Tag Archives: benefits

DOGE uncovers millions of non-citizens on benefits; billion-dollar human trafficking crisis

Important Takeaways:

  • Billionaire entrepreneur and Trump advisor Elon Musk dropped a bombshell this weekend during a fiery 100-minute town hall in Green Bay, Wisconsin, where he campaigned for conservative judge Brad Schimel in the state’s upcoming Supreme Court election on Tuesday.
  • Joined by Antonio Gracias, a private equity titan and a key member of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team tasked with rooting out waste in the federal government, Musk unveiled a shocking chart: a dramatic spike in Social Security Numbers issued to non-citizens, soaring from 270,000 in 2021 to a mind-blowing 2.1 million in 2024.
  • That’s almost 5 million non-citizens now embedded in the system—collecting benefits, draining taxpayer dollars, and, most alarmingly, infiltrating the voter rolls.
  • Musk declared, pointing to the data. “This wasn’t an accident. This was a massive, large-scale program under the Biden administration to import as many illegals as possible—ultimately to change the voting map of the United States, disenfranchise the American people, and lock in a permanent deep-blue, one-party state from which there’d be no escape.”
  • The evidence, according to Musk and Gracias, is undeniable. By sampling voter registration records, they uncovered non-citizens who not only registered but voted in American elections.
  • “We’ve referred them to prosecution at Homeland Security Investigations,” Gracias revealed. “That’s happening right now.”
  • But the scandal goes deeper than voter fraud. Gracias, who traveled from D.C. to Social Security offices and the southern border alongside Musk, painted a grim picture of a system rigged to incentivize illegal entry.
  • The human cost, however, is what Gracias called “the darkest thing.”
  • He estimates human traffickers and cartels raked in $13 to $15 billion exploiting this broken system, preying on desperate migrants from Africa and Central America.
  • “You think someone in Africa or Central America has $10,000 to $20,000 to pay these traffickers? No. What happens is: you come in, then you owe them the money. You’re an indentured servant,” said Gracias.
  • “And if you don’t pay? What do they do? They kill your mother. They kill your brother. They kill your family. What happens next? That’s what we discovered. And I have to tell you, it’s tragic to me. The human tragedy this created is the real problem,” he added.
  • Even worse, ICE data reveals 30,000 children who never showed up for their hearings and 270,000 more who didn’t even get Notices to Appear.
  • “ICE told us that kids are being trafficked back and forth across the border to complete families to make this easier. This is a human tragedy,” Gracias said.
  • “And how many of these people died on the way up here that didn’t make it in? What happened to them? We created a system here that created an incentive for people to come and been taking advantage of by these traffickers.”

Read the original article by clicking here.

Kellogg reaches tentative deal with union after 2 months of strike

(Reuters) -Kellogg Co said on Thursday it has reached an agreement with the union on a new five-year contract for its employees at a few breakfast-cereal plants in the United States, potentially bringing a near two-month long strike to an end.

The tentative agreement, reached after multiple rounds of talks with the union, includes wage increases and benefits for all employees and better terms for temporary employees.

The latest agreement allows for all temporary employees with four or more years of service to move to permanent positions with better pay and benefits.

Union members had previously opposed Kellogg’s two-tier employment system that did not offer temporary workers, who make up 30% of its workforce, a pathway to become permanent staff.

Employees at Kellogg’s cereal plants including Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania and Tennessee went on strike on Oct. 5 after their contracts expired, as negotiations over payment and benefits stalled due to differences between the company and about 1,400 union members.

The new deal, which will be voted on by Kellogg employees on Dec. 5, will also offer permanent employees with better post-retirement benefits.

During lengthy negotiations with union members, Kellogg had hired permanent replacements for some of its plant workers on strike, and also warned of a dent to its annual profit due to the disruption.

Kellogg is one of the several major U.S. companies that has faced worker strikes in the recent past as the labor market tightens and inflation reaches record highs.

Last month, farm equipment maker Deere & Co reached an agreement with workers after a six week strike.

(Reporting by Maria Ponnezhath in Bengaluru; Editing by Arun Koyyur and Shinjini Ganguli)

 

U.S. labor market strong; mid-Atlantic factory activity improves

FILE PHOTO: People wait in line to attend TechFair LA, a technology job fair, in Los Angeles, California, U.S., January 26, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson/File Photo

By Lucia Mutikani

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The number of Americans filing applications for jobless benefits unexpectedly fell last week, pointing to sustained labor market strength that should continue to underpin the economy.

