No Sosh Scurty crisis? (updated)

The chief counterargument to privatization of the Social Security system seems to be that "there is no crisis."

All well and good, one might conclude, funds are forecast to be plentiful in that lockbox-thingy until, uh, about the year that I might be retiring. Until then, there is no crisis, no reason to be discomfited, no reason to act. Heck, I even think the GOP is floating this idea not to save Sosh Scurty, but to shut it down.

OK, well how about this scenario?

A dummy corporation, in fact a network of dummy corporations, obtains credentials to do business with a major credit reporting agency (HT, Rick Stanley), thus getting access to the vast databases maintained on every person who has or at one time had a loan, credit card, bankruptcy, judgment, or bank account anywhere in the United States in the last 50 years or served in her armed forces since the 1970s. This much has happened.

This part has not happened, for all I know: the dummy corporations meticulously sift through these dossiers and then use dummy individuals to file false unemployment and disability claims against the Social Security "accounts" it has siphoned away numbers for, then wrecking their credit ratings. A company could sell stolen SSN's to third-parties willing to drift from place to place filing claims under multiple identities; the company could make its buck and disappear fast while the marketed identities are bled dry.

The amount of money to be stolen is far less than what could be scored by opening fraudulent credit cards or draining real bank accounts, but this lesser booty is easier to get away with. For anyone looking for it, fraudulent credit activity is easy to spot, by contacting the same credit bureaus in the first place. But how would you find out that someone has filed an unemployment claim as you? How would you know that this "account" you've created for yourself is being depleted, and when? And if you do find out, can you challenge the Social Security Administration so your own legitimate unemployment or disability claim will be honored? What will stop a third-party from holding on to a stolen identity for re-use a few years down the road?

Can't happen, right?

Then convince me there will be no crisis---that millions of retirees-to-be won't insist that Social Security accounts be privatized, one way or another, so an accountable private firm will be responsible for paying out, with stronger protections against fraud than what Social Security provides today. The crisis could be big enough to crater Social Security, if one out of, say, four people expecting SS benefits loses even a part of them because of fraud. That's probably enough for the House to draw the line, deny responsibility, and refuse to appropriate funds to repair the mess. Now who has reduced Grandma to eating dog food and living in a fridge box?

As far as I know, SS isn't even obligated to give you a new account number after an identity theft. Only if you are a victim of domestic abuse and you need to change numbers to hide from your ex. Hey, wait a minute . . . If the Social Security Administration admits that you might need to change your SSAN the better to hide yourself and kids from an abusive domestic partner, aren't they admitting that minor criminals commonly misuse the SSAN? Not to say that domestic abuse is a minor crime, but that it doesn't take Dr Evil's or the Russian mafia's vast worldwide criminal enterprises to exploit the weaknesses of the SSAN; all one needs is a bad temper and a private investigator.

No comments: