This is the important missing context. Musk can and does claim a lot. He rarely, if ever, provides any evidence or context. And none of his or his team's actions can be verified or monitored.
Anyone else in the world would just stop sharing stuff publicly given this kind of public abuse. There's no requirement to do so. But Musk just shared evidence and context again, by showing the output of the equivalent of SELECT GROUP(age), COUNT(*) FROM SSNS WHERE DEAD = FALSE:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1891350795452654076
It shows approx 1.3 million SSNs in the 150-159 age bucket, along with many millions more that are actually over that age, and over 1000 SSNs allocated to people over 200 years old, including one that is for someone marked as 360-369 years old. There are over 20M people listed as 100+ years old. Total sum is around 395M people. Therefore there is no 1875 epoch and that claim was simply misinformation.
So here's what we know given his statements:
1. There are a lot of data entry errors in the SSN database.
2. These aren't test data, misinterpretations of an epoch, etc.
3. Such errors are extremely common and not being rectified.
4. Many SSNs aren't unique.
5. There are far more records in the database than people in America.
If we combine those statements with prior knowledge of other related topics, we can infer:
• The data quality issues are much more extensive than just age and number of records.
• Whatever processes are meant to ensure data quality don't work.
• This was not previously known to the public.
• Civil servants know all this but are often unable to do anything.
We also know that this situation is expected. It would be much more crazy if Musk announced his team couldn't find fraud in SS. Just look at the graph for payouts from the American disability benefits system - it tracks general economic performance. Other countries don't see such a thing in their payouts, where improving economic conditions magically make long term disabilities disappear, but they also tend to be more aggressive at cracking down on benefits fraud. The UK did a big purge some years ago where every single person claiming disability benefits was re-assessed.
Anytime someone comes in and does basic checks of government finance systems they always find lots of very basic stuff. At one point it was discovered, again in Britain, that a Labour council was regularly paying invoices multiple times and nobody had noticed for years. Paying money out to dead or non-existent people is a common problem in all such systems.
The only exception I'd see is if there are people who have somehow gamed the system to collect multiple payments at once.
https://xcancel.com/ThatsMauvelous/status/189135619250239902...
Isn't that entirely expected? Someone coming to the US on a work visa gets assigned an SSN, works for some time and then leaves.
He doesn't. All he has shown is a list and claimed what he claimed. Based on that alone you're ready to expound a full theory spanning several pages of text.
And most of that text is trying to guess and to fill in the context. None of your guesses are correct until shown otherwise, and he hasn't shown anything except this list.
And yet we already know from his team's actions how reckless they are and how far from the truth are the many claims they make.
Two things to consider here: the first is that we don’t know if those records are actually tied to checks being sent, and we don’t know whether they’re linked to people who are still living (older men marrying younger women wasn’t uncommon). Anyone who’s worked on systems like this knows that you often have to review the entire record and the code which uses it because over the decades coders overloaded other fields on a fixed-size record.
The other thing to keep in mind is that most federal agencies have been underfunded for decades and government systems have to be more careful about false positives than false negatives. If they flag someone’s record as fraudulent and stop sending checks, that might mean some 90 year old gets evicted or can’t get the medical care they need, which is both inhumane and also a big political risk if their representatives or the media pick up the story. If you don’t have the staff to dig into data correction, it’s much safer to continue sending a small amount of money than to cut them off when you don’t have a confirmation of death.
Quoting the generally critical IG report:
> Approximately 18.4 million (98 percent) numberholders are not currently receiving SSA payments and have not had earnings reported to SSA in the past 50 years (see Table 2).
> The fact that these individuals were age 100 or older, had no earnings in the past 50 years, and received no SSA payments indicates they are deceased.
The IG report you link is very useful! It confirms a lot of what Musk has posted about the age buckets in the database, proving there was never any misunderstanding of the schema or epochs.
It does also say that many of the numbers without accurate death data aren't being used to pay out, which is why the SSA doesn't bother fixing them (which leads to the question of what did cause the payouts to stop?). So, the bad age/death data doesn't automatically imply pensions fraud.
Nonetheless the OIG is in Musk's corner here (as of July 2023). The reason is that even if SSA isn't paying out their death data is used by the rest of the US government to stop fraudulent payouts for benefits programmes after death, and so the SSA not bothering to ensure data quality opens up the rest of the government to fraud even if we accept their claim that it's not causing them problems directly. The OIG writes, "SSA has not established controls to annotate death information on the Numident records of numberholders who exceeded maximum reasonable life expectancies ... Death information missing from the Numident and the [death master file] hampers both SSA and Government-wide efforts to prevent and detect fraud and misuse".
So, it was just data without context. And the important context is:
- the issues with this data isn't unknown
- this data has already been investigated
- Musk's claims can be charitably called exaggerations. Quote from the report that you say "is in Musk's court": "We acknowledge that almost none of the numberholders discussed in the report currently receive SSA payments"
Pretty obviously the most common reason would be that the payments never started in the first place.
US social security payments don't start automatically on reaching an age, but you need to apply for them, right? Processing the application would be the ideal time to do all kinds of validity checks.
I've got popcorn ready for when President Musk's incelbro's use database queries to delete 20 million fraudulent Social Security accounts.
Mostly, they never started. Likely because the person died a long time ago, in many cases before the Death Master File existed and before claiming benefits, which is why as the OIG report notes, the vast majority of the numebrs in question have no records at all on the MBR, which contains everyone who has claimed beneffits administered by SSA since the 1970s.
In other cases, they started when the person was alive and eligible, and ended when social security got death information, which was recorded in the Master Beneficiary Record--where it needs to be to stop payment--but not in Numident. (All this is in the OIG report.)
> The reason is that even if SSA isn't paying out their death data is used by the rest of the US government to stop fraudulent payouts for benefits programmes after death
Like Social Security, other federal benefits programs do a lot more to verify that the person claiming information is eligible to receive benefits they are claiming then checking whether or not they are listed as dead in Social Security records, both initially and periodically. Social Security numident death information is a secondary check, not a single-source of truth. You want it right or both its primary and secondary uses, but its not the primary way that beneficiaries are validated as being both alive and who they claim to be.
https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf
>Other countries don't see such a thing in their payouts, where improving economic conditions magically make long term disabilities disappear
I don't know much about this but this could easily be explained by policy differences. The US has extremely strict income limits around disability:
> If you continue to work, your condition must also limit you from earning income above an amount we call “substantial gainful activity” (SGA). In 2024, SGA is $1,550 per month
We literally quantify disability by economic output, it would be insane not to expect disabilities to "disappear" when the economy improves and pay rises. Does that mean there is little to no fraud? Of course not, I know that I don't know enough to claim that.
Both of these are great examples of the limits of this "first principles" approach to complex legal and social systems, and everyone should be extremely skeptical of someone like Elon who is seemingly incapable of the self-reflection necessary to realize he might not have the whole picture.