This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Author: Hondo

  • Federal Fiscal Follies, Part III – Social Security Disability Insurance

    Yesterday, I wrote about Social Security’s impact on wage earners.  But as I said yesterday:  that’s not all that’s problematic about Social Security.  It gets even “better”.  Fair warning:  unless you’re a bleeding-heart libidiot who believes the primary function of government is to create a cradle-to-grave welfare state through income redistribution, what follows will probably piss you off.

    Of those receiving Social Security benefits, a record number – nearly 8.8 million, around 15.6% of the total and approaching 1 in 6 Social Security recipients – are currently receiving Social Security disability benefit payments.  Since there are about 142.1 million people in the US working, that’s one person receiving disability benefits for each 16.2 persons gainfully employed.  In 1967, that ratio was about 65 to 1.

    By law (42 USC 423) Social Security disability benefits may only be awarded to those who can hold no gainful employment of any type (and in some cases, to their dependents).  I simply do not believe that nearly 9 million people of working age in the US – or the equivalent of about 1 out of every 17.5 persons in the US civilian labor force – are so medically or mentally “Bravo Delta” that they cannot perform any type of gainful work whatsoever under any circumstances.  (You’ve really got to be in bad shape to be physically/mentally unable to sit at a reception desk or work as a janitor.) And information recently made public confirms that belief

    What’s caused this?  Well, there has recently been a huge expansion in the number of persons receiving Social Security disability benefits.  And at the same time, the Social Security disability program also appears to have become “Easy Money Street” when it comes to awarding disability benefits.  According to a recent Senate report, about 1/4 of recent Social Security disability benefits appear to have been awarded improperly.

    Here are the specifics:  since January 2009, roughly 5.7 million have been awarded Social Security disability benefits.  I’ll let you do the math yourself to figure out how many of those were likely awarded improperly.

    Now, for the bottom line:  as of July 2012, the average Social Security disability check was a bit over $1100 a month – or around $13,300 a year.  Multiply that by 8.8 million recipients, and that’s somewhere around $117 billion a year – or about 18% of Social Security costs today.  And based on what’s been made public, it looks like around 1/4 of those disability benefits – or about $29.3 billion this year – were very likely awarded improperly and should not be paid.

    “Not pretty”?  Hell, that’s absolutely butt-ugly!

    Like the rest of Social Security, I doubt this part of Social Security will shrink much any time soon – frankly, I personally doubt it will shrink at all.  But it certainly looks like the DoD budget will.  I guess continuing to pay improperly-awarded disability benefits is more important than defending the country.

    That’s all for today.  But yes – there’s more to come.  In a future article, I’ll next discuss another problematic Federal income transfer program:  the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as “foodstamps”.

    Oh, and if this article pissed you off – I think you’re gonna love the next one.

  • Federal Fiscal Follies – Part II

    I wrote the other day about the ridiculous economic cost of Federal regulation – which is estimated by two different credible sources to exceed 10% of the US GDP by 2014 if it hasn’t already done so.  Well, today I’ll be continuing that theme.

    I’ve written previously about Federal entitlement programs – Social Security in particular.  We now have more hard data showing exactly how such programs are slowly bankrupting the US.  Figures for this year’s Social Security payments through the end of August 2012 are now available.

    They’re not pretty.

    For those who didn’t know or who’d forgotten:  the Federal government’s financial (fiscal) year runs from 1 October to 30 September.  That means we’re nearing the end of the current Federal fiscal year.

    August data showed that the Federal government has already paid more than $594.64 billion to Social Security beneficiaries – with one month remaining in the current Federal fiscal year.  Assuming Social Security payments for September are the average of the previous 11 months, that means the Federal government will transfer nearly $650 billion from wage earners to Social Security beneficiaries this fiscal year.  That will be close to a 10% increase from last year’s nearly $591.5 billion in Social Security payments – which was the previous record high.

    To put this in perspective:   the DoD Base Budget request for fiscal 2012 was about $553 billion.  Another $118 billion was requested by DoD to support overseas contingency operations.  Yes, you read that right – this year, the Federal government will spend nearly as much on Social Security alone as it did on  DoD.   Given upcoming near-certain cuts to DoD’s budget next year and demographics, I’d guess we’ll probably see “crossover” next year.

    August 2012 also  marks the all-time high for the number of people receiving Social Security benefits – 56,291,797.  Based on the current US population estimate of a bit under 317.5  million, this means close to 18% of the US population – or approaching 1 out of every 5 US residents – is currently receiving income transfer payments from Social Security alone. And remember:  that percentage does not include those receiving income transfers from other Federal entitlement programs like AFDC, Medicare, Medicaid,  subsidized housing, or other welfare programs.

    And today I’m not even going to discuss all of the issues with Social Security.  More to follow on that score – tomorrow.

    But let’s take a moment to recap what we have so far.  Government regulation costs the US economy around $1.8 trillion annually.  Let’s assume 2/3 of that regulatory cost is unnecessary.  Social Security takes roughly another $650 billion out of wage earner’s pockets.  So that means between waste due to compliance with unnecessary Federal regulation and Social Security, the Federal government has is responsible for taking close to $2 trillion from those who earned it.

    And that nearly $2 trillion total doesn’t include income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, excise taxes, employer payroll taxes besides Social Security OASDI – or any other taxes.  That’s only the income lost to wage earners due to Social Security plus the waste caused by unnecessary governmental regulation.

    H. Ross Perot was wrong.  That “giant sucking sound” you hear isn’t jobs going South.  It’s the sound of the Federal government siphoning off 12.3% of the GDP between government-mandated waste and support for Social Security.