Other data on Thursday showed factory activity in the mid-Atlantic region rebounded in January from near a 2-1/2-year low, driven by a surge in new orders, which could allay concerns that manufacturing production was slowing sharply.

While the data so far suggest the economy is in relatively good shape, there are concerns an ongoing partial shutdown of the federal government could erode both business and consumer confidence, leading to cuts in spending.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits decreased 3,000 to a seasonally adjusted 213,000 for the week ended Jan. 12, the Labor Department said on Thursday. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims would rise to 220,000 last week.

The dollar gained against a basket of currencies. U.S. Treasury yields largely rose while stocks on Wall Street were mixed.

The claims data covered the survey period for the nonfarm payrolls portion of January’s employment report.

Claims fell 4,000 between the December and January survey periods. While that would suggest little change in labor market conditions after the economy created 312,000 jobs in December, the longest government shutdown in U.S. history raises the risk of a drop in payrolls.

Some 800,000 government workers missed their first paycheck last Friday because of the partial shutdown, which started on Dec. 22 as President Donald Trump demanded that Congress give him $5.7 billion this year to help build a wall on the country’s border with Mexico.

The pay period for most federal employees that includes the week of Jan. 12 runs from Jan. 6 to Jan. 19. About 380,000 workers have been furloughed, while the rest are working without pay. Furloughed workers will probably be counted as unemployed.

“The federal government shutdown could make the payroll jobs number a walking disaster,” said Chris Rupkey, chief economist at MUFG in New York. “Payroll employment is likely to dive in January with perhaps 300 or 400 thousand jobs lost.”

Private contractors working for many government agencies are also without pay. But Trump has signed legislation for all employees to be paid their salaries retroactively when the shutdown ends. Some economists say that could result in the shutdown having a small impact on January payrolls.

MODEST-MODERATE GROWTH

The Trump administration has been recalling some employees to work without pay in an effort to minimize the fallout from the shutdown. Publication of economic data compiled by the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis and Census Bureau has been suspended during the shutdown.

That includes December’s housing starts and building permits report, which was scheduled for release on Thursday. November’s construction, factory orders and trade figures have also been delayed, as well as December retail sales and November business inventories data.

The incomplete data is making it hard to get a clear read on the economy, which could complicate policy decisions.

The Federal Reserve said on Wednesday in its Beige Book report, which offers a snapshot of the economy, that eight of the U.S. central bank’s 12 districts reported “modest to moderate growth” in late December and early January.

The Fed noted that while outlooks generally remained positive, “many districts reported that contacts had become less optimistic.”

That was corroborated by a separate report on Thursday from the Philadelphia Fed showing its business conditions index increased to a reading of 17.0 in January from 9.1 in December, which was its lowest level since August 2016.

The survey’s six-month business conditions index increased to a reading of 31.2 this month from 29.9 in December. But its six-month capital expenditures index slipped to a reading of 31.6 in January from 34.5 in the prior month.

Despite the modest rebound in manufacturing in the region that covers eastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and Delaware, the level of activity is lower than it was for most of 2017 and 2018.

This fits in with other signs that national factory activity is slowing, having hit a two-year low in December. A report from the New York Fed earlier this week showed a second straight monthly drop in its Empire State manufacturing index in January.

“Conditions have certainly downshifted from earlier in 2018 and compared with 2017,” said Adam Ozimek, a senior economist at Moody’s Analytics in West Chester, Pennsylvania. “This reflects simmering risks that threaten to derail the otherwise strong economy.”

(Reporting by Lucia Mutikani; Editing by Paul Simao)

A higher Social Security retirement age comes with risks for many workers

FILE PHOTO: An elderly couple looks out at the ocean as they sit on a park bench in La Jolla, California November 13, 2013. REUTERS/Mike Blake

By Mark Miller

CHICAGO (Reuters) – Is it time to raise the Social Security retirement age? The idea crops up often as a partial fix for the long-term financial challenges facing the program.

