Wow – Talk About Longevity!
OK, take a guess. How many people in the US are over 112 years old?
C’mon – guess. 100? 1,000? 5,000? maybe even 10,000?
Nope. You’re way low.
According to the Social Security Administration, there are 6.5 million. Well, at least that’s how many active Social Security “accounts” exist for with birth dates of 16 June 1901 or earlier – indicating the individual has a current age of 113 or older.
Gee, that’s odd. In 2010, there were less than 53,500 persons in the USA that were documented to be even 100 years old. They sure got a lot older in only 5 years – and they multiplied, too!
I wish I was joking about the SSA being so out-to-lunch here. But I’m not.
The reason for this bit of idiocy? Those conducting the audit – from the SSA’s Officer of the Inspector General – “concluded that SSA lacks the controls necessary to annote death information on the records of number-holders who exceed ‘maximum reasonable life expectancies.’ ”
And, yes – as you might have guessed, some of those “account numbers” do indeed appear to be being used for unlawful purposes.
Apu the Hindu was right. We are truly screwed.
Category: "Teh Stoopid", "Your Tax Dollars At Work"
Interesting.
I will have to do a bit of research on this to further my knowledge.
My mother worked for SSA for 35 years and she is the original “self professed expert” on all subjects social security.
What I do know is that a social security expires with the holder, it is never reassigned.
Social Security came into being in 1935. Not sure how they assigned numbers to people from 1901, as it was a government issue, I am more than certain that it did not go smoothly.
I will do a bit of research on this one though, because that many “active” accounts seems a bit odd to me. And if someone who is 112 is reporting income for picking cotton 15 hours a day, then something in the system is severely broken.
*edit Social Security Number expires with the person, not social security.
That is BULLSHYT! There are probably that many ILLEGAL voter registrations put in by accorn and obama crap shooters!!
Ozzie 11B: that’s the theory. Unfortuntely, over history a few have been duplicated when the numbers were issued locally.
And then there’s this little fiasco:
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2009/08/how_many_americans_social_secu.html
Very interesting read. Let me amend my former statement to read —
“Social Security Numbers are not supposed to be reissued.”
LOL
“Not sure how they assigned numbers to people from 1901, as it was a government issue, I am more than certain that it did not go smoothly.”
Ozzie, I’m not sure about your point here. I would think they would get a number just like everyone else since the program was just beginning in 1935.
The date referenced was the birth date, not the date of assignment of the SSN. Someone signing up for Social Security in 1936 could easily have been born in or before 1901 – in 1936, they’d have been 34 or 35 on the day they signed up if they were born in 1901.
Basically I was going on the old joke —
“this is a military operation, nothing goes as planned.”
I will have to admit that the government back then seemed to have their shit more together than now.
So, nothing more than an attempt at a joke.
This is no surprise. If an account isn’t closed when someone dies, the account number is still active. If a death isn’t reported to SSA, how will they know enough to close it?
If you have no next of kin to report your death, how will it be reported to SSA?
The police aren’t going to do that. The coroner isn’t going to do that. The funeral home (assuming one is used) isn’t going to do that. So how is SSA going to know about it and close the account?
Well, Ex-PH2, common sense would say at some point – say, 100 years of age, maybe – the SSA should start requiring annual certification that the individual was still alive, and presumptively suspend the accounts of those who don’t respond/have someone respond on their behalf. Exceptionally few people live to reach 100 years of age – in 2010, there were fewer than 53,500 individuals in the US who were documented as being that old.
Another way would be to require whoever issues death certificates to report the name of the deceased, along with the SSN of the deceased, to the SSA. Not sure I’m quite willing to endorse the latter option – it is open for possible abuse, and adds another Federal mandate to state/local governments. But it may be the only way to get a handle on the problem.
If there are 6.5 million active “accounts” out for people who should be 113 freaking years old – then how many are there out there still getting a check after the individual’s has died?
The IRS could be helpful in passing along information about death to the SSA, if it wasn’t for all those broken hard drives.
Alternative hypothesis: Maybe they are not dead at all. Maybe they are on a waiting list.
Some lawyer will sue the SSA claiming age discrimination.
You do occasionally read about people denied or having benefits stopped because the SSA thought they were dead, so obviously there is some sort of mechanism in place.