    And the truly scary part?  That’ nowhere near all that’s being siphoned away from those who earn it.

  • Well, the Afghanistan Surge Is Officially Over. Now What?

    The Army Times is reporting that the surge in Afghanistan is over.

    U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced on Friday the troops had come out, declaring the surge had accomplished its mission.

    Over?  Yes.  But I’d take issue with that “accomplished its mission” part, Mr. SECDEF.

    From day one, the surge in Afghanistan – unlike the surge in Iraq – was smaller than those on the ground felt necessary.   And the results were predictable for anyone who knows a damn thing about military history.

    There’s an old military proverb.   If you’re facing a dug-in enemy company, you can take your objective with a battalion – but you’ll suffer heavy casualties.  Attack with a brigade, and you’ll suffer light casualties while annihilating the enemy.  Attack with a division, and you’ll likely prevail without firing a shot.

    In short:  using too small a force ends up being as costly as hell.  Mass has a quality all its own.

    We forgot all of that when it came time for the Afghanistan surge.

    I agree with the SECDEF that there will be difficult days ahead in Afghanistan.   That’s obvious, since we botched the surge by bringing too little.

    So, pray tell, Mr. SECDEF:   now what?

  • Federal Fiscal Follies – So, Just What Do Federal Regulations Cost the US?

    Ever wondered just how much Federal regulations cost the US economy?  Well, we now have a couple of reasonable estimates of that cost under “Obamacare”.

    It ain’t pretty.

    The libertarian-leaning Competitive Enterprise Institute estimates the cost will be approximately $1.8 trillion annually when “Obamacare” is fully implemented in 2014.   That’s in relatively good agreement with a similar estimate from the Small Business Administration of $1.7 trillion annually.

    For comparison, the current US GDP is approximately $15 trillion.  It’s currently growing at a rate of less than 2% annually.

    Yes, your mental math is correct.  That means the cost of complying with governmental regulations in 2014 will consume well over 10% of the value of all goods and services produced in the USA.

    Some amount of governmental regulation is necessary.  But the cost of compliance with necessary regulations shouldn’t consume anywhere near 10% of the total output of the domestic economy.

    No wonder the US economy is in trouble.  We’re slowly strangling ourselves with red tape.

     

    Author note:  the title of this article was edited to make it apparent that this article was the first in a series.  No other changes were made to the article other than adding this note.

  • One Way to Finance Retirement

    Unless, of course, you get caught.

    Seems as if a recently-retired Army Master Sergeant decided his retired pay would be less than he and his wife desired.  So starting in 2004, for about 6 years he and his wife took measures to ensure a better retirement.

    Unfortunately, those measures weren’t legal.  He was making illicit requisitions, ripping off the incoming property, and selling it.  She was helping him launder the money.

    They got caught.  And about three weeks ago they pleaded guilty in Federal criminal court.

    He got 40 months in prison, plus was required to forfeit $861,000 and four properties.  She pleaded guilty to money laundering, but only got 5 years probation.

    I kinda wish James H. “Bigamist” Johnson III had had the same judge and jury.

  • “Bigamist” Johnson Pays Fine, Avoides Doing Time

    Well, it looks like it’s official. Per the Army Times, that philandering former bigamist Brigade Commander, James H. Johnson III, won’t be doing any time. Looks like he came up with the $300,000 he was fined, and has apparently paid up. Full details are behind a pay wall, but the story’s “teaser” tells enough – well, assuming the Army Times got the facts right this time.

    Yeah, this was a travesty. IMO Johnson should be doing at least a couple of years at the Leavenworth crossbar hotel, followed by dismissal, along with that fine. But the courts-martial panel turned candy-ass and didn’t slam him like it should have, probably out of sympathy for his first wife.

    However, Johnson’s now a convicted felon – which likely rather severely limits his post-service employment prospects. In many states that also means voting and firearms ownership could be problematic.  I’m guessing his Army career will end fairly soon, too. And I’d also guess the judge at his civil divorce trial will look at all of this when he decides division of property and future alimony his first wife is owed.

    I hope that Johnson had to cash out 100% of any savings/retirement accounts and/or investments he owned to pay that fine. And I hope the judge in his divorce trial awards his first wife all community property, plus a big chunk of his retirement pay – say, 75% or so – as alimony.

    Have a nice rest of your life, Johnson. Good riddance, and don’t let the door hit you on the ass as you outprocess – hopefully very soon.

  • Here’s the Thanks We Get from the Syrian Opposition

    I’ve written a few times before (here, here, and here) on events in Syria.  BLUF:  I think we’re making a serious mistake in supporting the Syrian rebels.  We don’t seem to know – or, alternatively, don’t seem to care – who they are or what they represent.  And our recent track record in Egypt and Libya doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in the current Administration’s ability to manage such crises.

    Well today we have this.  The folks who we’re supporting in Syria (the Syrian rebels) are apparently giving the US the finger by publicly burning the US flag.

    Yeah, that’s from Infowars.  But I don’t think Alex Jones and crew fabricated the video clip.

    As I’ve said before:  tell me again why we’re supporting these folks?

  • Doubling Down on “Teh Clueless” About the Military

    Remember the recent controversy over naval photos at the Democratic National Convention?  You know, where they used file photos of Soviet Navy ships during a speech purporting to show support for US armed forces?

    Well, it appears as if they doubled down,  most likely inadvertently, on “teh clueless” when it comes to the military.  Because in the same speech, they apparently also used photos  of the Turkish Air Force’s precision flying team – instead of photos of USAF or USN aircraft.

    Geez.  Are they so strapped for funds they can’t even find someone competent to procure file footage?  Or do they just not give a damn?