the US. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation has been controversial since it took over aid distribution in Gaza in May. Its first executive director, Jake Wood, resigned after a few weeks and complained of Israeli interference in their operations. The UN had set up 400 distribution sites in Gaza, but the GHF reduced that to four. The shortage of distribution sites has meant that Gazans walk long distances for food, and often leave empty-handed. Violence has also been prevalent at the aid distribution sites. American contractors armed with live ammunition and stun grenades guard the food alongside Israeli forces, who have opened fire on crowds awaiting aid. Israel denies responsibility and blames Hamas for the violence. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that there is 'no starvation' in Gaza. Today, Explained co-host Sean Ramewaram spoke with Arno Rosenfeld, enterprise reporter at The Forward, the largest Jewish news outlet in the United States, about Moore's background and how he's navigating the crisis. Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There's much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. Tell us more about the guy who's in charge of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), Johnnie Moore. Johnnie Moore is an evangelical leader with a long history in Republican politics. He graduated from Liberty University and then worked in communications for them for a number of years. That's the university founded by Jerry Falwell, a big evangelical mecca in the country. And then he went from that into PR. He was running a boutique PR firm that got acquired recently by a larger firm, and they do work for both Marriott Hotels and also Focus on the Family. It's not exclusively conservative religious causes, but it includes that. And then he's had various roles in the government. So he was an evangelical adviser to President Trump during his first campaign. He prayed with Trump in the White House… Prayed with Trump! Didn't know Trump was a big prayer. Well, he's surrounded himself with these leaders. And Liberty was a big part of burnishing his conservative evangelical bona fides during that first race. So he has a long history there. And Moore held various posts in the government. He was on the committee that the US has to promote religious freedom around the world. So he's traveled around the world to defend the religious liberty of Muslims in China and different groups in different countries in the Middle East. He was involved in some of the diplomatic work with Saudi Arabia with Trump. He met with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman a number of years ago. So Moore has had long ties to the Trump administration, and now he is in this new role as a humanitarian. Everything makes sense up until '... and now he's in this new role as a humanitarian.' Because, as you're saying here, he's basically a PR guy. How does he go from PR flack in the Trump administration to in charge of maybe one of the most consequential humanitarian missions on the planet? The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is a very strange entity, but the most direct answer to your question is that Moore has a long history of supporting Israel, of traveling to Israel. He's deep into the world of Christian Zionism. Of course, a lot of Israel's strongest supporters in the United States are evangelical Christians. And so he comes out of that world and has these ties. And I think for a variety of reasons, when they were looking for someone to take over this organization after the executive director stepped down in May after only a few weeks on the job, they brought Moore in to burnish its reputation. He's been on a big media tour. So he's leaning into his PR expertise in this new role. What's he saying on his big media tour? His argument is basically that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is the victim of conspiracy theories promoted by the United Nations, which wants to hoard all of the aid and the glory for delivering food for themselves. He's also claiming that Hamas is on their own PR tour and has snookered all of these reporters around the world into repeating lies about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. So, basically, GHF is doing great work. They're doing the most Christian thing possible, in his words, feeding people. And unfortunately, the entire international aid community at the behest of the UN and perhaps also Hamas just has it in for them. It's very unfair, but they're not going to let that stop them from doing the Lord's work. What does he have to say about all the dead Palestinians? The dead Palestinians as a result of starvation or as a result of being shot while trying to get food from his organization? The second one. His argument is, again: It's very tragic. They never want anyone to lose their lives. He said that they complain often to the IDF when the IDF shoots at people queuing for aid. He said the IDF has taken responsibility for those incidents. He said Hamas has also attacked GHF employees and Palestinians trying to get aid from GHF, and that Hamas has not taken responsibility for that. He said that more people are being killed trying to get UN and World Food Programme aid than have been killed trying to get his organization's aid. It depends a little bit how you parse the statistics. I don't think that's true, but that's what he's been saying in these public appearances. Is he convincing anyone? One of the things that's important to understand about his role and what the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is intended to do is that there is a segment of Israel supporters in the United States that live in a little bit of an alternate reality. And I think his job is to convince those people that Israel and the United States are not responsible for Palestinian civilians starving in Gaza. So, for example, the piece that I wrote was about him addressing the American Jewish Congress. And his argument to them was basically: Yes, there is a humanitarian crisis. We are doing everything in our power. The United States and Israel are doing the right thing. Unfortunately, all these other aid groups are just letting food rot. He's a charismatic guy. He's good at talking to these audiences. So I do think it's a convincing message for that audience. It's just a very specific audience. Does it tell us something, though, that this is the kind of person that was put at the top of this operation, that it wasn't someone with deep experience in aid, but instead someone who would fight the PR war around the effort? It's another good question because Cindy McCain, John McCain's widow, runs the World Food Programme. So it's not totally unprecedented to have people who have a public profile and political connections in these figurehead roles atop humanitarian organizations. But Cindy McCain, after a lot of pressure, has become increasingly critical of the Israeli government. That's what people thought might happen with GHF. It's not just that Moore has these political connections or that he doesn't have deep expertise in humanitarian aid, but his job is to defend the United States and Israel, which is incredibly unusual. It's not anything that I've seen an aid organization do in the past. Certainly sometimes they speak out politically here or there, but they're not typically primarily promoting what almost seems like a political agenda. And that's a lot of what we've seen Johnnie Moore do, even as he insists the politics are the worst possible thing for humanitarian aid and he doesn't want anything to do with them. A lot of Israel supporters in the United States are liberal. They do care about civilians in Gaza, and they're very alarmed by what they're seeing in the news about starvation in Gaza. And so I think those people desperately want to be reassured that Israel, the Jewish state that they support, is not responsible for mass starvation and civilian suffering in Gaza. And he's presented a very compelling narrative to them. That's a lot of the role that he's playing right now. And I think that he's playing it well.

Trump is ‘clearly afraid' of what's in the Epstein files, says Pennsylvania House Democrat
Trump is ‘clearly afraid' of what's in the Epstein files, says Pennsylvania House Democrat

NBC News

time19 minutes ago

  • NBC News

Trump is ‘clearly afraid' of what's in the Epstein files, says Pennsylvania House Democrat

Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) joins Meet the Press NOW to discuss the president's domestic agenda legislation as Republicans lawmakers head back to their districts to sell the bill. Rep. Deluzio slammed the law, accusing it of saddling the American people with debt. The congressman also called for the release of the Epstein files, claiming the President is 'clearly afraid' of what's in the 29, 2025

Trump says poached Mar-a-Lago spa staff included prominent Epstein accuser
Trump says poached Mar-a-Lago spa staff included prominent Epstein accuser

USA Today

time20 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump says poached Mar-a-Lago spa staff included prominent Epstein accuser

Among the workers Epstein stole was Virginia Giuffre, a former attendant at Mar-a-Lago, Trump said on Air Force One. WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump says his falling out years ago with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was prompted by his former friend's recruitment of Trump's Mar-a-Lago spa staff, and that one of the people who accused the disgraced financier of sex trafficking had been a Mar-a-Lago employee. Trump told reporters that the staff Epstein "stole" from him worked in the spa and staffers included Virginia Giuffre, a former attendant at his Palm Beach resort who said in a unsealed deposition for a defamation lawsuit against Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell that she was forced as a teenager to have sex with powerful men. Among the men Giuffre said she was directed to have sex with was Prince Andrew of Britain, according to a lawsuit. Prince Andrew has denied the allegation. Giuffre died by suicide in April of this year. She is the only person Trump has named since he attested he'd ended his friendship with Epstein. He said he did so because the deceased multimillionaire, who was awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges at the time of his 2019 death, "stole" workers from his businesses. Trump acknowledged on July 29 that some of the staffers at the Palm Beach spa were young women. He first declined to provide the detail, telling reporters who were on a flight with him from Scotland, "Everyone knows the people that were taken." But he then affirmed that young women were involved, telling a reporter: "The answer is yes, they were." Asked what the workers did, Trump offered that they were "in the spa." "People that work in the spa. I have a great spa, one of the best spas in the world at Mar-a-Lago, and people were taken out of the spa – hired by him, in other words – gone," he said. Trump was asked if Virginia Giuffre was one of the people Epstein had hired. At first, the president said, "I don't know." But after a short pause, he said, "I think so, I think that was one of the people, yeah. He stole her. And by the way, she had no complaints about us." More: Trump met teenage Epstein victim who was contestant in his beauty pageant He could not say how many staffers Epstein poached from him, noting that the incident took place many years ago. He said that after Epstein was given an initial warning, "he took some others, and once he did that, that was the end of him." "When they steal people, I don't like it," Trump said. The White House previously said that Trump ended his friendship with Epstein, whom CNN reported attended the president's second wedding to Marla Maples, because the financier was a creep. Trump told reporters on July 29 that the two explanations were essentially the same. Trump has been under immense pressure to explain his relationship with Epstein and release documents related to the government's investigation into Epstein's alleged sex crimes. His most recent comments came after Maxwell, Epstein's codefendant, agreed to provide testimony to a congressional committee in response to subpoena if the panel granted her immunity. Maxwell was convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking. She appealed to the Supreme Court on July 28.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store