I rather doubt that an age discrimination suit would fly. Statistically, there is a good case for validation at some point due to age; less than 0.02% (around 1 in 5,800) of the US population even reaches the age of 100). So 100 seems an eminently reasonable point at which to start requiring annual validation that the individual is still breathing to receive SSA benefits. An even earlier age might be supportable.
Yes, you hear about an occasional erroneous termination of benefits by SSA. However, you also read on occasion about someone getting in trouble for defrauding Uncle Sam via continuing to cash a dead relative’s Social Security checks. My impression is that the fraud is far more common than erroneous terminations of benefits, but I could be wrong.
Okay, Hondo, but there are people who literally do live in isolation, some for an extended lifespan.
Not eveyone goes into senior residences or nursing homes. (I can’t think of any place worse than a nursing home.) Frankly, as expensive as that is, it isn’t an option for a lot of people.
I particularly like it when someone is found dead in a house that was put up for auction, and he’s been dead for 10 years. That came up on the news in January. This kind of story shows up on the news at least once a year. It is not really unusual.
I know how many options there are, because I’ve looked at them extensively, but there are people who either don’t know about them, or can’t afford them, or both. And those are the people who slip through the cracks.
In regard to this story, if there are that many active accounts but the actual centenarian count doesn’t match the accounts open, then it’s probably relatives of deceased people who were not reported deceased to SSA, intentionally or otherwise. The alternative is that the SS account numbeers were stolen a long time ago. ID theft is nothing new.
No argument about any of that, Ex-PH2.
My concern is that there is no mechanism to catch those who “slip thru” – or even, apparently, to flag what appear to be obvious cases for further investigation. There should be.
When only 0.02% of the population even reaches the age of 100 but SSA records show over 100 times that many active “accounts” for people over the age of 113 – that means something is seriously hosed, and needs to be fixed.
An aside: back when I was in (’71-’72) the Army used our SSNs as our service number. Had it stenciled on our duffle bags in big ol’ numbers for all the world to see.
I wonder when the stopped doing that.
Ummm, they did stop, didn’t they?
OC
Pretty sure it was the 80’s when we stopped putting our SSN on our seabags. I’ve got one sitting in the garage that still has my SSN on the carrying strap.
Reporting of death to the SSA is required now. When my dad died two years ago, a copy of the death certificate was sent by the coroners office to the SSA.
Um, I don’t think there’s any Federal law mandating that. I could be wrong.
Family members and/or funeral directors are expected to do so, and may end up in legal hot water for fraud if they keep receiving and/or spend the money received post-death. But that often happens.
And sometimes even telling SSA that someone has died doesn’t end the payments.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/07/pf/social_security_benefits_deceased/
Quote Hondo
“If there are 6.5 million active “accounts” out for people who should be 113 freaking years old – then how many are there out there still getting a check after the individual’s has died?”
How many of the 6.5 million 113 year olds are still voting democrat?
That was my first thought, it would be interesting to know of the 6.5 million, how many have voted in the last couple election cycles, and their affiliation.
Ex-PH2 – According to the Social Security Website they rely on reporting of death from Funeral Directors. But I am sure that no self respecting Funeral Director would ever consider not reporting a death for let’s say a paltry percentage of a deceased benefactors SS Retirement? hmmm? hmmm? No that would never happen would it?
Something that one “relies on” may or may not be “legally mandatory”. If it’s not – and sometimes, even if it is – well . . . .
Can’t wait for our Berkley Student in Residence Emeritus to explain how:
a.) The story is poorly written.
b.) It’s Bush’s fault.
c.) Anyone who believes this is an old timer.
d.) The government will fix it.
e.) Other countries like Sweaden have longer life expectancies than us.
f.) We should strive to be more like Norway.
g.) North Korea doesn’t have these kinds of problems.
I’m sure there’s more that I am too stoopid to think of.
Sweaden…world famous for their classic sweady meat balls :0)
They should run an audit on those who claim 100 % disability with the VA and SSA, maintains a FAA Sport Pilot Rating while rocking back and forth waiting for their next round of mind altering medication.
Just saying!
Don’t forget paralyzed from the waist down. Perhaps he crashes in the handy cap crash area of corn fields.
I bet all 6.5 million vote Democrat
Thread winner!!!