A higher retirement age would reduce the number of years on average that people receive benefits, as a way to cut program costs. But according to an economist at the Urban Institute who specializes in employment and retirement decisions made by older Americans, raising the retirement age would inflict serious harm on roughly one-quarter of Social Security beneficiaries.

In a report issued by the Urban Institute last month, Richard W. Johnson examines the arguments in favor and against a higher retirement age, considering trends and disparities in American workers life expectancy, health status and the labor market conditions that older workers face.

When Social Security was created in 1935, benefits began at age 65. Starting in 1956 for women, and in 1961 for men, retirees could claim benefits as soon as age 62, but monthly benefits were reduced permanently depending on how early they filed. Meanwhile, the age when 100 percent of earned benefits are paid – the full retirement age (FRA) – began to rise gradually under reforms legislated in 1983. The FRA is gradually increasing to age 67 for workers born in 1960 or later; for example, workers born between 1943 and 1954 reach their FRA at age 66; for people born in 1955 the FRA will be 66 and two months.

Social Security faces a long-run financial imbalance – the program is now spending more than it takes in annually in payroll taxes. The Social Security trustees project that the program will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2034; unless Congress takes action, benefits would be slashed across-the-board by about 25 percent.

Congress has three options for avoiding this dire outcome. It could raise revenue by increasing the payroll tax and increasing the share of wages subject to the tax. A second option is to cut benefits by reducing cost-of-living adjustments or through other benefit formula changes. The third option is raising retirement ages – effectively reducing the number of years, on average, when benefits are received. That could close roughly 27 percent of the long-term shortfall, Johnson calculates.

A LONGEVITY ARGUMENT

Rising longevity is one argument often made in favor of that last reform. Americans live several years longer, on average, than they did when the early retirement age was introduced, and longevity is forecast to rise 2.8 years by 2050, Johnson reports. The program’s costs will rise as people live longer, he told me in an interview. Is there a certain number of years of life we want to finance in retirement that we maintain by shifting that period later?

The retirement age debate usually focuses on the FRA, but Johnson focuses mainly on whether the early retirement age should be increased. If we want to raise the FRA, we also would want to raise the early age, he said. If the gap between the two gets too large, it would create inequities.

Here is what that means. Johnson calculates that filing at 62 currently translates into a 30 percent monthly benefit cut compared with filing at the FRA; if the FRA were increased to 69 without lifting the early age, that early-filing reduction would jump to a whopping 40 percent. That might be a wash in lifetime benefits, depending on how long you live, he said. But the larger point for most retirees is, you pay your bills on a monthly basis.

But increasing the early filing age would create hardships for many workers. If it were raised to age 65, Johnson estimates that 25 percent of workers aged 62 to 64 would face serious financial problems; that represents the share that is not working and has a health-related work limitation.

These workers are more likely to have health problems in their early sixties that limit their work ability, Johnson concludes, and many will not be able to pass the strict medical and functional screens of Social Security Disability Insurance. He also cites ongoing reluctance among employers to hire older workers, and the fact that the recent gains in life expectancy have gone mainly to people with more education and income.

We were seeing improvements in health status until 2000, but those have leveled off and we don’t know what will happen in the future, Johnson said. The most concerning part is we’re now seeing some indications that health status is declining for people in their sixties now, and for people in their forties and fifties, mainly due to rising obesity rates. All of that will make it much more difficult to raise retirement ages.

Rising income inequality also contributes to the problem, he finds. Lower-income workers are more likely to retire early – and that means they will have lower incomes throughout retirement. Conversely, median income for older households without any health-related work limits rose 34 percent from 1996 to 2014, adjusted for household size and inflation. This was due to their greater likelihood of staying employed and receiving wage income.

What kind of policy changes could be made to buffer the most vulnerable people from higher retirement ages? Johnson suggests exempting workers in physically demanding occupations; making the Social Security benefit formula more progressive than it already is to favor low-earners even more; expanding employment services and training and expanding unemployment insurance for older workers.

But he concedes all of these would be challenging policies to achieve from a political standpoint.  Most programs for desperate people don’t get a lot of funding, so the prospects are not great,  he said. There is a real risk that we could raise the early Social Security filing age and not offer enough protections to the people most at risk.

(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters)

(Reporting and writing by Mark Miller in Chicago; Editing by Matthew Lewis)