How many speak English?
And Chicago style by voting early and often.
20 some years ago I get a tax bill from California. I call to ask about it and they say I worked there 10 months and the amount I owe on the notice was all correct. I asked if it was someone else who had pulled my number out of the air to use since I had never worked in CA. They said, oh yes, quite common, but we have to send YOU the forms to be filled out and signed by your employers that you were in your state for wages during that period and not there. I was pissed. I asked, why do I have to go through all this when some clown has already moved on to another number. They became bureaucratic and said do the forms or it goes to collection. So I relented. I then talk to my wife who deals with phoney SSNs all day. She said if illegals, at retirement age, can show a history of working and paying SS withdrawals, even through 20+ SS numbers they are entitled to benefits. Pisses me off.
With government access to tech, it is getting worse instead of better.
I got an automated parking ticket in the mail a few months ago from Houston because my vehicle was parked in a no-parking zone at the Houston Airport. I, nor my vehicle, have been in Houston for the past 2 years plus. My vehicle has never been to the Houston Airport. Their website said that I could appeal the ticket online by Nov. 15. They mailed me the letter on Nov. 16 and I did not receive it until Nov. 18. The letter also said that if you missed the deadline, your only recourse was to schedule and appear for a hearing.
Imagine the fun I had trying to get that straightened out, wasting several hours. The offending vehicle was a friggin Honda Civic, which I don’t own/drive. They said “sorry”. I’s sure no one got fired, reprimanded…. certainly no software changes were implemented to cross-check the VIN with the Make/Model of the vehicle being ticketed (they got my mailing address via the VIN/registration). Nope, life goes on. What’s a few hours inconvenience to a random taxpayer?
Read an article a few years ago about a man who had a minor problem with his bank account; the resulting investigation reads like a crime thriller. He found out that no fewer than three other people were using his SSN SIMULTANEOUSLY. It took him months to prove to his various business associates and lenders, etc., that he was the real “Mr. Smith,” and got the phantom SSN holders*` The article indicated that this is a fairly common problem.
Never mind what happened to cause the break in sentence. It should read:
“…SSN holders forced off of his accounts.”
This is simply wonderful, who knew the ACA would have such a positive impact on life span in just five short years?
It’s amazing because it wasn’t even actual law for several of those five years when the population went from 50,000 centennials to 6.5 million of them.
You know Obama will take credit for that. I’m waiting for him to take credit for the “pause” in Global Warming.
GDContractor…You beat me to it. It’ll be in Obama’s next press conference about the ACA and an uptick talking point of its success.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssb36.html
Here is an interesting bit – this is the original Social Security publication for 1935. Note how much the syetm has changed!
and how badly my typing sucks… “system”
Gee, David – that sure looks kinda familiar . . . . (smile)
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=31674
Before my time here…. whine, whine, whine
Just pulling yer chain, amigo. Great minds think alike and all that. (smile)
If there are that many “over 100” collecting benefits, then that’s a perfect example of why the SSA is losing money.
On another note, if there are 6.5 million over 100 drawing SS benefits, how many millions are drawing SS benefits below 100 that they don’t even want to count or know about?
Eric: over 113, actually – not over 100. The cutoff DOB checked was in mid-June 1901. The 6.5M number was the number born on/before that date; they’d be at least 113 today.
I wouldn’t necessarily take it as saying all 6.5M are currently drawing benefits. The info I’ve seen doesn’t indicate how many of that number are drawing benefits today. It merely indicates those “accounts” are still “open” – e.g., that SSA hasn’t closed them out due to the death of the beneficiary.
However, I’d guess a fair number of those “accounts” are still generating payments from Uncle Sam. And I’d guess that number to be far more than the number of people over 113 who are actually alive and qualified to receive Social Security.
Ditto for “accounts” for those less than 113. I’d guess we have a fair number of “Chicago-style” (e.g., actually deceased but still on the rolls) Social Security recipients in the nation today.
I’m trackin’ Hondo and I don’t know if that’s better or worse, frankly. lol
When my father died, his SS (auto deposit) was frozen NOW. I am guessing that the undertaker notified the SS administration.
No wonder I’m getting so much junk mail from AARP, assisted living places, for orthopedic supplies, etc.
But on the plus side, I look pretty damn good for my age.